User talk:Notafly/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Rachana jalindra

Hi, you have uploaded a file of an image from Seitz supposedly showing Rachana jalindra, but the butterfly shown is from the genus Drupadia, probably ravindra or scaeva. I suggest that you have a close look and then remove the picture to Category:Drupadia. Also for the cleaned-up version. If you look at the images I have just uploaded to Rachana you will see the differences clearly. Alan ACCassidy (talk) 22:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Berber jewellery

Hello Notafly !

I plan to go to Paris in December to attend another Wikimedia meeting and I'll take this opportunity to see Cheveux chéris and Nigeria. Arts de la vallée de la Bénoué (Musée du quai Branly), maybe also the new galleries of the Department of Islamic Art (Louvre). I won't have much time, but if I see some remarkable piece of Berber jewellery, I'll try to do something. "Parures pectorales" is what you are looking for specifically ?

Ji-Elle (talk) 15:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Notafly !

The Wikimedia meeting in Paris was fine: more than 50 people gathered at the restaurant on Saturday night ! But I wasn't too lucky with the Berber jewellery. The new galleries for Islamic art at the Louvre are mainly dedicated to the Iranian world and the Ottoman Empire, and the Musée du quai Branly had very few necklaces on display at the moment. I could upload only 3 pictures. Peut-être la prochaine fois... Bon dimanche !

Ji-Elle (talk) 16:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Butal2.jpg

Hi Notafly, when reverting vandalism on this file, the author entry caught my eye: are you the person mentioned as author in the description of this image? --Túrelio (talk) 09:38, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Sphinx dares - Phalaena dares in CramerAndStoll

Hi Robert

On Cramer&Stoll pl. 48F (Spinx Dares) you placed a remark about the entry in Lepindex. I think that this is not about this plate but about pl. 310G (Phalaena Dares) that I just uploaded. I removed your remark from plate 48, if I'm wrong please undo my revision.
Btw, I'm still planning to upload the Donovan books ( "Epitomes" of Insects of China and India), but I'm trying to finish first Cramer and Stoll, now working on vol. 4, but there's still a verry big appendix by Stoll!
All the best, also for Christmas and 2013! Maarten Sepp (talk) 14:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Holiday greetings

A Merry Christmas and a great new year ahead to you and yours too Robert. Do consider that trip to the tropics sometime. Shyamal (talk) 04:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! DenesFeri (talk) 09:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, also! :) DenesFeri (talk) 10:04, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

christmas

Thanks a lot, same to you and your nexts --Siga (talk) 10:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: Happy Christmas

Hi Robert, now Christmas is over without a reply from me, mea culpa. However it is not to late to wish you a happy and successful new year 2013. Stay on commons we need you! Best wishes, --Pristurus (talk) 22:30, 28 December 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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:MaloneHoard.JPG

Yours sincerely, Vera (talk) 23:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Cramer and Stoll , Orsotriaena medus and Cepheuptychia cephus

Hi Robert
Working on pl. 362 C I found the name Doris, already used on pl. 8 B, C. On pl. 8 I was wrong, I'm afraid, I filled in the name from Funet but that refers to the Doris of pl. 362, as you already stated in your note with pl. 8, I replaced it with the Lepindex name [1]. And the there's also pl. 11 C, D ( "(Papilio) Hesione"), but that seems the same as 362C. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
In his French text with plate 362 [2] Stoll describes this specimen as "pareillement une variété de (...) planche VIII fig. B. C.". I added this as a note with my own descr. of plate 362. (Very strange, though, to me they look totally different! And the "pareillement" lacks in the Dutch descr., there he seems quite certain).
By the way, I stumbled on my family name on plate 359 Stenoma seppiana, an unsightly little moth, quite comical!
Greetings, Maarten Sepp (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2013 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:RIMG0004(1).jpg

Yours sincerely, Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:06, 13 January 2013 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Termini3.JPG

Yours sincerely, Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your compliment

I looked both Insect Collection Methodology and Category:Insect collecting carfully. Great work. Because of your hint I inserted one picture from Insect Collection Methodology in Koleopterologie and I also added a link to both, side and Category. I think Koleopterologie-Sammelmethode does not so much differ from Entomologie-Sammelmethode that we need a new page, whereas History of Coleopterology rather differs from History of Insects. I think, a History of Lepidoptera would also be worthwhile. In fact, I was so fascinated from the fact, that meanwhile you find almost all ancient writings in the net. For instance [3] a link to most Erstbeschreibung. Greetings --Siga (talk) 17:51, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Insecta from Podkomorské lesy

Thanks for determination of insect species from Category:Podkomorské lesy - animals.--Dendrofil (talk) 14:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Phoridae?

2012-10-14, meadow at San Vincenzo, Tuscany

Hello Robert, I think this couple belongs to the Phoridae. Can you confirm it? Regards, --Pristurus (talk) 23:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

And in the genus Phora! For a comparison see here [4] Congratulations on the clarity Best regards Notafly (talk) 20:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! To obtain the name of the genus is much more than I have expected. Best regards, --Pristurus (talk) 09:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Donovan - Insects of China

Hi Robert
I just made a Category:Edward Donovan:Insects of China with the title page and plate 1. Beautiful engravings! Please have a look at my descr. with pl. 1, maybe you want to change something (or everything, if necessary!). There is a big difference between the original descr. by Donovan and the 1838 descr. by Westwood. I'm not trying to add accepted names, afraid I would do more wrong than right. Maybe further on with the butterfly plates.
No hurry, we have here at last some sunshine so I'm off to Drenthe for a week. If you don't have time for this at all I'll go on with the plates in the same way next week.
Greetings, Maarten Sepp (talk) 12:08, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Easter

Hi,

I wish you Happy Easter! Cheers! DenesFeri (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Notafly,

Thank you! About the habitat pictures, I don't promise anything, but I will try. I have 2-3 pictures like this, and I will uploaded today. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 09:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

new landscapes

Hi Notafly,

You ask for some pictures about habitats; yes? I uploaded some landscape/habitat pictures from Transylvania and Madeira. And here they are: [5]. I don't know, if this is what you want. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 16:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll se what can I do, but I don't promise anything. DenesFeri (talk) 07:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Bee-fly

Hi Robert:

Your opinion at here and Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2013.04.24.-03-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim-Großer Wollschweber im Flug.jpg are highly appreciated. J Kadavoor J e e 17:19, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Robert; an in-depth review from a subject expert like you is highly appreciated. J Kadavoor J e e 15:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Permission to use your image "InteriorNKStockholm.JPG"

Hi, First a quick introduction: my name is Tolu Onile-Ere and I run a digital advertising agency based in Lagos, Nigeria. We are working on a campaign for a Financial services client and we would like to use your image as a background for an ad we are producing. We spotted your image on Commons.Wikimedia but were not totally sure about the usage rights so thought we would contact you just to be sure. We plan on using it for banner ads and also possibly a press ad. Can you please let us know if we have your permission to use the image. My email address is toluo@playhousecomm.com. Thank you. Regards,

No problem.My pleasure. Just attribute Notafly Wikicommons Notafly (talk) 20:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC) Your e-mail doesn't work for me. Thanks.

Paris

Hi Robert!

What a wonderful surprise to read your message. I have not forgotten all the help you provided me at the beginning. I am still what you could call "Syntax challenged" as to my contributions in Wikimedia but I did a lot of progress (there was plenty of room for improvement)!! How are you? Do you by any chance come sometimes to Paris? I would be delighted to meet you. I am happy you liked some of my photos. I take great pride in them. If you need any photos from this city, you can ask me what you would like. I go quite often to the Jardin des Plantes. You are right it is a wonderful place. I went to London a few weeks ago and spent four days in Kew Gardens. It was incredibly beautiful. Best regards. Dinkum (talk) 18:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Deyrolle

Hello Notafly! Yes I know Deyrolle but I never went inside. I took one or two photos of the facade not long ago. I had no idea they had such incredibly interesting stuff on so many topics - among which entomology... I will have to pay them a visit. And of course send me your list of desired photos. I envy you: Rome must be a wonderful city. I never went to Rome but it is in my to do list. I find it is disappointing to have one's photos deleted because of this no FOP rule. And even the Rimini station!! As for the photo of the cat sculpture by Niki de Saint-Phalle: she is a well known artist here and she died in 2002 so I am not surprised they vetoed it. I hope you will be able to go to Greece too. I love the islands especially. Best regards.Dinkum (talk) 04:59, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Again a Phora?

2013-05-25, in my garden at Marburg

Hello Robert, I think it is a Phora couple again (however here the female seems to be a little bit more active by using her legs during the copula..). Can you confirm the genus? Greetings from (still arctic) Germany, --Pristurus (talk) 22:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Robert, thanks for your answer. Videos can not fly away so there is no reason to hurry up. And the 2013 weather is completely crazy in Germany too (in the moment we have 13 degrees after 37 degrees last week..). So I am a little bit envious of your journey to Italy. Best wishes, --Pristurus (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Pherbellia annulipes - 2013-06-29.webm

Hello Robert, I think this video shows a comment fighting of two male Pherbellia annulipes. Is my interpretation correct or is it a male-female conflict? Regards, --Pristurus (talk) 21:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

File:VillaBorgheseGiardino.JPG

Hello Notafly, yu're quite right, that's Palazzina back garden. Thanks for correction :) --Lalupa (talk) 03:51, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Teviec

Thank you so much for the revision of the English text of the tomb of Tevice. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Girona

This image File:GalleassGirona.JPG is uploaded to Wiki Commons and described as "own work". But I'm pretty sure this image was used in National Geographic magazine in June 1969 to illustrate an article about the discovery of the shipwreck. Is "own work" accurate here? If not it would seem to be still under copyright.Mtsmallwood (talk) 16:17, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Indohyus.JPG

File:Indohyus.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 ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 13:20, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Onam greetings!

Have a nice Onam tomorrow! J Kadavoor J e e 17:17, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Syrphidae, Criorhina asilica?

Hi Robert, is this Criorhina asilica? I found a lot of them in Lake Garda area in early June. Greetings from Marburg, --Pristurus (talk) 23:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Robert, I have asked at diptera.info and you are right with Eristalis: "The two bands of hair on the eyes are typical for Eristalis tenax" (but for me the Italian individuals look much bigger than our here in Germany..). Greetings, --Pristurus (talk) 11:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

File:PakicetusInachusPisa.JPG

File:PakicetusInachusPisa.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 ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 11:03, 5 October 2013 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:CasadelFascioRodi.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Eleassar ^(t/p) 23:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

"Happy Diwali!"

While Diwali is popularly known as the "festival of lights", the most significant spiritual meaning behind it is "the awareness of the inner light". It is the belief that there is something beyond the physical body and mind which is pure, infinite, and eternal, called the Atman. The celebration of Diwali as the "victory of good over evil” refers to the light of higher knowledge dispelling all ignorance, the ignorance that masks one's true nature, not as the body, but as the unchanging, infinite, immanent and transcendent reality. With this awakening come compassion and the awareness of the oneness of all things (higher knowledge). This brings Satcitananda (joy or peace). Just as we celebrate the birth of our physical being, Diwali is the celebration of this Inner Light. While the story behind Diwali and the manner of celebration varies from region to, the essence is the same – to rejoice in the Inner Light! And this year Diwali and All Souls' Day come together to fully defeat the Evil! **"Happy Diwali!"** – J Kadavoor J e e 06:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Bothany

Hi Notafly! It's a shame I ahve not been yet to the bothanical gardens, but I am most into art rather than science stuff, so I don't vist often scientific museums and so. Winter days are a bit dark, so I am not sure if it worths to go now at the green houses, do you need the pics right now? Calci is a bit out of the way from Florence, and as far as I know it is not allowed to take pictures inside.. but if I ever go inside there I will give a try. Ifg you have the chance to come back to Tuscany please let me know, it will be very nice to mette you. --Sailko (talk) 07:39, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

sounds great! Do not forget to get in touch by the time ;) --Sailko (talk) 10:36, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Chloropidae

Cetema sp. ?

Hallo Robert, are you familiar with Chloropidae? Can this bubble blowing fly be a Cetema? Greetings from snowy Marburg, --Pristurus (talk) 23:52, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I have answered on my talk page. Greetings, --Pristurus (talk) 22:21, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Christmas and New Year

Hi,

I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! DenesFeri (talk) 11:56, 21 December 2013 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Lohengrin1933.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ju Ta 13:27, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Godeffroy Hirschpark

I just noticed your conversation with Ajebah. He is right: The Hirschpark is on my usual routes and on my todo-list anyway. Just tell me a bit more specifically what to look out for. I'm not quite sure what pictures you need. Buildings, scenery, animals?--Hinnerk11 (talk) 13:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Dracunculus vulgaris

Dear Notafly,

Category "Introduced species (Ireland)" looks OK. Category "Flora of Ireland" should be restricted to the native flora of Ireland.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 08:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

⧼Wikibase-terms/Archive 3⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

Dear Wikimedians,

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

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

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

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

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

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

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

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

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

Dear Notafly,

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

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

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

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

Click here to view the top images »

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

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

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

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou

Hi, I thank you for the award. I do photo shoots compensates for the excessive detachment of Greek philosophical texts. Sorry for my English, based on Fortran, Pascal, Latin and skills of PC Translator. Furthermore, I can not even enough to deal with communication tools Wikimedia. Zde (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Giardino dei Semplici

Hello, it took quite a lot of time, but I finally took a picture of the cycads greenhouse in the Giardino dei Semplici in Florence. I will upload it soon. I can't remeber if you planned to visit Florence soon of if you did already. If you are seeing the greenhouse make sure to reserve it to open, I hjad to ask and they let me see it just beacuse I did not ask to enter. I will link you the image files soon. --Sailko (talk) 20:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Finally finally ;)

--Sailko (talk) 20:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Eriophyes triradiatus vs. Stenacis triradiatus

Hi Notafly,

Which is the correct/accepted name of that mite, Eriophyes triradiatus or Stenacis triradiatus? On the enwiki the first name is the right one, but according to 2 collegues the second one shud be yoused (excuse my english). If you know, please help. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 08:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm fine, thank you! And thanks for the info to! cheers. DenesFeri (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Chomeursintellectuels.jpg

File:Chomeursintellectuels.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Ww2censor (talk) 10:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Usage of {{PD-US}}

Hi. I wonder why you tag works published in Berlin as {{PD-US}} (e.g., File:WeymerMaassen1890ReisenSud-AmericaPlate3.jpg). This license in appropriate only for works published in the USA. Mithril (talk) 15:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thereva cincta ?

Thereva cincta?

Hello Robert, I have keyed this to Thereva cincta with the online key to Therevidae... Could this be correct? Video was taken on 2014-09-05 at the foot of the Patscherkofel near Innsbruck, Tyrol, Austria. Greetings, --Pristurus (talk) 13:27, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I use one of your photos

Hello Notafly!

I have use a photo of Velella velella in my free software educational proyect "Animalandia" (http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org)

You can see directly in the follow link and clic over "Siguiente" ("Next"):

http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org/imagen.php?id=41895

If you wish (and I hope yes), you can send me (via fernando.lison@educa.madrid.org) some letters or/and a photo for your "contributor profile" in Animalandia:

http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org/autor.php?nombre=Notafly

I want show to my students (and so everybody) that Animalandia is make for "real person", and I can tell them about "generosity", "share" and other similar words that we use very few at this time...

This is my "contributor profile" and others, for example:

http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org/autor.php?nombre=Fernando%20Lis%F3n%20Mart%EDn

http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org/autor.php?nombre=Carmen%20Jim%E9nez

http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org/autor.php?nombre=David%20P%E9rez

http://animalandia.educa.madrid.org/autor.php?nombre=Steve%20Garvie%20%28Rainbirder%29

In the future, I use more of your photos, I sure!

Thank you for the licence and, of course, for your splendid photos!!

Regards!

Fernando Lisón, from Spain --Fernando.lison (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Re:Vienna Museum

I'll upload more photos tomorrow. I've already returned home. I'm glad to see that my images could be helpful :) Soldier of Wasteland (talk) 20:36, 31 January 2015 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:RodiStabilimentoBalneareLaRondaSide.JPG

And also:

File:StabilimentoBalneareLaRonda.jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 17:01, 6 February 2015 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:TeatroPucciniRodi.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 17:03, 6 February 2015 (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!

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:RhodesAquarium (2).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 17:05, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Lixus_pulverentus

Category:Lixus_pulverentus has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Esculapio (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Identification of an insect - maybe of the Syrphidae family

Hallo Robert,

A few days ago I took this photo

in our lovely Jardin des Plantes. I have tried to find the exact name for this insect. I went from Eupeodes luniger to Didea fasciata to Syrphus ribesii but can't decide which one it is. Could you help me?

Hope you are well. Best regards. Dinkum (talk) 03:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

It is Eupeodes luniger see the hook-shaped yellow marks which do not reach the outer edge. A female as the eyes are separated (the eyes almost meet in males this photo).Very nice photo. I am very well thank you.You too I hope. I will be in Italy soon. Very warm wishes Robert akaNotafly (talk) 17:40, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Heads-up

Hi, as an active colleague on upload projects, I thought I'd drop you a personal heads-up for my request for adminship, today being the last day for views. RFA's tend to only have a small proportion of the community taking part, so it can be difficult to judge if this is representative. --Fæ (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Using one of your images

Dear Notafly,

I wish to use your image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CardedHemiptera.jpg in a book. I believe it is licensed for this, but please advise how you wish to be attributed.

Default would seem to be: "Courtesy: Notafly, WikiCommons".

Thanks,

—Grmanners (talk) 11:32, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, and wilco—Grmanners (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BotanicGardensPisa (12).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 Good quality. But the basin is slightly tilted as far as I can see. Can you correct this? --Mummelgrummel 06:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC) Thankyou. Changed 1 degree Notafly 14:37, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not really shure whether this is kind of an optical illusion due to the lanes. It's o.K. for me. --Mummelgrummel 03:59, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! TombAnniaRegillaCaffarella (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 The file needs a better description of the pic, the present is bordering on nonsense and coordinates for the camera location would be nice. The house is tilting and need perspective correction, there is too much not so interesting lawn at the bottom and a bit of that should be cropped off, there is some CA especially on the right side of the building and some of the small light areas are overexposed. All fixable. W.carter 22:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC) Thankyou. I don't have the tools so I will avoid images with perspective problems ftm Notafly 13:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
You can download GIMP if you like, it is a free and very useful correction program. W.carter 15:05, 18 July 2016 (UTC) That is very kind. Thankyou. Uploaded fixed image Notafly 16:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Looks ok now. W.carter 18:00, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BagniDiLucca (22).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 21:15, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BagniDiLucca (40).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 13:13, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! RodosOldTowncu.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 DoF could be better and perspective correction is necessary. --XRay 16:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC) CommentThankyou. Now fixed? ~~~~ Notafly 16:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Support IMO OK now. The description should be improved too, for example what kind of wall or the location of the wall. --XRay 06:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC) CommentThankyou.Description improved.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BagniDiLuccaNature (4).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. W.carter 19:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FloraHildenc.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 14:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! ReedsHildenMarch 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. --Hubertl 14:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FloraRome (23).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jkadavoor 02:36, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FloraRome (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. --Poco a poco 18:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MorusCaffarellacu.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 ~~Subject category required. Jkadavoor 13:09, 29 July 2016 (UTC)~~
Support Good quality. --Jkadavoor 13:48, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FruttaDiMarmo (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 15:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FloraRome (21).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 05:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! HotelElaphos.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 19:54, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! VillaBorghese Umberto I (4).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 love details. --Hubertl 01:11, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PiscinaViaCesareBaronio (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. --Ermell 13:21, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! TreniTuscany (7).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Pretty good quality photograph. There's a bit of colour bleed from the green areas, but that could be the effect in the graffiti. --Peulle 14:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! TorreSelceAppiaAntica.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 20:34, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! LurganWarMemorialAngel.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 22:42, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BagniDiLuccaItaly(13).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 ccw tilted --Carschten 13:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC) CommentThankyou. Now fixed? Notafly 17:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Looks still slightly ccw to me, maybe you can take a second look. But ok for Qi though. --Carschten 19:19, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! NavanFortIronAge (5).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 16:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! San Sebastiano FuoriLeMuraCrucifix.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. W.carter 19:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! VictorianWalledGardenBangor (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. --Hubertl 19:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! GoetheVillaBorghese.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments So, a good photo is also about how you focus on the main subject in the picture. Here the thing to look at is the sculptures at the base, I think a slight crop (see note) would bring them more into focus. W.carter 11:18, 3 August 2016 (UTC) Comment I entirely agree. Done.
Much better, good quality. W.carter 12:56, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PierretRome (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 This one would work much better if you cut off some of the very bright window at the top and some of the bottom for balance. W.carter 19:35, 2 August 2016 (UTC) Comment I entirely agree. Not sure my crop worked though.Still too much at the top?Notafly 21:17, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Much better. Good quality. W.carter 10:41, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SculptureOstiaAntica.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. Here the tilt actually works for the picture. Pity that the whole plaque is not visible, but that would have left too much of a boring wall on that side of the image. W.carter 19:09, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Praia de Alvor, Algarve

Had it only been a little sharper, I would have nominated it for Featured Picture! w.carter-Talk 19:19, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PrimulaVulgarisKbracken.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 19:47, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! ErysimumCultivar.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments o.k. --Ermell 19:49, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AlvorBeach (17).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. W.carter 19:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! NineteenthCenturyFarmCaffarellaScarecrow.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AngelLisburn.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Whole statue, sharp, right angle, good categories, but now you got a new problem common on brass things. Much of the surface has a slight iridescent rainbow-ish pattern from CA. Correctable with color substitution. If you decide to try it you could also crop off the glary bit of the base. See note. W.carter 09:14, 7 August 2016 (UTC) Done Thank you!Notafly 20:50, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Good enough, QI. W.carter 08:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marchantiales.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Zcebeci 15:59, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BarbourMillSeptember2015 (44).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. Would be even better and cleaner with a little crop. See note. Do it if you like. W.carter 13:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Done. Thank you.--

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FloraHildena (37).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 22:06, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:09, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! KarlCieslukRoach (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. --Hubertl 18:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AlvorHarbour (4).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 05:36, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AlvorBeach (30).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 05:36, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AcropolisRhodes (4).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments GQ, but geocode would be helpful. --Palauenc05 20:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MoatRhodes.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 02:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Image:Stag Beetle Species Unknown Atlanta GA US.jpg

Thanks, Notafly. And thanks for the compliment on the picture. I always read the manual cover-to-cover when I buy a new electronic toy. Now I just need to learn how to rename my upload. :)

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

wasp

hi robert,

i seem to remember that you do hymenoptera too, can you at least narrow down this nice animal? flies around with the frontlegs hanging down, along logs in forest near cologne, germany. length i'd say at least 4 cm, but i could be mistaken. i still need to get a system to pre-screen all the fly pics i've taken, hopefully sometime this year; i also still have lindsey's commanster pics on my todo list, will try to do this in the next month or so...

cheers!

s.

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the Colorado beetle

Dear Notafly, Thank you so much for your help because it was first really quick and then the nice remark. I looked at your photos: I am in awe, very impressive, very good. And then your favorite painting from Carl David Friedrich! We have some tastes in common. Anyway I also wanted to ask you for advice. I have been downloading some of my pictures for quite a time now but I still don't get how everything works. I read and read the "How to" and everything but other than downloading my pictures, (and since there is the new page to do so, although I give the precise indication that I want to give a license CC0, free for all, the photos appear not to have any license at all) other than that I am not able to do anything else much as I really don't understand all the stuff with adding template, erasing my mistakes, and so on. Normally I am not too stupid but here I really have a hard time. I would like to know if you could give me the place where I could find some help. Something so easy to understand, that even I could get it. And again: thank you for your help with the beetle. Dinkum [6]

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Still unable to understand how Wikimedia Commons works, any idea where I could get help

Dear Notafly, I hope I am not disturbing you. The way you answered I thought I might ask you for help. Usually I am not stupid and I have been using computers for quite a time now. But there is this thing with Wikimedia Commons. I can't understand the most simple things. I just don't get the picture (no pun intended). Fact is I am very enthusiastic about being able to see all the pictures from so many different countries on so many different subjects. But until now I know only how to do 2 or 3 simple things: Looking at pictures, downloading mine and that is about it. I have no clue for the rest. An example. When I have downloaded a photo and given it a category sometimes a few days later I have found a better category. So I go back and open the file, click on "Category" and write the new name for this file. But in the meantime, some bot or someone has put a category (mostly very general) and I think the new category I just found is more suitable for this file. I make a preview and see only my new category name on the bottom of the page. But then when I click "Publish", the new category appears with the older one put by someone else. I would like to erase the former category but don't know how to do it. And there is a lot of things like that, very simple that I don't get. I have been reading the "How to" and the "sand box" and whats not. But this does not help me so far because the explanations although very good and certainly very useful don't take into account that the most easy tasks, the very simple stuff is just not explained. When I tried to get help to find out the names of lots of my pictures of plants and flowers I found a page in Wikipedia where they were doing just that: giving names to pictures from flowers. To submit your pictures they said you had to copy and paste a template. Well, I could copy the template but they don't say where to paste it. And then I was supposed to enter the name of my files and giving them clues as where the photos were taken. The template just frightened me only looking at it. So you see I would really need the help from someone or some articles where you really go step by step and explain what must seem so obvious for others and that I don't understand. Here is the address of the botanical help (in French):http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:Botanique/Quelle_est_cette_plante Because you see I don't know either how to put a link. That will be all for today. Sorry that I am such a chatterbox. Don't bother to answer if you don't have the time. I can understand that. Best regards. Dinkum

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Jebulon

[7]]

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Missing

CXLV CXLVIII

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

pic

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Varjus_olev_Eesti_lipp.JPG

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R1 Announcement

Adding timestamp to thread to give archiving bot a date. w.carter-Talk 10:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Jpegs

Just to let you know, jpegs are a very subjective thing on QIC. Some editors zapp a pic if there is even one of them in the pic, others can tolerate them if they don't disturb the composition. Some are very generous and think that an otherwise good composition makes them tolerable. My first camera produced a lot of them and I got constant critique for it.

On another note, I see that your talk page is becomming rather long, do you want me to set up an automatic archiving thingy on it for you? Best, w.carter-Talk 09:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

So the archiving system seems to be working fine. I've added timestamps/signatures to those threads that had none and therefore could not be archived. You can add similar ones in the future if someone forgets to signs their posts. Should you want to alter the settings, you adjust the threads left by altering the number at |minthreadsleft = 3 and days old at |algo = old(8d). All the best, w.carter-Talk 10:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! StazioneLucca (6).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 19:19, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! OldTownRodos (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 Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 18:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
-- Thankyou Notafly 18:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! ViareggioFS.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments A little bit of jpegs in the top right concrete, but an non-essential part of the pic so overall good quality. W.carter 09:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! LuccaShopfront.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Unfortunately there are a lot of jpegs on the green grate/shutters in the center of the pic. Fixable, but tricky. It would also have been better if the crop was such that the portal was in the center of the pic. Sorry. W.carter 20:14, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
I disagree, a better crop is enough for QI, IMO --Hubertl 07:17, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Ack! Apparently I'm being too hard on you. ;) But please do the crop. W.carter 09:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC) Done -- Thankyou both
Support In this case, I'll bow to Hubert1's greater experience regarding the criteria for QI, no need to drag this out. W.carter 15:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AlvorNRMay2 (4).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 am assuming the plants are the subject --Daniel Case 17:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks Yes they are notably the broomrape Orobanche foetida ~~~~
please always check for a proper signature, Notafly --Hubertl 07:28, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AlvorMay2016 (12).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 pic, but do you think you could add some cats regarding the sort of icon and something about the elements of the building, like the roof tiles? --W.carter 19:30, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Done Thank you.. Notafly 19:59, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Perfect! Good quality. --W.carter 21:57, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SagittariaSagittifoliaIreland.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Gorgeous! I'll be using this for my desktop for a while now. :) QI. --W.carter 20:28, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)