User talk:Bgag/Archives 2011-12

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gadara - West Theatre 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 Nice, though I would like to see less crop in the right above corner...--Gaeser 17:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gadara 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 -- Smial 19:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gadara 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 Ok to me. --Cayambe 09:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jerash - Hippodrome 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 good --Mbdortmund 01:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Roman theatre of Palmyra 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 Ok. --Berthold Werner 07:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Roman theatre of Palmyra 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 Quality is ok but value should be higher with a panorama. --Berthold Werner 07:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jerash - South Gate.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 IMHO, but in higher resolution can by better. — Jagro 11:42, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krak des Chevaliers 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 Nice, sharp, good composition. — Jagro 12:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hospital de Sant Pau 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. --Mbdortmund 19:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jerash - Oval Forum 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 Very good. --Cayambe 09:36, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jerash - Cardo maximus 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  Support QI & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 09:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jerash - Temple of Artemis.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. --Cayambe 16:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Sacrophage

Bonjour

ton sarcophage m'interesse mais il y a deux petits points blancs que tu peux enlever, s'est surtout ton détourage qui est dur. Tu pourrai entrer un peu le masque et faire un lissage de 2 à 3 Px... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Umayyad Mosque, Damascus (general view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Very interesting, useful and informative! But, in my view, the scope should be specified more accurately. These kind of ensembles have two exterior categories. And indeed, I think that the nominated photo is the best in the scope Umayyad Mosque, Damascus (general view) or outside view, whatever you choose. Another thing is photos representing views of the inner courtyard - a scope Umayyad Mosque, Damascus (inner courtyard) where this: or this: are among the best ones, imo. Both categories deserve to have a „VI scope“ because they give us absolutely different information. And another thing is the interior scope not to be confused here. For example, I had this in mind nominating this image: that was promoted. Let's see what others think about it.--MrPanyGoff 00:06, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment Hey people, won't you comment this great photo? Are you agree with the proposed scope differentiation?--MrPanyGoff 08:36, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
•  CommentI also think a scope Umayyad Mosque, Damascus (general view) would be appropriate in this case --Berthold Werner (talk) 15:21, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Done I have created a new category. --Bgag (talk) 17:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support For me everything is OK now. Best image in the scope, imo.--MrPanyGoff 07:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moabite Sarcophagus.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 & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 08:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jerash - Macellum sculptures.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 and useful.--Jebulon 18:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mosaic in Madaba.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 White parts in the lower left show no details --Mbdortmund 16:25, 18 January 2011 (UTC)  Comment I have imported a new version. --Bgag 23:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC) OK --Mbdortmund 18:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Bab Sharqi, Damascus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment Another interesting situation. This image shows the place of one of the old gates of Damascus with some simple new reconstruction. Months ago we had here the same topic of another city but this photo of mine was rejected no matter that the subject was even more representative, imo. Anyway, I'm not going to oppose this one, cheers for the new year ;) ...--MrPanyGoff 11:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
  •  Comment There is an article (or a stub) about this gate in two different WP, in English and in Arabic. I'm not quite sure that each gate of the old city of Damascus deserves a scope however. A set with all gates could be a better idea. --Myrabella (talk) 12:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Paul's Cathedral Dome (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment I'm going to support the image and the scope but in my view (exterior) should be added at the end of the scope. At the moment we have the same case with the same scope but (interior) (see above) that is wrongly named, imo.--MrPanyGoff 11:56, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment I have checked in Commons and I haven't found any category for a Dome (interior) or a Dome (exterior). --Bgag (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

• You didn't find one because they are not created yet. You was the man who divided the St. Paul's Cathedral scope into Dome and presumably other parts and I support this idea. It is usual to specify the scope as general - exterior or interior. If you separate the subject into subcategories then again, logically, they should be differentiate as exterior or interior otherwise what if someone want to nominate this image: in the scope St. Paul's Cathedral Dome. Both are photos of one and the same dome but represents completely different matters.--MrPanyGoff 21:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
• Agree with MrPanyGoff.--Jebulon (talk) 00:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Done --Bgag (talk) 13:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - For me, it is the best representation of the St. Paul's Dome.--MrPanyGoff 14:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Saidnaya, Syria.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in the scope so far, imo. The image shows considerable part of the small town.--MrPanyGoff 22:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amman Odeon 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  Support QI and Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 09:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amman Odeon 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 Bit grainy, but generally good. Mattbuck 10:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dana Reserve 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 ok --Carschten 20:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Camels in Dana Reserve 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 to me. --Cayambe 19:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Camels in Dana Reserve 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 QI for me. --Jovianeye 04:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Taqiyah.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 oui Someone promoted and wrote "oui" but signature was not transformed to username. And this picture was declined at 31. may 2009, see here Commons:Quality_images_candidates/Archives_June_2009 --Berthold Werner 18:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC) I have imported a new version of the picture before submitted again. --Bgag 19:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)  Support ok now. --Berthold Werner 09:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Hafez_al-Assad_and_Bashar_al-Assad.jpg

File:Hafez_al-Assad_and_Bashar_al-Assad.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

80.187.106.39 15:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dana Reserve 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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal Castle 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 Good quality. --Berthold Werner 15:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC) Blurry for me. Not QI for me--Lmbuga 01:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obelisk Tomb and Triclinium.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 --Taxiarchos228 09:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal Castle 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal Castle 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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Djinn Blocks.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 --Carschten 19:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dana Reserve 07.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. --Cayambe 14:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dana Reserve 06.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 Also good. --Cayambe 14:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Al Khazneh 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. --Coyau 12:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Theater of Petra.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. --Cayambe 08:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Street of Facades 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 Good. --Cayambe 19:20, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Street of Facades 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. --Cayambe 08:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niche in Petra.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 quality. --IdLoveOne 05:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lion Triclinium, Petra.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. --Cayambe 09:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Qasr al-Bint 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. --Cayambe 09:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Qasr al-Bint 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. --Cayambe 09:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great Temple of Petra - Upper Temenos.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. --Cayambe 08:05, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monumental Gate, Petra.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 Also good. --Cayambe 08:05, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Street of Facades 06.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 --George Chernilevsky 08:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Uneishu Tomb, Petra.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 --George Chernilevsky 08:11, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Street of Facades 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 --George Chernilevsky 08:13, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Qasr al-Bint (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support - Not so many variants in the category but very hard to choose between three or four good competitors. Finally, I select the nominated image because it is the only one that shows some remains of two important features - the main cornice and the portico.--MrPanyGoff 13:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:48, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Great Temple (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• I  Support this one. It is more informative and even has a higher tech quality, imo.--MrPanyGoff 20:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Comment This one gives more infos about the monument itself (pro) but has more tourists and is not facing (contra). The gate is pro and contra IMO (more info, but out of scope and distracting). No quality issues like the other. Please help !!--Jebulon (talk) 16:28, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Scores:

1. Great Temple of Petra 01.jpg: 0
2. Great Temple of Petra 02.jpg: +1  
=>
File:Great Temple of Petra 01.jpg: Declined.
File:Great Temple of Petra 02.jpg: Promoted.

--MrPanyGoff 15:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blue Chapel, Petra 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 -- George Chernilevsky 16:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Silk Tomb, Petra 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. --Mbdortmund 22:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blue Chapel, Petra 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 for me --Archaeodontosaurus 13:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Near Al-Siq, Petra.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. --Berthold Werner 16:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great Temple of Petra 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 Ok for me. --Berthold Werner 16:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Urn Tomb, Petra 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. --Cayambe 11:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tombs in Petra.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 11:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View of Petra.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. --Cayambe 21:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Urn Tomb (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best detailed image in the category for now.--MrPanyGoff 16:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 21:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Garden Temple, Petra 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  Support QI for me --Archaeodontosaurus 11:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Refuge in Petra.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. --Coyau 22:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Garden Temple, Petra 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. --Cayambe 20:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monumental Gate relief, Petra.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 for me --Archaeodontosaurus 17:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dragon on Mengjia Longshan Temple.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 Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seven Pillars of Wisdom, Wadi Rum.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 Belle prise de vue! -- MJJR 15:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Champignon jordanien

J'ai posé la question à l' "Association Mycologique de Toulouse"... j'espère aussi déclencher leur intérêt pour nos travaux photographiques, en les insitant à nous rejoindre. Ton champignon pourrait faire date. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Il s'agit de "Podaxis pistillaris" il en existe une autre image dans COMMONS mais la tienne est bien meilleure je t'engage à la présenter à VA! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup pour l'information. J'avais importé une autre photo du même champignon. J'en ai changé aussi la description et j'ai créé une nouvelle catégorie. --Bgag (talk) 22:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Qasr al-Bint 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 Good quality & useful --Ianare 20:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wadi Rum 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 Good quality. --Berthold Werner 10:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wadi Rum 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 Good quality. --Berthold Werner 10:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Silk Tomb (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support - OK, I support this as most illustrative, imo.--MrPanyGoff 21:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Scores:

1. Silk Tomb, Petra.jpg: +0
2. Silk Tomb, Petra 01.jpg: +2 
=>
File:Silk Tomb, Petra.jpg: Declined.
File:Silk Tomb, Petra 01.jpg: Promoted.

--MrPanyGoff 10:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mushroom in Wadi Rum 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  Support QI & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 13:59, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Podaxis pistillaris.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:55, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 07:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dead Sea, Jordan 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 07:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Diocletian's Camp, Palmyra 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 Good quality. --Cayambe 15:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Longshan Temple - Fenghuang.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. --Mbdortmund 20:50, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Longshan Temple - Drum Tower Cavalier.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. --Mbdortmund 20:50, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Longshan Temple - Dragon 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 Ok. --Jovianeye 18:20, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lin An Tai Historical House 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 Good quality. --Mbdortmund 09:36, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Longshan Temple - Dragon 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 ok. --Ankara 08:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Pinglin Tea Museum.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pinglin Tea Museum.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. --Jovianeye 05:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wen Wu Temple 11.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. --Mbdortmund 10:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wen Wu Temple - Chinese lion.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. --Coyau 12:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ci En Pagoda 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 Nice composition. Quality fine except for some minor compression artifacts. Is it tilted, or is the bell hanging at an angle for some reason (e.g. the wind)? --Avenue 03:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC) I have imported a new version of the picture. The picture is not tilted. Effectively it was very windy on the top of the pagoda. --Bgag 00:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC) QI to me. --Avenue 08:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ci En Pagoda 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 & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 05:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ci En Pagoda, Taiwan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ci En Pagoda 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 Good quality. --Raghith 16:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Yerba Buena Island, California.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 04:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple of Chukou 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 Good--Jebulon 10:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple of Chukou 04- Dragons.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. --Mbdortmund 11:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moulin à vent, Saint-Paulin.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 - Jean-Pol GRANDMONT 14:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vieux presbytère de Deschambault 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. --Taxiarchos228 21:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue of Saint-Paulin.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. --Taxiarchos228 21:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moulin à vent, Saint-Paulin.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 - Jean-Pol GRANDMONT 14:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dragon and Tiger Pagodas 07.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}}}

File:Daisen-in_01.jpg

File:Daisen-in_01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Vantey (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Zuiho-in_01.jpg

File:Zuiho-in_01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Vantey (talk) 05:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dragon and Tiger Pagodas 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 {{{3}}}

Request for Use of Image in Academic Publication

Request for Use of Image in Academic Publication

Dear Bernard, I'm a student at MIT, and I'm working with my professor, Mark Jarzombek (web.mit.edu/mmj4/www/) on a book on global architecture. I have been looking for a good photographs of Ifuago. In particular, I'm interested in this photograph of yours: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Batad_rice_terraces.jpg. I'd like to use in our book, which is a survey history of art and architecture. I'm not sure yet how many copies will be printed, maybe a run of 8,000 or something like that - global distribution. You'll be properly accredited as the photographer, of course. If you are interested, please email me at ahw@mit.edu. Love your work. Thanks, Alexander Hilton86 (talk) 20:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forest View Suspension Bridge, Jhihben 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, nice --Taxiarchos228 11:35, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Eluanbi Lighthouse.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Al criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Image Use

Greeting Bernard,

I would like to confirm that I can use some images for resale and want to know exactly what your attribution requirements are? You can reach me at roman.banfield@gmail.com

Thank You!

Roman

Bernard Gagnon / BGAG Quebec

Hi Bernard

I am preparing an educational book on architecture and would like to include the following images I found in Wikipedia Commons. The use as described under the GNU Free Documentation License requires attribution. I would be crediting the work as follows:

Painted Ladies, Alamo Square, San Francisco, California. photograph: Bernard Gagnon

Gassho-zukuri Farmhouse, Ogimachi, Japan. photograph: Bernard Gagnon

Please confirm that this is correct and that I do have your permission to use the image with the proper credit.

You have extraordinary photographs. Congratulations!

kind regards,

Andrés Mignucci / NONZA Architect

you can reply to my email: andresmignucci@gmail.com

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Sansiantai Bridge, Taiwan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:32, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Dragon and Tiger Pagodas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Earth Store Bodhisattva.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}}}

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Church of Panagia Paraportiani (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Good but please add (exterior) to the scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:55, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

•  Comment There is one more identical photo of the same position which is also sunny good quality photograph. It is better as a matter of sunlit but this image here is better as a matter of no obscured facades. Unfortunately, both of them don't show the bell.--MrPanyGoff 14:59, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment A set would be useful.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
• Well, ok after all a tough decision but I would  Support as best in the scope.--MrPanyGoff 14:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ancient Greek theatre in Delos 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. --Cayambe 14:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Pebble Beach 6th hole.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 13:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ancient Greek theatre in Delos.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Blue Chapel (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:36, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Temple of Winged Lions (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Obelisk Tomb and Triclinium (Petra).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best on rich scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:03, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Terrace of the Lions (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best on rich scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:55, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 07:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
FedExField (interior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:54, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Heinz Field (interior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question I have to ask: is this still how the field looks ("Pittsburgh" in one end zone, slashes in the other end zone, and no logo at mid-field)? This photo is from 2005, and I see that in a 2008 photo, the end zones say "Pittsburgh" and "Steelers" and the Steelers' logo is at mid-field. cmadler (talk) 14:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment I don't know how it looks now. I suppose it could change each year. --Bgag (talk) 15:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
•  Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:51, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Terrace of the Lions 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 Good quality. --LC-de 06:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Terrace of the Lions 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 Good quality. --LC-de 06:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
CCGS Ernest Lapointe museum ship (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment I think the better formulation of the scope is: „CCGS Ernest Lapointe museum ship (exterior)“.--MrPanyGoff 21:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

•  Support Now it is OK for me.--MrPanyGoff 06:16, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 18:12, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Roman arch on Straight Street, Damascus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Are we sure that there is only one Roman arch in Damascus? Probably it is named after some emperor...--MrPanyGoff 17:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

•  Comment I have made some researchs and it looks there is no specific name for this arch. It has been discovered in 1947. I suggest to add the name of the street in the category name in case there are other Roman arches in Damascus. --Bgag (talk) 17:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
•  Support It is OK now, imo.--MrPanyGoff 07:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 06:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Great Mosque of Aleppo Citadel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 06:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ferocactus wislizeni.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support This is the best image we have for this species. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 12:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Agora of the Competaliasts 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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 06:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Terrace of the Lions 06.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.--ArildV 23:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Maison Alphonse Desjardins.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mengjia Longshan Temple (main hall).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bust of Hermes, Delos 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 QI to me.--ArildV 22:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amphoras in Delos.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 16:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mosaic from the Insula of the Jewellery 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 Good quality. --Berthold Werner 12:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Establishment of the Poseidoniasts, Delos 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 19:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Establishment of the Poseidoniasts, Delos 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. --Cayambe 19:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Capitania Marítima de Barcelona.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Very good --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 19:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Citadel of Aleppo (interior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 19:38, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Casa de l'Ardiaca, Barcelona.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope for now. The scaffolding in the background is not very nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeodontosaurus (talk • contribs)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 16:50, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House of Hermes (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Establishment of the Poseidoniasts, Delos 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 Good quality. --Cayambe 15:19, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Relief of a bull's head, Delos.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. --Coyau 15:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bust of Hermes, Delos 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 to me.--ArildV 20:34, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maison Dupont, Saint-Narcisse 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. --Coyau 15:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stoa of Philip, Delos.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. --Coyau 15:49, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Temple of Isis (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:07, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House of Hermes 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. --Cayambe 08:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alligator at ChampionGates.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 I think it's good. --Florstein 07:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House of the Lake, Delos 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mosaic from the Insula of the Jewellery 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 {{{3}}}

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Gobierno Militar building, Barcelona.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 18:54, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Banco Español de Crédito (Plaça de Catalunya).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 18:54, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Capella de Sant Ramon de Penyafort, Cathedral of Barcelona.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 18:54, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple of Isis, Delos 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. --Ralf Roletschek 19:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Sacred Way (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good and useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:42, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House of the Dolphins 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. --Cayambe 11:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Merci et un salut de France

Merci d'avoir proposé hier la promotion d'une de mes photos au titre d'image de qualité : c'est ma première proposition ! J'en suis d'autant plus satisfait que j'ai jeté un long coup d'œil à vos productions, lesquelles se passent de commentaires (photographer's blackbelt amplement méritée). Autre satisfaction : vous êtes le troisième Québécois que je croise depuis mon inscription à Wikipédia (en septembre dernier) et, à chaque fois, ce contact m'apporte quelque chose de positif. -- Je découvre véritablement depuis un peu plus de trois semaines les exigences de Wikipédia en ce qui concerne la photo numérique et j'apprends en regardant (de près) celles des autres. Votre suffrage est une incitation supplémentaire à continuer. Merci encore. Bien cordialement.JLPC (talk) 10:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House of the Dolphins (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. Yann (talk) 19:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House of the Trident 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 Good quality. Really funny those friendly lions. --Berthold Werner 16:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Citadel of Aleppo (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment New picture imported after the first picture was promoted. --Bgag (talk) 12:16, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
• This image is very good but there is no geocoding. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
  •  Done --Bgag (talk) 20:49, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
    •  Support His image shows the hill, it seems to me the best. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:14, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
•  Support - Although it is not so sharp, finally I support this one as wider view of the object.--MrPanyGoff 20:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Citadelle d'Alep.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Citadel of Aleppo.jpg: +2 
3. Aleppo Citadel 01.jpg: +1
=>
File:Citadelle d'Alep.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Citadel of Aleppo.jpg: Promoted.
File:Aleppo Citadel 01.jpg: Declined.

--MrPanyGoff 06:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House of the Masks (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House of the Trident 07.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.--JLPC 21:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House of Inopos 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 The ocean line (horizon) is not horizontal. Otherwise good. --Cayambe 14:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)  Comment I have imported a new version. --Bgag 02:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC) Good for QI now.--JLPC 07:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Theatre Quarter (Delos).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:55, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:26, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View of Mykonos 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 Good quality. --Cayambe 19:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Theatre Quarter, Delos 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 QI for me. -- JLPC 21:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Hassan II Mosque01.jpg

And also:

• File:Hassan II Mosque02.jpg

Yours sincerely russavia (talk) 15:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Orthodox Cathedral, Fira 01.jpg

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cathedral of Candlemas of the Lord (exterior), Santorini.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I think so too, but we must add (exterior) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church bells in Fira.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. -- JLPC 21:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 03.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 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 Nice composition.--ArildV 13:31, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Photos on Tripbucket.com

Some of your photos have been selected to appear on http://www.tripbucket.com, a website dedicated to helping our members achieve their bucket list dreams. We have credited you with a link to your photo on Flickr.

You can see the dream with your photos at:

http://www.tripbucket.com/dreams/dream/summit-mount-mulanje-malawi/?ppc=PhotoSource

If you have any questions, contact us at photos@tripbucket.com.

Thanks you for sharing your photos!

Valued Image Promotion

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 02.jpg

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist (exterior), Santorini.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 05.jpg

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist (interior), Santorini.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Therasia island.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Nea Kameni island.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met -- JLPC (talk) 07:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Imerovigli, Santorini.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Little Venice, Mykonos.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Because of the wider view.--MrPanyGoff 14:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Oia and Armeni 01.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 22:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

VI

Bonjour Bernard, pour les deux images en VI que tu viens de mettre il faudrait rajouter (exterior) dans le scope. Bien amicalement --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:04, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Je prends la liberté de le faire car je vois qu'il est 4h du matin chez toi --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:11, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
President's Mosque, Aleppo (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:13, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mosque of Abraham, Aleppo citadel (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Al-Atroush Mosque, Aleppo (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
The gardens of the Adachi Museum of Art.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Nur al-Din Mosque, Hama (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

VI : scope

En passant ce matin sur la page VI, j'ai vu votre photo et constaté que, si j'ai bien compris le fonctionnement de cette page, vous devriez ajouter (Exterior) au nom du scope que vous avez choisi. Dans ce cas-là, il me semble que la promotion s'impose. J'espère vous avoir aidé. Excusez ce mot à la hâte : ma journée est trépidante ! -- Bien cordialement. JLPC (talk) 11:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Zeniarai Benzaiten Shrine, Kamakura.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope IMO. -- JLPC (talk) 23:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Oplurus grandidieri.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Armoury of Lévis, Canada (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It would be useful to add Exterior scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pyrgos, Santorini.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 06:05, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Red Beach (Santorini).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope IMO. -- JLPC (talk) 08:31, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 06:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Raymond James Stadium (interior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Good scope, good image, VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 19:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Forest View Suspension Bridge (Taiwan).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support--Paris 16 (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

•  Question Please explain what makes this bridge "of more than local interest", as required to have its own scope? Thanks, cmadler (talk) 13:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:41, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Plaque of John Jones Ross.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plaque of John Jones Ross.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. -- JLPC 16:36, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Guillaume Couture 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 19:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CPCCT Wenling Road Station fuel price sign 20110313.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. -- JLPC 20:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Vieux presbytère de Deschambault 01.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vieux presbytère de Deschambault 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. --Poco a poco 19:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Église Saint-Joseph-de-Deschambault 02.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Église Saint-Joseph-de-Deschambault 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 QI for me. -- JLPC 16:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Sainte-Anne de Varennes Basilica (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yami balangays.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. --JLPC 17:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Statue of a monk, Chukou.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue of a monk, Chukou.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 13:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lin An Tai Historical House 07.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 19:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grand Cypress East Course 8th hole.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. --JLPC 08:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Balangay.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Maritime Museum, Oia.jpg

File:Maritime Museum, Oia.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View of Oia, Santorini.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. --JLPC 20:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Licensing your panorama pictures

hi Bernard,

i would like to use some of your great panoramic images for a mobile phone game i've created. the game is about panoramas and until now i used only cc-by licensed pictures. the current way is that there is a "credits" section with all photographers names and also whenever a picture is displayed in the game the photographers name is also shown.

i would like to use your cc-by-sa pictures, but because i do not know how to SA them from inside a game, i would like to ask for permission to use them BY (cc-by: attribution only).

the game i am talking about is "afternoon world trip" where the goal is to travel around the world http://www.gameprogramming.de/index.php?id=62

please reply to ludocrazy@gameprogramming.de

cheers, Sirleto (talk) 15:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Venitian Fortress of Koules.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. --JLPC 17:17, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Venetian Loggia, Heraklion 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 Good quality. --JLPC 20:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Venetian Loggia, Heraklion (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope (malgré l'ombre sur la façade) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:36, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:38, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Venetian Loggia, Heraklion 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 Good quality. --Coyau 16:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Vieux presbytère de Deschambault (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Agios Minas Cathedral 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 QI for me. --JLPC 20:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Carl Yastrzemski01.jpg

File:Carl Yastrzemski01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 20:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Statue of a monk, Chukou.jpg

File:Statue of a monk, Chukou.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Église Saint-Joseph-de-Deschambault 02.jpg

File:Église Saint-Joseph-de-Deschambault 02.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Vieux presbytère de Deschambault 01.jpg

File:Vieux presbytère de Deschambault 01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Plaque of John Jones Ross.jpg

File:Plaque of John Jones Ross.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:10, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 02.jpg

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 02.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 05.jpg

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 05.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:20, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 03.jpg

File:Cathedral of Saint John The Baptist, Santorini 03.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

This concerns images of yours in Category:Cathedral of Candlemas of the Lord .     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Pinglin Tea Museum.jpg

File:Pinglin Tea Museum.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:55, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank You for the Wikipedia Pictures

Hello, My name is Duane Hurst and I recently made a free (non-commercial) English web site to share information with people. I added links to your Wikipedia/Wikimedia freeware picture (http://wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tianchi_Lake.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ueno_park.jpg). I also gave credit to you on my web pages for your work. Thank you for sharing with the public. My website is:

http://www.freeenglishsite.com/

I add pictures such as yours to one of the following major sections of my site: 1. World section - contains information and over 10,000 images of every world country and territory. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/index.htm

2. USA section - contains information and images of every USA state and territory. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/usa/index.htm

3. English section - "Mel and Wes" lessons in conversation format. Stories are located in various USA states and world countries such as China, England, Germany, Japan, Mexico and Thailand. Each lesson has many slang terms and idioms, which I link to my Slang Dictionary. This eventually will have over 5,000 terms. Currently, it has about 3,000 slang and idioms. I regularly add new lessons and slang terms. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/lessons/index.htm Slang Dictionary link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/slang/Eslang_a.htm

Prior to retirement, I taught English at several private and public universities in the United States.

Please share this free site with your friends. I hope all will enjoy the pictures and find the English information useful. Sincerely, Duane Hurst in Utah, USA

Email address: duanerhurst@freeenglishsite.com --65.130.202.239 14:56, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Permission to use photo in show

Could you please email me at chelseahernandez@gmail.com. I am working on a television show in the US and we would like to feature your image of Saint Thecla: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Statue_of_Saint_Thecla,_Maaloula.jpg Please email so I can give you more information. Thanks! - Chelsea, Austin TX

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkadi Monastery - Main bell.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 photo and good quality -- Lothar Spurzem 21:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkadi Monastery - Apses of the church.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 --Bgag 00:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)