User talk:Siren-Com/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

MG BUFFET et LOUIS QUATORZE

Bonjour,
Politiquement rigolo, ces deux images côte à côte en QI !! Vous auriez peut-être aussi dû changer le titre de votre proposition concernant le royal gamin et sa maman. Pour les "reviewers", il reste le Dauphin. Pas très grave à mon avis. J'ai changé mon vote, mais je voudrais bien que d'autres donnent leur avis sur le fond bleu clair. Je trouve votre MG BUFFET absolument remarquable, vous devriez peut-être la proposer en Image de Valeur, elle présente à mon avis toutes les caractéristiques et je la soutiendrais le cas échéant. Elle est selon moi la meilleure de la catégorie. Cordialement, --Jebulon (talk) 21:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marie-George Buffet 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 and useful.--Jebulon 14:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC) I've corrected the file description. This lady is the "national" secretary of the French Communist Party, and not the "general" secretary, (this function disapeared). --Jebulon 14:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Anne d'Autriche et le Dauphin C des M.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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:Amanda Lear 2010.jpg

File:Amanda Lear 2010.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

--Ankara (talk) 18:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Dauphin François II.jpg

hi, maybe you're right, but the problem is, that "portrait miniature" is more question of technique than size. Portrait miniature usually is the portrait on the hard ground (not canvas or paper) made in enamel or under lacquer or even glass. This is for taking the portrait in travel - like family photos now. So they can be enough big - f.g. this one is 25 sm high. And analyzing the style of your file - it is definitely the "portrait miniature" (I was studying portraiture in Art history, so I'm quite sure). Shakko (talk) 13:59, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Sucellus

Thanks for spotting that, I wished I had checked more carefully, it is clearly not the same. There seem to be only three Sucelli in Joconde, so that's not even because I copied a wrong link. If you want to add Joconde templates, you're welcome, but it's not always easy to find things on the database. If you have the inventory number, you can copy it in the "recherche simple", and you should find it, otherwise, it can be a little more complex. Morevoer, there are many things that are not on Joconde, and there is no real way to know what there is and what there insn't. (For example, I think there is most of the tens of thousands of drawings from the Louvre but virtually nothing from its Egyptian or Greek collections). Thanks anyway for your checking.--Zolo (talk) 14:55, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Austerlitz

Bonjour Siren-Com.
Je suis désolé d'avoir été amené à envoyer en "consensual review" votre très intéressante vue du bas-relief de la bataille d'Austerlitz sur l'Arc de Triomphe, mais il y a des erreurs de suture particulièrement visibles entre vos trois photos, notamment au niveau du casque du cuirassier russe (son cimier est presque double) et sur le profil du grenadier de la Garde Impériale que Napoléon retient d'un geste de la main (sa jambe notamment). J'ai souligné ce que j'ai constaté par des annotations. J'ignore si c'est réparable ou améliorable, mais je tenais à vous dire qu'il n'y a ici que le point de vue d'un spectateur: le médiocre photographe que je suis serait bien incapable de réussir un tel panneau. Cordialement,--Jebulon (talk) 13:54, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ange en pierre cimetière de Passy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 --Mbdortmund 15:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vincennes Donjon 01-2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 et VVF. Rama 14:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pégase Opéra 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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.--Jebulon 01:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC) I suggest to translate the caption in English, and go to FP --Archaeodontosaurus 08:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Etienne-Jules Ramey Thésée et le Minotaure Tuileries Paris.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Image de qualité.--Jebulon 22:25, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Saisset 23 mars 1871.jpg et la Commune

Bonjour, j'ai vu la recatégorisation que tu as faite pour File:Saisset 23 mars 1871.jpg. Tu as remplacé son appartenance aux deux catégories Category:Paris Commune et Category:Political posters of France par la catégorie Category:Posters from the Paris Commune ; mais cette dernière catégorie groupe les affiches de la Commune, avec en-tête de la Commune ; or l'affiche de Saisset est à en-tête de la République française, c'est le résultat d'une tentative de médiation entre le gouvernement de Versailles et la Commune. Il me semble que c'est une affiche de l'époque de la Commune, mais pas une affiche de la Commune (not from the Paris Commune). Cordialement, Kertraon (talk) 01:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

OK. Cordialement, Kertraon (talk) 12:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

“Author” when it comes to reproductions of old works

Hi Siren-Com! Thank you for sharing your photos and scans with us. They enrich our projects. Please note, that you simple reproductions of old works are not protected by copyright in almost every country and thus you should choose PD-old instead of a more restrictive license. Please also name the author first instead of the one who reproduced it. We should keep our content as free as possible :-) Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 09:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Effel_Tower_in_smogy_january_evening.jpg

File:Effel_Tower_in_smogy_january_evening.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Grcampbell (talk) 04:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bataille de Jemmape Arc de Triomphe coté Est.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Très bien et informatif.--Jebulon 08:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

File:La_Défense_Nord.jpg

File:La_Défense_Nord.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Ww2censor (talk) 16:34, 5 September 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:
Éléphant de la Bastille.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

I have not nominated the image but download it. - Siren-Com (talk) 08:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Fondation E Napoléon Paris 12e.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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 12:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Triomphe de la République détail 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 15:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Syracuse 2.jpg

File:Syracuse 2.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Martin H. (talk) 18:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wang Xiaoshuai 2012 b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Yann 12:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pont Saint-Michel Napoléon.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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! Siège du château d'amour.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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! Ecole militaire horloge 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 10:32, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

About File:Koh Poda 16.jpg

I answered on my discussion page. -- Aisano (talk) 20:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cavalier Gaulois Pont D'Iena RG am.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 11:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cavalier gaulois pont d'iena RG am face.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 11:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cavalier arabe pont d'Iena RD am.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 11:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Horloge justice avant restauration.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Firilacroco 10:53, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fontaine hotel Cail Paris 8 detail.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very nice.--Jebulon 15:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:Fontaine de la Paix

Bonjour, j'ai créé Category:Fontaine du Marché-Saint-Germain (Paris) d'après la dénommination dans la Base Mérimée (PA00088518). Je me suis rendue compte après qu'il ya la Category:Fontaine de la Paix. Pourquoi avez-vous changé le nom de Category:Fontaine du Marché-Saint-Germain qui existait avant en Category:Fontaine de la Paix?--GFreihalter (talk) 16:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Comme j'ai créé l'article W:fr du même nom, j'ai créé la catégorie Commons sur le même modèle. Dans l'historique de la fontaine, on voit qu'elle n'a pas été construite pour le Marché St-Germain. Sur de nombreux livres, elle est nommée de la Paix et n'a plus rien à voir avec le marché (cela induirait le lecteur en erreur ?) J'ai remarqué que les notices Mérimée n'étaient pas du tout fiable, elles sont rédigées par des fonctionnaires non spécialistes qui ne font pas de recherches bien longues et s'appuient sur des sources non vérifiées et non remise à jour (voir Fontaine du jardin Vuillemin qui selon eux serait encore dans le square Saint-Laurent ! je leur ai écrit, aucune réponse.). De nombreuses fontaines ont plusieurs noms et je l'avoue, je ne sais pas qui détient la vérité. Dans ce cas je crois pourtant que de la Paix est meilleur que du marché. Cependant, si d'autres personnes ont un autre avis, je suis prèt à étudier leurs arguments. Bien cordialement. - Siren-Com (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Siren-Com/Archive_2&oldid=715962101"