User talk:Grtek

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Grtek!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Grtek,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:44, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Šchara z jihu.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:06, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Korona.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 07:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grama Bay.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 08:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pik Karakolskiy.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK. --C messier 18:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kamnik-Savinja Alps.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Hubertl 18:37, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ridges of Tien Shan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Hubertl 18:37, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Djigit northface from Kultor Glacier.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not bad for a compact camera --Uoaei1 20:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 27 July 2016 (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:
Free Korea Peak.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:18, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Djigit in the background.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK. --C messier 10:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 28 July 2016 (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:
Soviet Constitution Peak, Kyrgyzstan, east face.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It would be good to put the view orientation. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment ?? There is - in the description...--Grtek (talk) 10:17, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Info It is only one picture of that peak on commons and I dont think there will be another in near future (due to remotness of that area). So in my opinion it is better to have more general scope what could be narrow in future (in the case that there will be another pics of that mountain) --Grtek (talk) 18:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment No --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
      •  Comment The scope is defined according to Commons:VISC. If you disagree, lets give some arguments or vote oppose. Simply "no" is not an argument.--Grtek (talk) 08:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
        •  Comment You can see an object or a landscape of several places. The images which were very different. We must give a chance to all the useful images. Many of us accept this recommendation as you can see. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
          •  Comment "Think of scope as being akin to a Commons Category, or to the generic title of a Gallery page." "Your chosen scope must be broad enough to be realistically useful to somebody who wishes to search the VI repository." Potencial changed scope "Soviet Sonstitution Peak, East Face" wouldn't be akin to a commons category, that hypothetical category is not conceivable when there is only one picture of that peak on commons and we can't simply expect a lot of more in future.
            

And also, after hundreds of years, when every object on the Earth would be photographed on commons from all possible sides, so there would be demand for more scopes about this peak, this contemporary scope "Soviet Constitution Peak" still wouldnt exclude any other (sub)scopes.

So I still disagree with you and not going to change scope in nomination. Other story if this would be photo of one of most prominent peaks in the world - like Eiger, Matterhorn, Everest, Alpamayo... In that case it definitelly would be necesarrily to "give a chance to all the useful images" and narrow the scope by orientation / year / type of media / etc--Grtek (talk) 11:18, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment, I agree with Archaeodontosaurus. There is an established VI convention for immovable objects, like buildings and landscapes, that the scope contains the view direction if it is possible to have an equally valued image taken from another direction. DeFacto (talk). 20:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment OK, third opinion and it seems that I am wrong... but, please, could you propose changes to Commons:VISC? Because there isn't any word about that convention...--Grtek (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Soviet Constitution Peak, Kyrgyzstan to Soviet Constitution Peak, Kyrgyzstan, east face --Grtek (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:55, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2016 (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:
Views of the Kamnik–Savinja Alps from Ljubljana.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 16 August 2016 (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:
Bezengi part of Main Caucasus Range from southern side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 16 August 2016 (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:
Maps of ridges of Tian Shan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope Thank you! --Mathieu MD (talk) 15:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Yes very didactic --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2016 (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:
Karakol Peak, north face.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ezarateesteban 22:31, 18 August 2016 (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:
Pik Semionova Tien-Shanskogo, north face.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:58, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ezarateesteban 22:33, 18 August 2016 (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:
Pik Teketor, Kyrgyzstan, from northeast.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:36, 19 August 2016 (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:
Pik Korona, Kyrgyzstan, from northwest.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:36, 19 August 2016 (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:
Djigit Peak, northeast face.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Question Is your monitor is well calibrated? All of your pictures are too dark. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment I dont know - is it too dark? I must admit I (subjectivelly) like more dark photos. Otherwise, this photo has huge dynamic range (contrast between sunny snowy parst and rocky terrains in shadows) and I think that photo couldnt be much more brighter, because then that bright parts of image would be overexposed. I uploaded a little bit brighter version, is it okay for you and your monitor now?--Grtek (talk) 09:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support If it was a poorly calibrated screen problem, the images would be easy to fix. I tried the results are not satisfactory unless it cuts out several plans, if that is a long process. In my opinion this is the problem of snow; should be a polarizing filter for images easily rework. The result is actually dark. But these are images of great use value. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

 Info photographed with polarizing filter. Thanks for review.--Grtek (talk) 17:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:12, 19 August 2016 (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:
Djigit Peak, northwest face.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:13, 19 August 2016 (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:
Djigit Peak, north face.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:10, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Useful. --Pierre André (talk) 14:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:27, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Taapmajärvi wilderness hut 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 Good quality. --Hubertl 14:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Puvrrasjoki wilderness hut 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Hubertl 14:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pihtsusköngäs canyon in winter.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Llez 14:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pihtsusköngäs waterfall in winter.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 19:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 27 August 2016 (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:
Pihtsusköngäs waterfall in winter.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 28 August 2016 (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:
Pihtsusköngäs canyon in winter.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Difficult. It's only a detail of the canyon. File:Pihtsusköngäs waterfall in winter.jpg is another one of Pihtsusköngäs and en:Pihtsusköngäs is a waterfall. May be an image in summer is better. --XRay ^talk 04:41, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment You are maybe right on the first half - the scope is canyon and the canyon could be non-important (unlike waterfall). The canyon didnt have a name on finnish topographic maps, so I called the scope "Pihtsusköngäs Canyon" after the waterfall above the canyon. Köngäs means "waterfall" in finnish, so it is probably wrong name for a canyon ;-) Pihtsusrotko or Pihtsuskuru or Pihtsuskanjoni would be better (the stream is called Pihtsusjohka, the lake above waterfall Pihtsusjärvi, etc). But it is just question of name and in fact it seems to me as non-important (or fixable). Maybe more important question is if the object itself is important (when it havent name in topographic map...)--Grtek (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Ok for me. Thanks for the explanations --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Ethnic map of Macedonia.png

File:Ethnic map of Macedonia.png 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!

86.22.198.10 12:15, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ice formations at Zdobnice River, Czech Republic.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 20:26, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Чанчахи.jpg

File:Чанчахи.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!

Barbarian (talk) 19:53, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Untere Stuhllochscharte.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Imehling 11:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)  Comment - I love this view and would like to nominate it at FPC, but I'm concerned folks there might complain that it's a lot smaller than the landscape photos we generally feature, nowadays. Do you have a larger version? -- Ikan Kekek 17:37, 10 December 2019 (UTC)  Comment It is my intent to nominate it as FPC, and small scale is also my concern. But unfortunatelly this is just 1:1 cut from 4:3 full scale, phototographed on my Canon G10, so I havent got any larger version of this particular 1:1 composition. --Grtek 10:56, 11 December 2019 (UTC) I understand. Either way, it's a great composition. -- Ikan Kekek 12:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Snow-covered trees near Stubwieswipfel, Totes Gebirge (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 CA should be removed. --Ermell 15:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)  Comment Tried to fix it. Better? --Grtek 14:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Chenspec 18:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sněžka in violet.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments It's not in the criteria, but it's very helpful for landscape pictures. Most people have no idea where the Krkonose Mountains are. --Imehling 08:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Person and red clouds.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Info There is a little white dot in the image (I added a note) --PantheraLeo1359531 18:12, 18 December 2019 (UTC)  Done, removed, thanks --Grtek 21:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC) Good quality --PantheraLeo1359531 09:29, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reichenspitzegruppe.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2020 (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:
Maps of mountain ranges of Turkey.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
  Resolved
•  Comment - Clearly best in a scope of 2 maps, but many of the pink things aren't labeled on the map, especially the ones that sort of have teeth facing each other, whatever those are. There should also be a legend of symbols. Could you make these improvements? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

There should be legend. But I wanted to make that map language neutral. Do you know if it is somehow possible to add graphic features (like legend items) to file description?

OK, I figured out how to save map language neutral and add legend.. Uploaded new version, check it please... --Grtek (talk) 21:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

About labeling - these teeth facing each other things (grabens) are not labeled in source map. It could be (maybe) possible to find that grabens in another literature, I am not sure. Is it necessary to have everything labeled?--Grtek (talk) 21:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

It is if you want people to know what they're looking at. I don't know what grabens are. But really, maps that have obscure symbols aren't going to help anybody. Don't you feel that way as a map-reader, yourself? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

 Support, useful. I think you and I meant something different in using "labeled". The fact that you indicated in the legend what the symbol for grabens was is sufficient labeling. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ledolam.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. Interesting too --Podzemnik 02:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Národní divadlo z Kampy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Zcebeci 22:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Alexander Leisser 06:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Charles Bridge Covid.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Both sides are leaning in a bit. Perspective correction needed. --Milseburg 12:26, 26 March 2020 (UTC)  Done --Grtek 16:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC) OK for me now. --Milseburg 20:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Alexander Leisser 06:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Novotného lávka z Mostu Legií.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment There are white triangles at the top-left and bottom-right corner. Please crop the image, or clone the triangles out. --Aristeas 11:28, 25 March 2020 (UTC)  Done --Grtek 19:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)  Support Thank you very much! Good quality. --Aristeas 17:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Alexander Leisser 06:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jan Hus Statue, Old Town Square.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Mandelinka - FPC

Ahoj, koukni se prosím na mou fotku mandelinky bramborové ve FPC. Díky --Adámoz (talk) 11:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prague, Old Town Square, COVID.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Perspective correction needed. --Tournasol7 15:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC) @Tournasol7:  Done --Grtek 19:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)  Support QI for me. --Milseburg 07:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gneiss rocks near Vltava river, Southern Bohemia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --The Cosmonaut 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Climbing on southern bohemian gneiss, Sedmý špic near Český Krumlov.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --The Cosmonaut 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vltava river below Český Krumlov, spring morning.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 11:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Babies (Černý) on Kampa (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 {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pinus sylvestris on gneiss rocks near Vltava river, Southern Bohemia 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. --Moroder 10:07, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Přihlaste své fotky do Czech Wiki Photo 2020!

Czech Wiki Photo

Milí fotografové a editoři projektů Wikimedia,

každý rok společně nahrajete na Commons tisíce svobodných fotografií. Chceme vám všem poděkovat a také vás ocenit. Vyberte ty nejlepší z vašich fotek a přihlaste je do 30. 10. 2020 do soutěže Czech Wiki Photo 2020! Soutěž je otevřená i úplným nováčkům. Autoři tří nejlepších fotek si odnesou vouchery do Foto Škoda a speciální wiki-odznaky. Přihlášené fotky bude hodnotit i Honza Rybář, držitel Czech Press Photo.

Baví vás focení pro Commons i mimo soutěže? Staňte se fotografem Wikimedie, půjčujeme fototechniku a proplácíme cesty - více na Fotíme Česko.

Těšíme se na vaše snímky!
Za spolek Wikimedia Česká republika
Jakub Holzer
jakub.holzer@wikimedia.cz -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chaukhi north wall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 21:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Truso travertines admixture.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 09:04, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Holy Trinity cathedral Tbilisi, interieur.jpg

File:Holy Trinity cathedral Tbilisi, interieur.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Picture of the Year/2021/R2/v/Boy wearing a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic in Egypt - Inbound8844811027769309500.jpg

Chci Vás pozvat zahlasovat zde. Roky Covidu19 u konce. Dík. --Kusurija (talk) 11:51, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)