User talk:Smial/Archive/2014

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tim Digby-Bell (Duologue) (Haldern Pop Festival 2013) IMGP6051 smial wp.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. --XRay 11:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! A0770 Fritz-Funke-Strasse 56 Dortmund Denkmalbereich Oberdorstfeld IMGP9003 wp.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 Photographer 18:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dickebankstrasse 36 Dortmund Denkmalbereich Oberdorstfeld IMGP9007 wp.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 Photographer 18:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! A 0783 Wittener Strasse 270-272 Dortmund Denkmalbereich Oberdorstfeld IMGP9076 wp.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 take it back, QI --Poco a poco 11:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainboard supermicro x8da3 IMGP0593 wp.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 18:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Unna Bahnhofsbereich neuer Busbahnhof Infosaeule IMGP7240 wp.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 No Augenpfeffer. Good quality. --Tuxyso 23:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Katzenjammer Hengelo 2011 IMGP0987 wp smial.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. --XRay 08:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Multi mode sfp transceiver IMGP7820 wp.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. --XRay 08:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Digitalwaage mit ei IMGP1351.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 20:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! USB stick with write protection IMGP7832 wp.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. --XRay 08:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC) Same here.--Tonto II. 09:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Miro video dc30 DSC00560 wp.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. --XRay 16:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schreiben IMGP1478 wp.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. --XRay 16:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Logitech corded mouse m500 imgp1410 smial wp.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. --XRay 16:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Antistatische Transportverpackung IMGP1448 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

WLM album

Hello. The photo File:Дом органной музыки Днепропетровск 1.JPG, edited by you, will be printed in photoalbum with the best Ukrainian WLM photos. Should we attribute yourself as coauthor of this picture or only attribute the first author?

No, it is not necessary to mention my name, as my rework was only a small technical correction. -- Smial (talk) 17:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Albarracín, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 002.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Albarracín, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 002.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Intel extreme core i7 990x socket lga1366 bottom view imgp1394 smial wp.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. --Cccefalon 13:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schoko-Osterhase IMGP1551 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund anti acta demo 20120211 IMGP1700 smial wp.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 09:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Intel extreme boxed cooler for socket lga1366 top view imgp1395 smial wp.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 09:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund anti acta demo 20120211 IMGP1747 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 16:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 380-kV-Ems-Freileitungskreuzung IMGP0026.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 a small resolution for a Smial-Photo ... I credit the fact that it is from 2007. Quality is ok. --Cccefalon 19:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Strung Out (Ruhrpott Rodeo 2013) IMGP4977 nmz.jpg

File:Strung Out (Ruhrpott Rodeo 2013) IMGP4977 nmz.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!

Fappadappadoo (talk) 05:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Nice try. -- 87.123.149.18 09:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

User_talk:Moroder#Nikon_D800

Hallo Rainer,

schau mal die oben verlinkte Diskussion im unteren Teil. Dort versuche ich Wolfgang zu erklären, dass der richtig angewandte M-Modus in Sachen Schärfe einen Vorteil gegenüber den Automatikmodi hat. Möglicherweise sind meine pädagogischen Fähigkeiten nicht so gut ausgebildet und du bist was Fototheorie angeht sowieso bewanderter als ich. Vielleicht kannst du ihm das besser erkären als ich. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:58, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, ich war einige Tage ohne Klapprechner verreist. Wikifreie Zeit. -- Smial (talk) 22:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Ein wenig anstrengend

die Type sofern man nicht seiner Meinung ist. Vor allem hat er ein stetes Bedürfnis nach dem letzten Wort, sei es noch so sinnfrei. Tschüss --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/2014⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

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) 19:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Koefte (Mad Sin) (Ruhrpott Rodeo 2013) IMGP7612 smial wp.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 21:48, 28 February 2014 (UTC)  Comment I don't like the composition: The arm (see note) is disturbing. Too much space at top. Improvable -Lmbuga 02:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

High ISO

Hi Smial,
kannst du bitte mal hier vorbeischauen - ich kann die Begründungen von Mattbuck dort nicht nachvollziehen, vor allem beim Bild von Ska-P. Gruß -- Achim Raschka (talk) 08:15, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Ich verstehe nicht, weshalb es einfach nicht in die Köppe geht, daß bei diesen ISO-3200-und-höher-Bildern Kompromisse unvermeidbar sind. Wenn ich meine Bilder mit solchen vergleiche, die die Profis auf derselben Veranstaltung gemacht haben, dann haben die Profis zwar oft den besseren, effektvolleren Moment erwischt, aber verrauscht und unscharf ist das alles genau soviel oder sowenig wie mein Kram. In Einzelfällen sind meine Bilder auch besser als das, was ich so beim RollingStone, beim Musikexpress, bei Tageszeitungen oder in Blogs ergoogeln konnte. Technisch ist ein Großteil der Festivalsommerbilder, zumindest die, die mit etwas mehr Erfahrung später im Jahr gemacht wurden, mit dem, was die Profis abliefern, durchaus vergleichbar, es liegen keine Welten dazwischen. QI soll Bilder auszeichnen, die eine gewisse Mindestqualität erreichen, um gut nachgenutzt werden zu können. Leider ist dort, wie an so vielen Stellen, inzwischen der Nasenfaktor wichtiger geworden als das Ziel des Projekts. --Smial (talk) 11:20, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Danke - im Prinzip könnte ich ja auch nachvollziehen, dass ich als Laie falsch liege. Ich habe allerdings auch das Gefühl, dass sich an Konzertbilder niemand so richtig dran traut (und einschätzen kann) - in der Regel liegen die tagelang unbeachtet rum, bis sich mal wer erbarmt, während alle Bahn- und Gebäudebilder vorher durch sind. Evtl. liegt's aber auch an mir und mein Name ist bei QIC verbrannt - who knows. -- Achim Raschka (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Ich vermeide eigentlich weitgehend eine Bewertung der Konzertbilder, um mir keine Parteilichkeit vorwerfen lassen zu müssen. Das sollte ich möglicherweise überdenken. Bei krassen Fehleinschätzungen mische ich mich latürnich ein, die Bilder vom 18.3. hatte ich allerdings völlig übersehen. Daß einige sich nicht an dieses Genre herantrauen, kann ich durchaus nachvollziehen, ich halte mich z.B. bei Pflanzen- und Tierfotos völlig raus, weil ich von Biologie keine Ahnung habe und sowas auch noch nicht selber systematisch gemacht habe, da können nur Fehlurteile herauskommen. Das mag anderen bei Konzertbildern ebenso gehen. Ob dein Name da verbrannt ist, kann ich nicht sagen, du stellst ja meistens Bilder anderer Fotografen vor, was ich im übrigen sehr begrüße. Ich habe sogar schon einmal darüber nachgedacht, bei QIC eine zusätzliche Bedingung vorzuschlagen: Für je 10 (oder 5 oder sonstwieviele) Eigenvorschläge muß zwingend ein Bild eines anderen Knipsers eingetragen werden, möglichst aus den aktuellen Uploads des Tages, damit da etwas mehr Leben reinkommt und nicht alle immer nur den eigenen Bauchnabel bewundern. Außerdem könnte man dadurch evtl. zusätzliche Mitstreiter gewinnen. Zu den Bahnbildern sage ich lieber mal nix... -- Smial (talk) 16:34, 26 March 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

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Smial/Archive,

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:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. 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)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Tomi Ungerer par Claude Truong-Ngoc mars 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tomi Ungerer par Claude Truong-Ngoc mars 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Danke sehr ! --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 05:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weitwinkelperspektiven.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 Excellent Quality and Hight EV, But PLEASE, remember a short description on English in QI Nominatin procedure, Thanks --The Photographer 23:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)  Comment I've tried to add an english description to the image page, but my english is not very good. -- Smial 08:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Highko Strom (Bonsai Kitten) IMGP4394 smial wp.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. --XRay 16:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alex Chernitsyna (Honigdieb) IMGP3501 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice photo. --Tuxyso 11:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:AC Cobra Tour Auto 2014 Circuit de Dijon Prenois 12.jpg

Bonjour, je vous remercie d'avoir proposer cette photo comme Image de qualité. Cordialement François de Dijon (talk) 08:47, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, danke für die Erhebung dieses Foto als Bildqualität. Grüße François de Dijon (talk) 08:47, 2 May 2014 (UTC) (Maschinenübersetzung)

File:AC Cobra Tour Auto 2014 Circuit de Dijon Prenois 12.jpg

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Steckernetzteil mit Adaptern IMGP2309 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 22:00, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Halbleiterrelais (smial).jpg

File:Halbleiterrelais (smial).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!

Túrelio (talk) 13:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kitty Daisy Lewis (Traumzeit Duisburg 2014) IMGP5507 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Conor J. O'Brien (Villagers) (Haldern Pop Festival 2013) IMGP4526 smial wp.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 Nice and sharp--Lmbuga 20:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jan Plewka (Selig) (Jübek Open Air 2013) IMGP9661 smial wp.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 Tight crop, but ok --Poco a poco 10:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hohlweg Werl-Büderich Schanze IMGP6100 smial wp (03).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very nice and very good. QI and FP IMO--Lmbuga 23:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Thanks for your pictures and for your aid in my talk page Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 10:11, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Arbol de Guanacaste-1-2.JPG

File:Arbol de Guanacaste-1-2.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

186.4.58.56 00:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality images

Hi Smial,
ich glaube, das dies ein "quality image" ist (Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#July 29, 2014). Gedeht habe ich das Bild schon um 1,7° aber Mattbucks Kommentar kann ich nicht umsetzten. Was ist deine Meinung zum Bild? Man kann sogar den Sekundenzeiger auf der Uhr sehen. --Atamari (talk) 10:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Hast du eine Rauschunterdrückung in der Kamera eingeschaltet oder nachträglich angewendet? Sieht in 100%-Ansicht etwas verschmiert aus. Die Schärfe liegt auch nicht optimal auf dem Gesicht. Beides ist nach meiner Meinung unter Konzertfotoaufnahmebedingungen tolerierbar, auch wenn es hier etwas grenzwertig ist. Das Bild hätte ich gar nicht geradegerückt, das ist bei Livefotografie nie ein schwerwiegender Fehler. Wurde auch schon mal bei meinen Bildern angesprochen - mir egal, dann fällt es eben durch. Immerhin führt so eine überflüssige Bilddreherei zwangsläufig zu gewissen Qualitätsverlusten, da müssen halt Tonnen von Pixeln neu interpoliert werden. Das von Mattbuck angesprochene CA ist nicht das relativ leicht zu beseitigende radiale solche, sondern ziemlich sicher Längs-CA, verstärkt und auffällig geworden nur durch das direkte Knipsen in die Lichtquelle. Unter den Aufnahmebedingungen gewöhnlich nicht vermeidbar und meines Wissens nicht durch automatische Bildbearbeitungsfunktionen korrigierbar. Manuell würde ich es mit partieller Reduktion des Farbkontrasts versuchen, wenn das wirklich kriegsentscheidend wäre. Ist es aber bei so einem Foto nicht. Wenn das so weiter geht, werden dehmnaex die Clowns Fachleute dort bemängeln, das Personen blau und nicht farbecht aussehen, wenn blaues Bühnenlicht leuchtet. -- Smial (talk) 12:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC) PS: WMDE-Förderbedingungen hin, WMDE her, ich skaliere die allermeisten meiner Bilder auf 3000 Pixel auf der langen Seite. Das gibt idR 6 MPixel oder mehr, je nach Zuschnitt, und ist für alle professionellen Nachnutzungen in dem Bereich ausreichend. Die Profis liefern in aller Regel viel kleinere Bilder an ihre Redaktionen, für Online-Nutzung und Zeitungskartoffeldruck sind 2 MPix schon mehr als groß genug. Der Vorteil beim Skalieren ist, daß man gerade bei hohen ISO-Einstellungen und verwacklungskritischen Belichtungszeiten kleinere Bildfehler vertuschen und auch besser nachschärfen kann. Wenn eben z.B. die Schärfenebene nicht millimetergenau getroffen wurde. Wir arbeiten beim Festivalsommer ähnlich wie bei schnellen Sportarten ständig an den Grenzen des heutzutage technisch machbaren, von daher kriege ich immer wieder einen dicken Hals, wenn solche Kritiken von Leuten kommen, die zu faul sind, bei ihren Kirchen-, Urlaubs- oder Bahnhofsknipsbildchen mal ein Stativ einzusetzen.

(nach BK) Bei vielen Bildern die bei den QI durchfallen ist mir das auch mehr oder weniger egal - man muss damit leben. Aber gerade bei diesem bin ich überzeugt, das es in die engere Auswahl gehört. Nein eine Rauschunterdrückung habe ich bei der Kamera nicht extra eingeschaltet. Und hier bei den Tageslichtaufnahmen auch nicht nachträglich gemacht. Bei den Innenaufnahmen, die auch mit einer hohe ISO-Zahl entstanden sind habe ich in der Regel eine Rauschunterdrückung am Abschluss der Arbeiten durchgeführt (was dann im Detail zu matschigen Farben führt). Man kann ein Bild 20x oder 100x vergrößern dann wird man es immer als unscharf bezeichnen. Auch das alle Bereiche scharf sind ist utopisch. Ich habe das Bild in rund 10m-15m Entfernung mit dem 200er-Objektiv gemacht und nachträglich auf den passenen Ausschnitt geschnitten. Ich habe auch zuerst gedacht, das Bild zu rotieren wäre falsch - weil es könnte auch eine perspektivische Verzerrung sein. Aber ich konnte es Anhand des Ursprungbildes 1,7° drehen und dann erneut auf den passenden Ausschnitt beschneiden. Sonst hatte ich mit dieser Leihkamera sehr gerade Bilder gemacht - eine Korrektur war nur bei ganz wenigen nötig. "Mattbuck angesprochene CA" kann ich nicht nachvollziehen bzw. ich finde auch bei dem Konzertfoto hier tollerierbar. Da sind 200-500 Lampen, die verschiedenfarbiges Licht abgeben - da ist nichts optimal. Es kann auch schon mal Licht, vielleicht auch gespiegeltes Licht von Hinten kommen. p.s. auf einem anderen Bild wurden gelbliche Zähne bemängelt, die werde ich jetzt auch nicht nachweißen... --Atamari (talk) 12:27, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Abgesehen davon, daß ich kein 2.8er Teleobjektiv habe, knipse ich sehr oft eher mit 5.6, sofern genug Licht da ist. Erst, wenn ich die Wahl zwischen f5.6/ISO6400 und f4/ISO3200 habe, dann lieber Offenblende. Schei* was auf's Rauschen... Bei den Zähnen: Ich habe eine Menge Bilder in die Tonne getreten, weil da böse Details erkennbar waren, die man besser nicht veröffentlicht. Aber gelbe Zähne? Weiße gibt es nur nach viel Photoshopverunstaltung auf Fernshzeitschrifttitelseiten. Smial (talk) 12:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Scheiß auf's Rauschen! Habe oft ISO-Automatik mit Mindestbelichtungszeit eingestellt. Lieber ein Rauschen mit ISO 6000 in den Flächen als Bewegungsunschärfe. --Atamari (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Ich habe mir mal die Nominierungen von Mattbuck angeschaut, siehe mal beispielsweise hier (siehe meine Notiz). Eine Frechheit an anderen Werken so hohe Maßstäbe zu setzen und seine eigenen überzeugen nicht. --Atamari (talk) 14:27, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Bei Langzeitbelichtungen sehe ich kein Problem damit. Ist ja nicht featured pictures, da würde ich erwarten, daß der HighEnd-Fotoknipser die Geister angeht. Aber richtig ist natürlich, daß man solche kleinen Mängel nicht bei anderen kritisieren sollte, wenn man die bei eigenen Bildern großzügig übersieht. Es bringt aber nichts, Mattbuck anzugreifen, und ich würde das auch nicht als zielführend ansehen, denn meistens beurteilt er recht neutral und weiters ist er auch selten zickig, wenn ein Bild von ihm mit halbwegs nachvollziehbarer Begründung abgelehnt oder er bei einem consensual review überstimmt wird. Da gibt es andere Kandidaten, die wirklich keine Ahnung haben oder aber nur ein ganz bestimmtes Pferd reiten. -- Smial (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Nachtrag: Ich stelle meist nur noch Bilder von mir dort vor, die ich selber gut genug finde, daß sie sozusagen mein Portfolio schön ergänzen können. Einige meiner QI würde ich inzwischen sogar wieder zurückziehen, weil sie nicht so recht zum restlichen Qualitätsniveau mehr passen wollen. Aber ehe ich DA ein Faß aufmache, gehe ich lieber wieder mehr knipsen ;-) -- Smial (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patti Smith (Haldern Pop Festival 2014) IMGP4004 smial wp.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 Excellent – hervorragend! -- Spurzem 20:14, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Erste Meinung

Ein schönes Bild aber kein QI? Ist zu dunkel (obwohl Tageslicht) und nicht so perfekt scharf (hat viel von der Qualität bei der Umwandung von raw nach jpg verloren ). Oder kann ich trotzdem bei den QI probieren? --Atamari (talk) 14:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Nee, sorry, bei Food würde ich deutlich frischere Farben erwarten. Food ist eh ein recht schwieriges Terrain, das sich für Schnappschüsse eigentlich nicht sehr gut eignet. Was den Schärfeverlust angeht: Der kann eigentlich bei Raw -> JPG gar nicht passieren. Ich vermute, daß du das hochkomprimierte, im Raw vorhandene Vorschau-JPG mit dem entwickelten JPG vergleichst. Da ist es (zumindest bei meiner Pentax) so, daß dieses Vorschaubild zum einen relativ stark geschärft ist, wohl um auf dem kleinen Kameradisplay einen guten Eindruck zu machen, und andererseits die Kompressionsartefakte (JPG-Kästchen) oft an Stellen eine Schärfe vortäuschen, wo tatsächlich gar keine ist. Um das zu sehen, muß man sich mal so einen angeblich unscharf gewordenen Bereich bis auf Pixelebene heranzoomen und mit dem Vorschau-JPG vergleichen. Dann wirst du idR sehen, daß das fertig entwickelte Bild (sofern in bester JPG-Qualitätseinstellung oder als TIFF gespeichert) mehr Details zeigt, diese aber eben so extrem aufgezooomt unschärfer wirken. Ich wollte immer schon mal ein entsprechendes Beispielbild (vorher/nachher) anfertigen, evtl. komme ich heute abend dazu. Es ist dann Aufgabe der Nachbearbeitung, den visuellen Schärfeeindruck wiederherzustellen, ohne wiederum verfälschende oder auch einfach nur unschöne Schärfungsartefakte zu produzieren. -- Smial (talk) 15:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Benjamin Clementine (Haldern Pop Festival 2014) IMGP0879 smial wp.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 Excellent portrait. Expressive--Lmbuga 11:44, 14 August 2014 (UTC)  Comment It can be FP IMO, but I have no very good criteria for that--Lmbuga 11:49, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Lion in Todi

hi,how are you? i hope fine. can you do a second look to the photo that you see on the right? Because i have cut the bottom,thanks. Have a nice day. --LivioAndronico talk 15:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Danke --LivioAndronico talk 11:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

My first comment was a bit unclear, I meant "too tight" crop at the bottom. But as said: QI do not need to be "perfect" images in all respects ;-) -- Smial (talk) 11:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Personality rights tag

You are adding {{Personality rights}} tags to images that already have them (e.g. 1, 2). Please revert, and only add the tags to appropriate images that isn't already tagged as such. Regards -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 15:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Wenn dieser lustige commons uploader eine Möglichkeit hätte, dieses tag sofort beim Upload zu setzen, wäre es vermutlich nicht notwendig, bei Massenuploads hunderte von Fotos nachzutaggen, wobei natürlich gelegentlich dupes auftreten können. BTW.: Falls du solch ein Dupe findest, kannst du das auch selbst zurücksetzen. Weiters wird sicher irgendwann auch mal ein Bot drüberlaufen, der das automagisch macht. Ich habe die Aktion übrigens abgebrochen, weil ich es einklich ziemlich öde finde, die Uninformiertheit anderer und die Resultate unzulänglicher Software händisch zu reparieren. -- Smial (talk) 16:05, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

You're right

See the new version (File:Statue of Federico II Hohenstaufen in Oria-retouched.jpg), please. You were right. The halo was due to the process of increasing the sharpness. Thank you for your presence and your great photos. No problem if you decide to oppose the photo to be QI--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 20:43, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The retouching was much work, wasn't it? But this version is not QI candidate? Looks acceptable, but I can not find it on QIC. -- Smial (talk) 07:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Geneva Rugby Cup - 20140808 - SF vs LOU - Jonathan Danty 1 filtered.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Geneva Rugby Cup - 20140808 - SF vs LOU - Jonathan Danty 1 filtered.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 04:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chicony CH-286-N-16 Ver 1.0 hauptplatine IMGP4892-IMGP4900 smial wp.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.--Florian Fuchs 10:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

QIC

Hallo Smial! Ich bin für jede Anregung dankbar, sofern sich diese im machbaren Rahmen aud Aufwand bewegt. Ich habe diese Bilder zu einem Zeitpunkt gemacht, wo ich nahezu täglich für WLM unterwegs war und nicht mehrere hundert, sondern mehrere tausend(!) Fotos in den Bezirken Mattersburg, Oberpullendorf und Obewart gemacht habe. Bist du wirklich der Meinung, dass ich da noch Zeit gehabt hätte, mich mit den Fotos „herumzuspielen“? Es war schon Arbeit genug, alle Bilder zu beschriften sowie etliche davon auszurichten und hochzuladen. Übrigens sind viele davon bis heute noch nicht korrigiert, ausgeschnitten und hochgeladen, da ich mittlerweile aus guten Gründen (siehe meine Sperre) die de-WP boykottiere. Im Übrigen mache ich nicht nur für WP Fotos und jede Woche warten auch viele hundert Fußballfotos darauf, beschriftet (was bei Spielszenen schwer genug ist) und bearbeitet zu werden. Allein gestern Abend habe ich beim EM-Qualifikationsspiel Österreich gegen Montenegro mehr als 1000 Fotos gemacht und einen Teil davon weitergeleitet. Das Interessante dabei ist, diese die Empfänger mit meinen Bildern immer wieder höchst zufrieden sind.

Vielleicht erinnerst du dich noch an die Kandidatur des Fotos von Haben Sie die Kandidatur von Marcel Sabitzer? Dort wurde nicht das Bild beurteilt, sondern ob Marcel Sabitzer eine Zahnerkrankung hat, was bei einem Fußballprofi und Nationalspieler ohnehin lustig ist. Und auch dort war es Cccefalon, der diese aberwitzige Diskussion, wie beim Foto File:Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (03).jpg angeheizt hat. Auch die Kandidatur von Valentino Lazaro hat Cccefalon versaut. Ich weiß nicht, was ihn dazu treibt, oder warum es ihm Spaß macht, anderen Benutzern die Kadidaturen zu versauen. Als ob er davon irgendeinen Nutzen hätte; seine Bilder werden dadurch weder besser, noch schlechter.

Nun, mich stört das mittlerweile nur am Rande, da für mich viel wichtiger ist, ob meine Fotos (nicht mehr in Dde-WP, sondern international) gebraucht werden. Und das werden sie, wie du hier nachprüfen kannst: 45 % Bildverwendungen. Cccefalon schaut da im Vergleich mit mickrigen 15 % Bildverwendungen ganz schön alt aus. Es ist schade, doch bezeichnend, in welcher Gesellschaft wir leben. Schönen Gruß aus Österreich --Steindy (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Da es schon sehr spät ist, nur ganz kurz: Mein Kommentar war nicht persönlich gemeint. Und da ich bezüglich Englisch eher auf vier minus stehe evtl. auch mißverständlich formuliert. Morgen mehr. -- Smial (talk) 00:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Kein Problem, Smial! Ich habe deinen Kommentar auch nicht persönlich aufgefasst. Mich hat dabei nur „irritiert“, dass andere Benutzer über mein Zeitmanagement befinden und meinen, dass ich noch mehr Zeit investieren sollte. Meine Frau findet es jetzt schon viel zu viel, was ich mache. Siehe auch hier. / F.G. Steindy (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Entschuldigung, wenn ich mich hier ungefragt einmische. Aber ich finde es wichtig klarzustellen, dass das Bild von Marcel Sabitzer nicht wegen eines unschönen Zahns als QI abgelehnt wurde, sondern mehrheitlich wegen zu geringer Schärfentiefe. (ups, Unterschrift vergessen!) --MB-one (talk) 20:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Ja MB-one, Sie dürfen sich „rühmen“, diese bemerkenswerte Begründung angezogen zu haben. Hatten Sie an meinen anderen neun unbewertet gebliebenen Fotos nichts auszusetzen gefunden? Merkwürdig, dass man bei dem „unscharfen“ Foto jede einzelne Wimper und jedes Haar der Braue erkennen kann. Cccefalon ist auf diesen Zug aufgesprungen und hat dann – ebenso wie Tobias "ToMar" Maier und mein Spezialfreund A.Savin – mit der Zahnerkrankung massiv nachgesetzt. Mit solchen, solchen oder auch solchen QI-Fotos kann ich selbstverständlich nicht mithalten. Aber das ist ohnehin egal, möge es Ihnen und den anderen Freude und Genugtuung bereitet haben! Übrigens: wenn ich wollte könnte ich dieses destruktive Verhalten auch betreiben, denn ich finde in nahezu jedem Bild auch etwas, das ich kritisieren könnte; ich mache es aber nicht. Dass dies ein Reportagebild und kein Studiofoto ist, interessiert auch kaum jemanden. Ich habe im Stadion bestenfalls wenige Augenblicke, um meine Bilder zu machen; jedenfalls aber zu wenig Zeit, um an den Einstellungen meiner Kamera zu basteln. Übrigens: wieviele Reportagefotos haben Sie schon gemacht? --Steindy (talk) 23:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Markt Unna 2008 IMGP6405 wp.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}}}

Verschoben. Mal schauen, ob das jetzt auch mal irgendwann archiviert wird, wenn eine Unterschrift dahinter steht. -- Smial (talk) 10:53, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Jcdecaux aussenwerbung IMGP4618 wp.jpg

File:Jcdecaux aussenwerbung IMGP4618 wp.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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Vera ^(talk) 21:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Jcdecaux aussenwerbung IMGP4618 wp.jpg

File:Jcdecaux aussenwerbung IMGP4618 wp.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!

Denniss (talk) 23:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Max Prosa (Traumzeit Festival 2013) IMGP3983 smial wp.jpg

File:Max Prosa (Traumzeit Festival 2013) IMGP3983 smial wp.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!

Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MARTa Aussendetail IMGP2517 wp.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 That figures. --Mattbuck 17:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Kapëtterchesautomat w 294.jpg

File:Kapëtterchesautomat w 294.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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 08:11, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eulenturm Unna IMGP4625 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 22:31, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hertingerstrasse 12 (Unna) IMGP4574 smial wp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:43, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Schoko-Osterhase IMGP1551 smial wp.jpg

File:Schoko-Osterhase IMGP1551 smial wp.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!

Josve05a (talk) 11:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chuck Robertson (Mad Caddies) (Ruhrpott Rodeo 2013) IMGP8446 smial wp.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. --Code 20:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Lindt Goldhasen

Hallo Smial, verstehe ich es richtig, dass Du „meine“ Lindt-Goldhasen löschen lassen willst? Wenn ja, müssten konsequenterweise auch alle Bilder von Autos, Motorrädern, Kameras usw. gelöscht werden, was ich sehr bedauerlich fände, aber für mich auch kein Weltuntergang wäre. Wikipedia und die Commons haben so viele Fotos von Pflanzen, Tieren, auch von pornografischen Darstellungen usw., die alle bestehen dürfen, dass es auf ein paar Aufnahmen von industriellen und/oder künstlerischen Erzeugnissen überhaupt nicht ankommt. Unlängst wurde zum Beispiel das Logo gelöscht, das ich am Tank eines über 50 Jahre alten Horex-Motorrades fotografiert hatte, und ich bin gespannt, wann sämtliche Logos, die in Wikipedia im Moment noch gezeigt werden, ebenfalls rausfliegen. Die Löscheiferer, Relevanz- und Urheberrechtshüter scheinen zurzeit ja Hochkonjunktur zu haben. Beste Grüße -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 11:45, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

[1] -- Smial (talk) 15:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC) Ps: Wenn du einen Weg weißt, wie ich alle meine Bilder löschen lassen kann, sag mir Bescheid. Pps: Ich bin vor allem auf die Löschkommentare der beteiligten Admins gespannt. Mal wird sowas gelöscht, mal wird sowas behalten, da maht jeder, was er will. Reine Willkür.

Re-nominating a file for deletion

Any explanation on why you decided to re-nominate File:Japanese Kit Kat Bar.JPG for deletion, when it was nominated 11 days ago and no one has yet to vote on it? I understand that you might not have seen it, but I have found at least one other image that has two nominations on it, both from today. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:04, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Verklickt bzw. die Warnungen übersehen. -- Smial (talk) 23:05, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Are you going to correct it? It seems like youre working to fast. /Hangsna (talk) 18:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gleisvermessungsgeraet IMGP4046 smial wp.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 Left part could be a bit sharper, but good overall --DXR 16:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)