User talk:Eusebius/Archives/Promotions/August 2009

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trompette - corps.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, could not find your portrait in the reflections *g* --Mbdortmund 11:07, 3 August 2009 (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:
Périnet piston valve.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Looks good to me. Descriptive and clear image. --JalalV (talk) 10:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Trompette - premier piston - montage perspective.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trompette - premier piston - montage perspective.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Karel (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2009 (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:
Palais de justice de Tours.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info I've replaced the image by an edit by Maedin. Old one is here. --Eusebius (talk) 19:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

 Oppose as not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (should be geocoded, but is not). "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so". I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page. -- Rastaman3000 (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

DerivativeFX just doesn't copy the geotag automatically. Fixed. --Eusebius (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Looks fine to me. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I couldn't find a better one. - H005 (talk) 22:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:47, 7 August 2009 (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:
Château de Fontainebleau.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support - best IMO Rastaman3000 (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you think it is the more valuable image for the scope, or do you support this one because it's the only one with a geotag? It is easy to geotag any of the three other candidates, if one of them is judged better than the others. Please take some time to perform an actual review. Or you can copy-paste geotags and remove your own oppositions, too. --Eusebius (talk) 16:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your commnent; I've Geocoded the others like you've suggested (Actually, I have no clue how comes I havn't thought of it myself). However, I still support this image, as IMHO it best illustrates the scope, and is of a high quality. Rastaman3000 (talk) 15:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

•  Support I also think this is the best of the proposed four images. -- H005 (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. FontainebleauChateau01.jpg: 0
2. Fontainebleau West.jpg: 1
3. Château de Fontainebleau - pano façade.jpg: 2
4. Chateau Fontainebleau.jpg: 0
=>
File:FontainebleauChateau01.jpg: Declined.
File:Fontainebleau West.jpg: Declined.
File:Château de Fontainebleau - pano façade.jpg: Promoted.
File:Chateau Fontainebleau.jpg: Declined.

--Eusebius (talk) 10:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eilean Donan castle - 95mm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness not absolutely perfect, but great view and all other criteria ok. -- Smial 12:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eilean Donan castle - 140mm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness not absolutely perfect, but great view and all other criteria ok. -- Smial 12:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathédrale de Tours - détail de la tour nord.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 framing --Ianare 20:01, 15 August 2009 (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:
Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Grenoble (interior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info Only competitor, quite dark (no HDR), uncorrected perspective:

--Eusebius (talk) 21:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Actually I think there's another, stronger competitor, which I find a more interesting shot:

  

However, the educational value of a picture of the nave is definitely higher for illustrating the scope, thus my support. -- H005 (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 20:51, 18 August 2009 (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:
Blair Castle.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support The best one. --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blair castle - facade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Some CA, but overall good. Maedin 14:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tours - hôtel de ville - clocheton.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. -Jcart1534 02:28, 26 August 2009 (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:
Castle Stalker.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support -- TonyBallioni (talk) 14:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Jcart1534 (talk) 12:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Castle stalker2.jpg: +2 <--
2. Castle Stalker 01.jpg: 0
=>
File:Castle stalker2.jpg: Promoted. <--
File:Castle Stalker 01.jpg: Declined.

--Yann (talk) 17:30, 29 August 2009 (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:
Antoine-Laurent de Jussieu.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support -- TonyBallioni (talk) 12:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Jussieu Antoine-Laurent de 1748-1836.jpg: +1 <--
2. Paris - Jardin des Plantes - AL Jussieu.jpg: 0
=>
File:Jussieu Antoine-Laurent de 1748-1836.jpg: Promoted. <--
File:Paris - Jardin des Plantes - AL Jussieu.jpg: Declined.

--Yann (talk) 17:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)