User talk:Tuxyso/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments cw tilt --A.Savin 13:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)  Done. Please take another look, A.Savin. --Tuxyso 20:01, 10 February 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 09:38, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg

Hi, via OTRS (ticket number 2014020710001483), we received the following message: It is a very beautiful photo but a parrot-expert friend wrote: "The photo is a Green Winged Macaw and not a Scarlet. The misinformation about the two macaws is everywhere; I saw that it came from your source. Green-Wing's have the facial feathers; Scarlet's have a clean looking face with no feather lines. " - could you take look at it? Jcb (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

• According to [1] the zoo has both, Green-Wing's and Scarlet's. I will check tomorrow, but it is surely possible that I am wrong because I'm no bird expert. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Jcb, the case is more difficult than expected. According to [2] (Similiar specicies) there are few differences between the Scarlet and the Green-winged Macaw. The facial feathers are a clear evidence for the Green-winged one thus the bird experts might be right. In the same enclosure there are two birds, I made a shot one year before at the same enclosure: File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster.jpg. This is clearly a Scarlet (no facial feathers). One aspect is still confusing: If you take a look on https://www.dropbox.com/s/gbzayk21sxdwc18/Macao-001.jpg (I've not uploaded it to Commons due to quality issues but it is the same as File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg) there are yellow and green upper wing feathers which is an indicator for the Scarlet. Probably you can send this additional photo to the bird experts and affirm that File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg is an Green-winged macao. If he is sure I will surely change the category and decription. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for taking a look at it, but I really do not know anything about birds. I will ask the mailer to join the talk here. Jcb (talk) 08:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
      • I've additional asked birds experts on the German Wikipedia: de:Wikipedia:Redaktion_Biologie/Bestimmung#Ara_macao_oder_Ara_chloropterus. Let's wait and change if required. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
• KPeregrine I'm the person who opened the ticket, a bird watcher and blogger about birds. My friend who works with parrots pointed out the identification error. Here are links to descriptions of both species: This description of Ara macao at Wikipedia says that the two species are easy to confuse and that the face feathers are a distinguishing charactersitc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarlet_Macaw#Description Another Ara macao description: http://eol.org/pages/1177962/overview Here are two descriptions of Ara chloropterus (Green-winged macaw) describing the red feather lines on the face: from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green-winged_Macaw#Description and at Encyclopedia of Life: http://eol.org/pages/1177966/overview I hope this helps. It is a very beautiful photograph. (p.s. this is only the first or second time I've joined a 'talk' so if my edit format is poor please correct it.)
  • KPeregrine, thanks for the information. I hope you will participate more often. Just to avoid further mistakes: You are sure that

    File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg is an Ara chloropterus?

  • If that is the case I will modify the file description and correct the categorization. I was a bit unsure because of the green yellow feathers. Have you also taken a look on [3]] (same bird)? --Tuxyso (talk) 17:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
    • KPeregrine I am sure that the visible part of the bird looks like an Ara chloropterus. I read the zoo webpage [4] using Google Translate and it appears that a Scarlet Macaw paired with a Green-winged Macaw and produced a hybrid offspring (is this a correct translation?). A hybrid would have confusing traits. That said, since this could be a photo of the pure Green-winged and a very diagnostic trait of Ara chloropterus is visible in the photo (red feather lines on white face), it is safest to identify the photo as Ara chloropterus. If you find out this is a hybrid bird it will make an interesting note on the photo.
      • [[KPeregrine I've corrected everything (also in the articles). Please take another look if everything is OK. Thanks for your info and help. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
        • KPeregrine: Correction again. I've contacted the zoo and it's indeed an hybrid of Ara chloropterus and Ara macao. Probably a taxo expert can tell me how to categorize it. Are both categories OK? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
          • Tuxyso, yes, excellent! Thank you.
            • KPeregrine Is it your post? Excellent summary of the Ara discussion. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord Abend 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord Abend 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erlöserkirche Mülheim Heimaterde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Luftaufnahmen

Hallo! Ich möchte doch dich als Fotograf diverser Luftaufnahmen vielleicht einmal etwas fragen - wenn ich darf. Wir planen derzeit für Wikipedia Fotoflüge im Münsterland. Die entscheidende Frage ist die nach Equipment und Einstellungen. Meine Vorstellung ist derzeit, zwei Kameras mitzunehmen, eine mit einem Tele und eine mit einem Normal- oder Weitwinkelobjektiv, da der Wechsel zu lange dauert. Und wir planen, morgens zu fliegen. Ungewiss ist noch, ob eine Fenster im Flugzeug ist. Wenn, dann werde ich mir mit Tonkarton eine Blende bauen müssen. Wie ist deine Erfahrung bezüglich Zeit- und Blendeneinstellungen. Eine kurze Zeit (unter 1/500 s) erscheint mit sinnvoll, da das Flugzeug unruhig ist und schnell fliegt. Und eine ganz große Blende erscheint mit suboptimal, vielleicht f/5.6. Autofokus möchte ich auch abstellen, da eine feste Einstellung auf "unendlich" ausreichen sollte. Vielleicht hast du ja noch ein paar Tipps für mich oder kannst mir sagen, wo ich falsch liege. Es wäre sehr nett, an einigen deiner Erfahrungen teilzuhaben. Danke! --XRay ^talk 10:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Wir könnten kurz im IRC chatten, dort ist die Kommunikation direkter. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich bin gerade versuchsweise bei #wikimedia-commons angemeldet.--XRay ^talk 10:49, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

XRay, ich auch. Unter welchem Nickname denn? Ich heiße dort einfach Tuxyso --Tuxyso (talk) 10:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

XRay als Nickname, aber es ist der IRC über eine Webanwendung (Mibbit). Ich habe kein IRC-Tool installiert.--XRay ^talk 10:53, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich installiere mal ChatZilla.--XRay ^talk 10:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Du kannst auch den Webclient nehmen, damit bin ich auch drin, http://webchat.freenode.net/ --Tuxyso (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gnadenkirche Heißen Highres 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Remarkable qood quality. --Cccefalon 17:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Marktplatz Heißen Kirche 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good --Christian Ferrer 14:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sunderplatz Mülheim Heimaterde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

About : File:Sunderplatz Mülheim Heimaterde 2014.jpg

I didn't expect you to correct all the problems on the branches because it seems to be almost impossible (imo). I've only tried to "do the job" as far as I could so as to help you as much as possible. I hoped you would correct the slight errors concerning the buildings, so that I could promote the picture. -- I've asked you about the softs because I've noticed they all make stiching errors but not the same ones... which is sometimes interesting. I usually use Hugin (with enblend) and Microsoft ICE when problems are obvious, and I compare the different results. Colin, who makes good panos, recommended me to use Hugin with Smartblend instead of Enblend... but I've not tried yet. -- I know there are only a few panos of that size on Commons, that's why I tried to review yours. I'm sure you'll soon do some other good ones with your Nodal Ninja ! -- Best regards. --JLPC (talk) 17:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• JLPC, thanks for your reply. I appreciate your work on the photo. I promise that I will upload a complete new stich tomorrow. Currently I am experimenting with different techniques. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Your new version is really better, even though I preferred the general contrast of the first one, but this is not important : matter of taste... Only four problems now imo (see notes, please) : two of them can be probably fixed easily. As for the two other ones, I can't tell because I don't know what's on the original pictures. But, according to your improvements, I think we can be optimistic ! (If you've experimented different techniques, maybe you can copy and paste the two problematic parts from one to another...) --JLPC (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
    • You are welcome ! -- Today's pano is better. Christian Ferrer promoted it before me but I uploaded it to straighten the savings bank (I'm working hard to do the same with one of my panos these days and this was a good training) : done !...But it was just for pleasure ! --JLPC (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Happy you've enjoyed your work... which is very good on almost the pano. I've suppressed two notes, now irrelevant (problems fixed) and added two other ones. On the right, near the house roof, some birch branches can be stiched easily (I think). On the very right part of the picture, you've done a great work with the branches on the brown wall... but I think there's something to do with the contrast under the archway. If not, I'll promote anyway. Best regards. --JLPC (talk) 19:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
        • Really good now. Your work concerning the lower left part is spectacular. -- Enjoy your Ninja ! --JLPC (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Harley Davidson Cafe Las Vegas 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good now. Btw, no, I don't care what kind of camera a picture was taken with, I just expect quality --Poco a poco 19:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim Luftaufnahme mit Rathaus Blickrichtung Ost 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Colours are a bit dull but ok. --Mattbuck 22:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrmündung Duisburg Luftaufnahme 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Colours are a bit dull but ok. --Mattbuck 22:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Adam Opel AG Werk Bochum I Luftaufnahme 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 09:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Luftaufnahme Innenstadt Essen Blickrichtung West 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Bit dull but ok. --Mattbuck 00:02, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/Archive 6⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

D600

Hello Tuxyso, to answer your comment in the QIC page, I want to say not only the D600 is good but also the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II lens witch is an excellent lens. However the edition is also very important, I make a lot of sharpening with lightroom and I reduce a bit the size before to to upload it in wikimedia. --Christian Ferrer 11:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Christian, thanks for your reply. The 70-200 VR II is a great lens, especially the AF performance and sharpness at open aperture. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Uferensemble RWW Stadthalle Schlossbrücke Mülheim 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good--Lmbuga 22:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berliner Platz Mülheim 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. (Panorama template should be added IMO) --P e z i 22:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)  Done Pano template added. --Tuxyso 22:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrtalbruecke Morgens Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 10:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhraue bei Mintard mit Ruhrtalbrücke 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good!--Lmbuga 18:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haus der Stromwirtschaft Mülheim Delle 50-52 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrbania Schlossbrücke Stadthalle Rundumsicht 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Just for information, what is the apro. fov? The exif say's 360° but this can´t be true... --Leviathan1983 12:59, 28 February 2014 (UTC) It a cropped version of a 360° pano. I would say about 270°. --Tuxyso 13:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Altendorf 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:39, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Altendorf 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:43, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Uferensemble RWW Stadthalle Schlossbrücke Mülheim 2014 Crop.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:16, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Altendorf 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:18, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 09:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Ruhraue bei Mintard mit Ruhrtalbrücke 2014.jpg

Hello Tuxyso, I saw this nice picture in the QIC page, and it seems that the houses in the left are leaning in a bit; It would be great if you could remove the perspectives, if not it's anyway a good and nice image! --Christian Ferrer 19:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Christian thanks for your careful view. I will look on it later, correction will be time-consuming because it is a stitching. Best wishes --Tuxyso (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patio de los Arrayanes Alhambra 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patio de los Arrayanes Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Am Abend 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:02, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Five Boats mit Marina Sonnenuntergang 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit tilted counter-cw --A.Savin 12:59, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 13:16, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 19:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Werhanmühle Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 09:14, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trevélez Highres Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good--Lmbuga 09:54, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Generalife Garden Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and composition.--ArildV 08:16, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Partal Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:48, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patio de los Arrayanes Alhambra 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 06:17, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks like some parts of the sky have been denoised and some not. Also, strange white spots. --A.Savin 12:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Better NR, strange white spots are clouds, or do we mean different things? Please take another look. Thanks. --Tuxyso 13:26, 14 March 2014 (UTC) No, several white points of unknown origin, no clouds, no stars. This I cannot mark because the annotator zoom again doesn't work. Please check the sky yourself. I'm sorry --A.Savin 19:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Done You are right. They were comming from the sensor (forgot to activate NR for long time exposure). Would be nice to take another look. --Tuxyso 00:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)  Support Looks good. --A.Savin 12:50, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Werhahmühle Küppersmühle Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality! --Cccefalon 16:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of El Salvador Nerja 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --Halavar 12:36, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Faro de Torrox 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Slightly clipped white and leaning cw --A.Savin 12:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Done. Please take another look. --Tuxyso 13:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 22:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alhambra Patio de la Lindaraja Nasrid Garden 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 11:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church Santa María de la Alhambra 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 13:00, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Generalife Garden Alhambra 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. However, I had cloned out the airplane; but that might be personal taste.. --Cccefalon 10:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Done. --Tuxyso 11:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church Santa María de la Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 07:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Generalife Garden Alhambra 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alhambra Löwenhof mit Löwenbrunnen 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Innenhafen Duisburg Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Innenhafen Duisburg Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thyssen Krupp Quartier High Res Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. (BTW: There is a template for panoramics.) --XRay 12:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC) It's a wiki :) I know of the template, I will set it, sometimes I just forget. --Tuxyso 12:34, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Torcal Felsformation 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Torcal Felsformation 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 18:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Torcal Cows 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments This is a fine image and the poop makes me laugh for some childish reason. --Saffron Blaze 18:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cómpeta 01 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:21, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Torcal Iberiensteinbock 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Left rock is IMHO too blurry to have a great composition, but QI anyhow --Poco a poco 15:59, 22 March 2014 (UTC) No other chance at 200mm focal length even not with f2.8. But background blurr for portrayals is not per se bad, is it? --Tuxyso 16:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC) If you consider it just a portrait, forget my comment, I thought that your intention was rather to use the rock in the background as part of the composition, which I liked and you had (maybe by chance) executed good Poco a poco 18:51, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Landscape Around El Torcal 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 21:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View from Balcón de Europa in Nerja 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok for QI --Martin Kraft 17:50, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stumpfkrokodil Bioparc Fuengirola 01 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stumpfkrokodil Bioparc Fuengirola 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality, but it could be a little darker. --Hockei 16:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)  Done New version uploaded. --Tuxyso 20:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)  Comment Better IMO. --Hockei 21:02, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Torcal Felsformation 01 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ximonic 07:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

• In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Tuxyso,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

• In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
• In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cómpeta Complete Panorama View Golden Hour 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 09:53, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Cómpeta Complete Panorama View Golden Hour 02 2014.jpg

Servus Tuxyso,
wirklich schönes Bild, der gelbe LKW, der graue Glockenturm, das Verkehrszeichen auf der Böschung ... ein Bild bei dem man stundenlang Details schauen kann. Das einzige was mir aufgefallen ist: Auf der Beschreibungsseite des Bildes haben beim Pano-Template glaub ich die Anzahl der Bilder und die verwendete Software die Plätze getauscht. Liebe Grüße, --P e z i (talk) 20:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

P e z i, danke für die Info. Ich habe es direkt mal geändert. Vielen Dank für das Lob bzgl. des Panos. Ich finde das Foto auch sehr schön, in natura war der Anblick noch ein wenig schöner. Eigentlich war ich schon auf dem Heimweg, ich MUSSTE aber anhalten und die Szene im Foto festhalten. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrbania Mülheim Ansicht März 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Arctic Kangaroo 14:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrbania Mülheim Ansicht März 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Arctic Kangaroo 14:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Cómpeta Complete Panorama View Golden Hour 02 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cómpeta Complete Panorama View Golden Hour 02 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Welcome to Trevélez sign 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good. --Halavar 10:30, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ham hanging in a shop in Trevélez 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ummmhh, delicious :) --Poco a poco 09:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ham Monument Trevélez 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:03, 12 April 2014 (UTC) Needs a crop below, IMO. Would make a better composition.--Jebulon 19:25, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:El Torcal Iberiensteinbock 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:El Torcal Iberiensteinbock 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/Jee 07:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Trevélez Highres Panorama 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trevélez Highres Panorama 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/Jee 07:53, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 01 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good quality. --XRay 16:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014 Alternative.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. --Iifar 06:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC) I've nominated the photo on FPC. --Tuxyso 06:42, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aalto Theater mit RWE Tower 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Done Dust spot removed. --Tuxyso 07:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)  Support --Rolf H. 07:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Straßenbild Essen mit Hochhäusern und Postbank Gebäude 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 13:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alte Synagoge Essen 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 13:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen Einkaufsstadt Hotel Handelshof 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haus der Technik Essen 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 08:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Granada from Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 18:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aalto Theater 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 10:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Amazing quality but IMHO the image is tilt --The Photographer 14:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC) Mmh, I think you are wrong in this case. The projection keeps verticals straight. For that reason the foreground is curved. The place why you placed the note is not vertical due to slight curvature and probably a not fully centered shooting position but has nothing to do with a tilt. --Tuxyso 14:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)  Support Minor ccw tilt (right side), nevertheless QI for me. --Iifar 06:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)  Done New stitching. --Tuxyso 09:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpg

Have you considered what the "Panini General" projection in Hugin would have done to that? It seems that projection is made for scenes with a central perspective. -- Colin (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey Colin! Never heard of the Panini projection, thanks for the hint. I've tried this projection with Hugin, see the result. What do you think? I am not fully convinced. The close lines on the floor are not that curved as in my version, but the main problem with the Panini projection is that the palm trees are imho stretched too much. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Don't use the one called "Panini" -- that's a misleading old broken projection. Use "Panini General" instead. Also you can alter a couple of sliders that change compression at the top and bottom -- moving the sliders one way tends the image towards rectilinear. Obviously going fully rectilinear isn't possible for a very wide angle shot, but a small adjustment can be enough to remove curving/distortion from some shots. All cylindrical projections promise straight verticals. Only Rectilinear promises straight horizontals. The "Panini General" projection promises straight diagonals when the come from a central perspective -- which can suit some images. File:Paisley Abbey from the south east.jpg uses it, with a little adjustment to the top to keep the roof of the abbey straight. File:Paisley Abbey from the west - crop.jpg also uses it. It is possible it doesn't suit your picture, but I always think it is worth a try. -- Colin (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey Colin! I've again spent several hours to improve the pano with Panini General, see result. Finally I come to the conclusion that the current version on Commons is still the best one. What do you think? The lines on the foreground floor are better, but there are new problems with the verticals at the right. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tuxyso. Sorry you have spent so long on this to achieve no gain. I'm puzzled that a change in perspective would alter whether verticals were vertical, unless you've accidentally moved the image in Hugin preview and altered the alignment? As a cylindrical perspective, it should be no different in how verticals are show. It clearly shows better handling of the diagonal lines on the ground but I guess people aren't too upset by the lines being curved, especially since the horizontals are curved at the bottom. Most of your subject is in the central third, which has least distortion. Oh well. I'm reminded of a quote I read recently, which is to be found in the first paragraphs of this text. The final paragraph is apt too. -- Colin (talk) 17:26, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Deine Frage bei QI / meine Antwort

Hallo Tuxyso,

selbstverständlich bin ich mit dem Ergebnis im File:Brilon-Propsteikirche-Blick durchs Mittelschiff nach Westen.jpg zufrieden. Ich nehme gerne Ratschläge von erfahrenen Fotografen an, damit ich mich verbessern kann. Wobei die Bewertung bei QI auch von der jeweiligen Person abhängt. Einmal positiv bewertete Bilder werden selten durch andere Teilnehmer in Frage gestellt.

Gruß --SteveK (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hallo User:SteveK! Schön, dass du zufrieden bist. Ich habe nachgefragt, weil ein korrekter Weißabgleich bei Mischlichtsituationen manchmal tatsächlich Geschmackssache ist. Auf welchem Feld bist du denn fotografisch so unterwegs? --Tuxyso (talk) 06:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Ich interessiere mich vor allem für Bauwerke, die laufen einem nicht weg. Natürlich kommen auf Wanderungen auch mal Aussichten vor die Linse, nur ist da die schwere Spiegelreflex eher hinderlich. Fototechnisch experimentiere ich auch schon mal, habe hier einige Panoramaaufnahmen eingestellt und auch schon mal mit HDR experimentiert. Hier kannst du meine Machwerke anschauen. Alles vor 2006 ist analog fotografiert. Beruflich komme ich gerade weniger zum Hobby. --SteveK (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Hallo SteveK! Spannend, ich habe mich gerade mal durchgeklickt. Analoge Fotografien finden sich in der WP leider viel zu wenig, gerade diese sind aus dokumentatischen Gesichtspunkten natürlich besonders interessant. Du scheinst in jedem Fall einen Faible für Kircheninnenräume zu haben. Kennst du die Aufnahmen vom User W:User:Diliff? Dieser kombiniert HDR mit Innenraumpanoramatechiken und hat zahlreiche richtige beeindruckende Kircheninnenraumaufnahmen erstellt. Ich wünsche auf jedenfall weiterhin gut Licht (und auch eine gute Hand für deine Arbeit auf dem Gebiet der Heraldik). --Tuxyso (talk) 08:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014 Alternative.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:09, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brenntag AG 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:53, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

LTR marks

Hi! The bot removed an invisible LTR character, take a look here and here. For example in that case in "(Essen)‎]]" there is a misplaced special character between (Essen) and ]]. I believe that the main reason for these LTR characters inside the category links are copy/paste actions from a category list. However recently they are getting more and more frequent, so I'm wondering if there are other sources. Do you remember if you inserted these categories by coping/pasting from a category page? If you copy and paste [[Category:Exterior of Alte Synagoge (Essen)‎]] inside this webpage you will be able to see it as U200E character. This proble should not happen with automated tools without coping/pasting.... can you confirm it? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 07:14, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Basilicofresco, thanks for your reply. Sometimes, especially for longer category names, I use copy&paste - could be the the case for "Exterior of Alte Synagoge (Essen)‎". I navigate to another photo of the same building which is already categorized and copy the category name from the HTML page into the input box of Cat-a-lot or UploadWizard. I guess that copy&paste is the usual way if you do not use tools like cat-a-lot. Probably the programmers of UploadWizward and Cat-a-lot should be informed that they automatically remove the special character during categorization. A further important information: I always use cat a lot or the UploadWizard for categorization and do no manual categorization. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:26, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hartmut Esser 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 09:30, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadskantoor Gemeente Roermond 2014 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 14:52, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Christoffelkathedraal 2014 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 12:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadskantoor Gemeente Roermond 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 16:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ev-Kirche-Muelheim-Duempten-2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Joydeep 06:14, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ophrys apifera Bienen-Ragwurz 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support nice and very good! --Iifar 06:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 009.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Oops --Poco a poco 19:38, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick vom Desenberg Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality (the exiting review work for panos is always to look out for stitching errors or duplicates but I couldn't find a single one).. --Cccefalon 11:26, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Munsterkerk Roermond 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Joydeep 07:24, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 008.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 06:51, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 10:37, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 007.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Joydeep 11:34, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments needs perspective --A.Savin 10:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 21:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)  Support ok --A.Savin 10:21, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Epipactis atrorubens Braunrote Stendelwurz Warburger Börde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI --Rjcastillo 14:27, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gymnadenia conopsea Mücken-Händelwurz Warburger Börder 2014 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. --P e z i 19:43, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gymnadenia conopsea Mücken-Händelwurz Warburger Börder 2014 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Joydeep 08:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prunella grandiflora Warburger Börder 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Joydeep 08:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 005.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Perspective correction necessary. --Cccefalon 15:04, 12 June 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 09:39, 13 June 2014 (UTC) Good quality. --Cccefalon 17:58, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Ophrys apifera Bienen-Ragwurz 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ophrys apifera Bienen-Ragwurz 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Patchway railway station MMB 33 150120.jpg

Hi, you added the note "Good Quality" to this image, but left it at the nomination stage. Could you please clarify what you meant to do please? It's on the June 13 list. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Matt! I've forgotten to promote, sorry. --Tuxyso (talk)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Johanniskirche Muelheim Turm Highres 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 05:43, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim an der Ruhr Heißen Sturmschäden Juli 2014 006.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Both sides are leaning out --Christian Ferrer 17:11, 19 June 2014 (UTC)  Done, please take another look. --Tuxyso 22:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)  Support --Christian Ferrer 16:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasserbahnhof Mülheim mit Blumenuhr 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 06:34, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrschleuse Mülheim 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 06:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Leinpfad 1 Mülheim mit Boot.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, but yet tilted cw. --Cccefalon 06:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)  Done --Tuxyso 20:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC) Good quality. --Cccefalon 04:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kräuselscharbe Phalacrocorax melanoleucos 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Composition (more space at left) and DOF could be better, but QI for me. Nice head and body of the bird. Vivid color--Lmbuga 16:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kräuselscharbe Phalacrocorax melanoleucos 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 09:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kräuselscharbe Phalacrocorax melanoleucos 01 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Best headshot among Microcarbo melanoleucos. --Averater 07:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aalto-Theater-Abends-2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aalto-Theater-Abends-02-2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. (Deduction in the rating because of the sun reflection, but still QI IMO) --Cccefalon 05:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC) IMHO a certain amount of reflection with such glass surfaces in evening light is not bad. --Tuxyso 06:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC) Agreed, thats why I promoted it. But of course it remains an issue on the way to a perfect photo. Allow me the comment, please :) --Cccefalon 09:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RWE Tower Essen 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments There is a small tilt ccw --Cccefalon 08:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 20:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC) Good quality. --Cccefalon 20:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Kräuselscharbe Phalacrocorax melanoleucos 01 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kräuselscharbe Phalacrocorax melanoleucos 01 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Park Aalto-Theater Rundumsicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 23:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RWE Tower only Tower 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 08:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schwalbenschwanz Desenberg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Desenberg Westansicht Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great image except for the sky which has become posterized or has some other artifact. See the note. The problem also exists along the top edge to the left of center. --Generic1139 22:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 22:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC) Fixed. Good quality --Generic1139 01:43, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama Daseburg und Umgebung vom Desenberg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Please check the notes I added. --Iifar 14:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wewelsburg Südfassade 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:42, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bergbaumuseum Bochum Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, though somewhat too high colour saturation. --Smial 22:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the review. I've neither changed saturation, nor dynamic or contrast. IMHO the saturation is due to blue hour light. --Tuxyso 04:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halde Haniel Amphitheater 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Interesting --Iifar 17:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama Warburg Highres 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Bgag 23:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schachbrettfalter NSG Weldaer Berg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness at the tip of the wings borderline but overall ok and still good enough for QI --Cccefalon 04:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daseburg vom Desenberg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality wit only one issue to complain: The spire of the churc is not complete. Do you have some pixel more? alternatively you could clone out the black extension over the golden ball. --Cccefalon 03:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)  Done Ups, I've overseen it. Thanks for the hint. Please take another look. --Tuxyso 05:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Good quality. --Cccefalon 07:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Silbergrauer Bläuling auf Tauben-Skabiose 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI, good IMO--Lmbuga 10:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sechsfleck-Widderchen auf Distel 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Livioandronico2013 13:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Desenberg Westansicht Panorama 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Desenberg Westansicht Panorama 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rothenburg Marktplatz Blick vom Rathausturm 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and nice --DXR 20:10, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick über Rothenburg vom Rathausturm 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. You could try to crop the bottom just a little bit in order to have less of the roof. -- XtoF 21:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the review. The problem is if I crop tighter at the front I loose the intersting timber framed house at the very right. --Tuxyso 22:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Jakob Kirche Rothenburg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fleischhaus Brunnen Marien Apotheke Rothenburg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 06:48, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ratstrinkstube Rothenburg 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:05, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Bergbaumuseum Bochum Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bergbaumuseum Bochum Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emscherkunst Tanzender Strommast Zauberlehrling 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI --Rjcastillo 00:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emscherkunst Tanzender Strommast Zauberlehrling 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Close to overexposure but still OK IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel 23:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emscherkunst Tanzender Strommast Zauberlehrling 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Needs excessive perspective correction ... very good! --Cccefalon 20:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord Abend Seitenansicht 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Some issues, but ok for QI imo. --ArildV 06:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emscherkunst Tanzender Strommast Zauberlehrling 04 Crop.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me, but a bird looks strange (note) --DKrieger 20:43, 24 August 2014 (UTC)  Done Bird spots removed. Thanks for the hint. --Tuxyso 20:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emscherkunst Tanzender Strommast Zauberlehrling 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting --Poco a poco 11:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emscherkunst Tanzender Strommast Zauberlehrling 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, a non-centered composition showing the whole shadow could have been an idea --Poco a poco 11:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:St. Jakob Kirche Rothenburg 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St. Jakob Kirche Rothenburg 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rothenburg Rödertor Außenbarbakane 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Jakob Rothenburg Umgebung 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Siebersturm und Spitalgasse 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --~~~~

Nominations

Hello, I've just declined 3 photos , but I did not understand what it would be "unfortunate bottom crop" could explain it to me? Danke. --LivioAndronico talk 21:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Livioandronico2013! "Unfortunate bottom" crop means that the crop at the bottom is not optimal (that was not my main reason for decline). Let's take File:Watch of san pietro.jpg. You have a lot of sky there, but a dividing line of the building is cropped at the right side (see note). Understood my point? --Tuxyso (talk) 22:02, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Ok thanks --LivioAndronico talk 22:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaisergarten Oberhausen Liegen am See 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice.--Famberhorst 04:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaisergarten Oberhausen Kiosk 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 12:14, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaisergarten Oberhausen Tiergehege Fontäne 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sehr schön mit dem Regenbogen, obwohl die Enten und die Frau mit dem Kind ziemlich dunkel sind. QI -- Spurzem 06:37, 1 September 2014 (UTC) Bei so einem Motiv musst man zwangsläufig sehr knapp belichten um noch Zeichnung im Himmel zu erhalten. Ich schaue aber heute Abend noch mal, ob ich Enten und Kind noch moderat aufhelln kann. --Tuxyso 06:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaisergarten Oberhausen Tiergehege 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Lovely --The Photographer 13:19, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Halde Haniel Amphitheater 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Halde Haniel Amphitheater 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)