User talk:Kallerna/2009

CA

Use [1]. Reupload doesn't work, I don't know why. Cheers. --Richard Bartz (talk) 22:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

With Photoshop try this. --Richard Bartz (talk) 16:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

4 million files press release

In case you weren't aware, this is just to let you know that one of your uploads is (partially) the subject of this press release. Thanks for putting us over 4 million! -kotra (talk) 03:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Well Done ;-) --Stefan-Xp (talk) 15:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, thanks :). —kallerna™ 16:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments on FPC

Hi kallerna. It would be nice if you could phrase you comments on COM:FPC a little less offending. Comments like “no usage” or “uinteresting” may offend the image author and are in some cases not even right (there is nearly no iamge that can´t be used at all). That would be nice. Thanks, norro 12:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I just tried to be pithy. —kallerna™ 13:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

File:2007 FoC, Abelard Giza (Gęba).jpg

Thanks a lot for uploading the new version. I really appreciate your work on that image. odder 15:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading the image. :) —kallerna™ 15:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments about your edit to my discussion page

hello kallerna, thanks for the welcome and sorry for not having noticed the sandbox :)

Rollback

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see the Meta page about rollback. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Huib talk 13:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! —kallerna™ 13:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Adminship?

Hi. I'm wondering if you want me to nominate you for adminship? Take your time. --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Why not? You can do it, if you want :). —kallerna™ 14:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy to hear. It will take some time making the nom! --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. You can see the nomination here. Please accept, and I'll do the transcluding if you want. Good luck! --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I accepted the nomination, thank you for it! —kallerna™ 14:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

A discussion you may be interested in...

I've taken your comments about image names on board, and I would appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have with regard to this thread. Best of luck with your admin bid! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 17:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I also added the images on your user page to my FP Nominees. I can't believe they haven't been nominated before! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 17:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Sublaines

FYI: see here. Regards, Wutsje (talk) 16:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Good job! —kallerna™ 16:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Standortfoto Pori mod.jpg

Moi! Osaisitko korjata tuon kuvan tietoja? Samulili (talk) 17:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Korjasin tuo tiedot, eiköhän ne nyt ole oikein. —kallerna™ 13:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

New proposal for the FP candidates voting process

Hello! I've written a proposal to bring more impartiality in the voting process of FP candidates. Could you please give your comment on that here? Regards -- Tiago Fioreze (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Administrator

---

Kallerna, onnittelut! Sinulla on nyt ylläpitäjän oikeudet Commonsissa. Odota kuitenkin vielä hetkinen ja lue Commons:Administrators, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard ja Commons:Deletion requests.

Voit halutessasi liittyä IRC-kanavalle seuraamme: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net. Commonsin ylläpitäjille on myös oma IRC-kanavansa: #wikimedia-commons-admin.

Harkitse myös liittymistä kanavalle #wikimedia-admin, kaikkien Wikimedian ylläpitäjien yhteiselle kanavalle.

Kannattaa lukea myös Commons:Guide to adminship.

Tarkista myös, löydytkö listoilta sivuilla Commons:List of administrators, Commons:List of administrators by language ja Commons:List of administrators by date.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! Ask if you need anything. --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! —kallerna™ 11:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Good on you, mate! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

FP Nomination

Nomination Notification

G'day! I love File:Ripped pig.jpg, that you've uploaded to Commons, so I've nominated it for Featured Picture status. Its nomination is at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ripped pig.jpg. Best of luck! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Judging by the support it was getting in your previous nomination, I thought it should have it's chance. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks :) —kallerna™ 11:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. I wanted to test out my new {{SarcNom}} template, so I figured I'd kill two pigs with one stone. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 12:30, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

:D —kallerna™ 12:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flying bird.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Ianare 01:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Yosemite Valley from Tunnel View in Yosemite NP.JPG

Hi, you deleted the image but did not specify, by which other image it is supposed to be replaced. Therefore Delinker bot deletes it all over the projects but does not know how to replace it. PLEASE never, ever do something like that again. --h-stt !? 07:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! AfChapman Stockholm.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 composition, quite fitting for stockholm --Ianare 21:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yyterin lietteet-Duckboards.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Ianare 21:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Engel mit Teddy.jpeg

Why did you delete the file? The artist agreed with the licence and it waited for the OTRS-ticket. --Don-kun (talk) 13:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I did restore it. —kallerna™ 15:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Loppusijoituskapseli.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 and useful, although crop is a bit tight --Mbdortmund 15:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Cetonia aurata take off composition 05172009.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cetonia aurata take off composition 05172009.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Isosuo.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. Yann 07:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Too small image ..

Hey one comment tell [File:Samba Carneval Helsinki 2009.JPG my] image is too small. How i stop nominate that image?...D100a (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Taidat olla sama heppu kuin tämä fi-Wikissä. Se äänestys loppui jo, koska siihen laitettiin se malline, joten sinun ei sitä enää tarvitse lopettaa. —kallerna™ 13:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Mistä arvasit? :D D100a (talk) 15:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Sama käyttäjänimi, kuvia Helsingistä. :) —kallerna™ 12:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Quebec FPC

Good day. Would you mind having a look at the new version of my Quebec city image. I'd like some feedback before nominating again. I tried to better stitch the water. Thanks. --S23678 (talk) 04:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It's much better, but the stitches are still visible. —kallerna™ 13:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dagestani man and woman.jpg

Hello, I posted a restored version. Best regards, Yann (talk) 16:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok. —kallerna™ 18:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you think the restoration is not good enough? I just would like to know because this is a first time for me for this kind of work. Yann (talk) 17:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Well the photo is much better and I think that restoration is ok. But I won't support because I don't think that every photo made by Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorskii should be featured, althought he was really good. —kallerna™ 17:48, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

question

Hi Kallerna, I'd like to ask you please beside the crop what other issues you have the image File:Western tent caterpillars Malacosoma californicum in Joshua Tree NP.jpg? Maybe I will be able to correct them? Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 09:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to see more centered composition + the quality isn't FP-material IMO. —kallerna™ 18:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Perunapelto Nakkila.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 Perfect, nice --George Chernilevsky 20:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pharaoh Hound headshot.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. --Iotatau 20:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Apis mellifera on Potentilla palustris.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. Is this a Sigma 105 mm Macro lens you used? Lycaon 17:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)  Comment Yes it is. It's superb lens IMO. --kallerna 18:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chrysomya albiceps + Potentilla palustris.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for sure. Lycaon 17:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ojakellukka.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 DOF is quite shallow, but enough details are visible, IMO. --Yerpo 20:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lysimachia vulgaris.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 Would prefer more of the plant to be in focus, but it's acceptable. Maedin 18:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hopeasinisiipi (Polyommatus amandus) underside.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 Correct. --ComputerHotline 17:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paistekärpänen.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 Correct. --ComputerHotline 17:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Siili.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 picture leans to red, IMO --Mbdortmund 02:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)  Info Colours adjusted. Any better now? --kallerna 06:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC) YES --Mbdortmund 23:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erinaceus europaeus 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 very good --George Chernilevsky 20:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erinaceus europaeus 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  Support Lovely, well done. Yann 20:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nymphalis urticae.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 Correct --ComputerHotline 08:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nokkosperhonen (Nymphalis urticae).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 --Böhringer 21:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porin raatihuone.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 tilt, correct please -- George Chernilevsky 13:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)  Info Sorry, fixed! --kallerna 17:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC) Now Ok -- George Chernilevsky 21:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vuohenkello (Campanula rapunculoides).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. Maedin 18:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Calliphoridae.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 --Mbdortmund 22:06, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Petunia x hybrida.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 Difficult reds again. 7.4% of the image is blown in the red channel. Lycaon 07:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)  Info I uploaded new version. Any better now? --kallerna 07:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC) Yes ;-). Lycaon 11:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Volucella pellucens & Potentilla palustris.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 Beautiful color palette, nice framing, good detail. --Ferengi 08:21, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Chainsaw.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I don't think the action bit should be in the scope. The fact that it is an action shot just adds value to the image, as it shows the machine and the way it works. I'm not convinced whether we need separate scopes for action and non-action for tools. I would support a Chainsaw (singular best? Eusebius or Yann help?) scope. Lycaon (talk) 18:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think there are better pictures about chainsaw in action fore example: HBR (talk) 19:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment That one has the focus on the tree and the man, not on the saw, so would fail criterion 3, and of course also fails criterion 5. Lycaon (talk) 19:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

•  Support, but please check the scope wording. Lycaon (talk) 11:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
  •  Comment Any better now? —kallerna™ 12:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Looks OK to me. --Myrabella (talk) 00:30, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cirsium arvense.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 colors, good detail, great framing. --Ferengi 23:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

old pavement pic

Just to let you know that I promoted this to QI and added it to Road surface on enwiki, which didn't have a picture to illustrate pavement deterioration. Good work! Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! —kallerna™ 16:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nova Scotia Duck-Tolling Retriever headshot.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 colours, the part of the head facing the camera is in good enough focus IMO. --Jolly Janner 14:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Please review

Hi, I think it's a bit unfair to fellow nominees to constantly ask for review of your images. You nominate lots of images, some of them might get overlooked, but hey, that's life. I for example nominated just one photo (and in fact my first nomination) which has been constantly overlooked, but I have refrained from nagging people to review it. It really rubs me the wrong way seeing you trying to get attention over other users. Please show some common courtesy next time. Thanks. --Ferengi (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's forbidden to ask for review. I understand you, but putting text like "Please review" may get attention from people who don't usually review photos. But if you think that it's rude, I can stop it. Sorry. —kallerna™ 19:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I forgot to thank you from reviewing QI's. It's good to have people like you who can review any photos! Thanks! —kallerna™ 19:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I try to review as many photos as I can and leave none out, it's just that there are simply too many nominations. I also usually give priority to reviewing older nominations so that they don't get left out (unless some new nomination grabs my eye, in a positive or negative way). Asking for review is indeed not forbidden (if it was I would have reverted you ), so I just made the above comments. It was a one time mention, I'll leave it to your discretion from now on. Keep taking beautiful pictures! --Ferengi (talk) 20:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll try! —kallerna™ 08:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paistekärpänen (Helophilus pendulus).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 --Mbdortmund 14:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kamomillasaunio (Matricaria recutita).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 --Mbdortmund 15:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Old pavement.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 Pinprick detail and no noise. — Daniel Case 15:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Libellula quadrimaculata.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 Correct. --ComputerHotline 08:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Onnenkoski.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 Well done. -- Smial 00:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maitohorsma (Epilobium angustifolium).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 composition good dof Gnangarra 14:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linnakepuiston ranta.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments some chromatic abberation on the rocks bottom right its minor Gnangarra 14:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirnu.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! -- H005 00:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erinaceus europaeus 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 OK --Mbdortmund 19:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hoverfly Säppi 2009.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 --Mbdortmund 11:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tabanidae 2009.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 DOF a bit shallow but good documentation of the body and head --Mbdortmund 14:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Chrysops divaricatus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Oppose as not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (should be geocoded, but is not). "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so". I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page. -- Rastaman3000 (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• •  Info Sorry, I forgot. Added. —kallerna™ 12:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment - I could not find enough information on the scope, so I'll leave it to others. Rastaman3000 (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Well, it seems to be a species on its own, which makes it a reasonable scope. I can't see any competitors. -- H005 (talk) 22:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Rastaman3000 (talk) 18:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flies on Leucanthemum vulgare.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, difficult subject --Ianare 07:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Juvenile Erinaceus europaeus kallerna.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 cute --Mbdortmund 20:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Aalto-malja.JPG

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aalto-malja.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 Not sure, the background IMHO should be white, not grey. As a result there is too little contrast between the vase and its environment. -- H005 16:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)  Comment It was white, the result is just grey. I made adjustments, any better now? --kallerna 17:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC) Yes, much better. That was what happens if you have a very light subject (e. g. snow) and let the camera do the exposure, it almost always gets too dark. -- H005 17:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prestige -sun glasses.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 Pure white background would be better, but OK as-is. --Ianare 20:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hoverfly Pori.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 Lower wing a little blurred, but excellent composition and QI material. TimVickers 18:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sitruunaperhonen (Gonepteryx rhamni).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good --Korall 18:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sirokeijunkorento (Lestes sponsa).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 Correct. --ComputerHotline 07:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Ernesto Cardenal a la Chascona.jpg

Perhaps you can have a look at that QI-candidat, I reduced the noise --Mbdortmund (talk) 09:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, it's better now. —kallerna™ 10:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Motocross helmet.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 fine details --Mbdortmund 13:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Calliphora vomitoria.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support-- as a side note, this image doesn't appear to be in the category that is its scope (I am assuming it should be)... TonyBallioni (talk) 22:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)Previous reviews

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 17:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Itäkeskus shopping centre.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support, But please add the exact date the picture was taken to the file description. (It appears in the exif). Rastaman3000 (talk) 16:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

• •  Comment Done. Thanks for reviewing! —kallerna™ 09:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 17:03, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Firefly-shoes.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 Would probably prefer to see the whites toned down a bit, but they aren't blown so it's ok. Nice shoes, :-) Maedin 09:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tyrni Säppi.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 Bit dark bottom, but overall good. Nice shown unripe fruits. QI --George Chernilevsky 19:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Härkäpää (Phalera bucephala) Säppi.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Lucarelli 22:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Kas-Pin photos?

Hi, Kallerna!

You can make photos of Finnish Kas-Pin trainings, sports uniform, emblems, etc.? It is really very rare.

With best regards --George Chernilevsky (talk) 10:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

May be too rare, no associations on my town. I'll promise to take photos if I see anything, but that's very unusual sport. —kallerna™ 12:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Branta canadensis kallerna.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 Got the whole bird in focus. Composition of surrounding area could be better, but it's out of focus, so isn't so important. --Jolly Janner 17:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ripped pig.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 --George Chernilevsky 13:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

my QI nomination

Hello Kallerna, please correct your small mistake here: [2] --> my gold crystal nimination, thanks, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

There weren't your signature. Please add it. —kallerna™ 11:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

ah, OK. I reverted it. Thanks a lot. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. —kallerna™ 09:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Sitruunaperhonen (Gonepteryx rhamni).JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sitruunaperhonen (Gonepteryx rhamni).JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 18:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Golf balls kallerna.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 because of educational value, which mitigates for the the too low DOF. Also, I do not fancy your name in the file names (I've seen that before in your images), these should really describe the photo only and not its author. -- H005 16:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)  Comment Nickname in filename are normal, it is good for unique filenames in server storage --George Chernilevsky 09:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC) Whether "normal" or not, I think there are many good arguments against this habit, but this is not the place to disuss them, so I'll hold my peace. --H005 15:52, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dendrocopos major with dead pig.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 woodpecker is a little fuzzy, but OK overall --Ianare 03:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Säpin majakka.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 tilt ccw --Mbdortmund 22:23, 20 August 2009 (UTC)  Info Fixed. --kallerna 10:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC) Looks good. --Jcart1534 11:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PV Valsörn II.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 shot --George Chernilevsky 06:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scarce copper.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 Would work better with shallow DOF, background grass stems distracting--Vladanr 09:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)  Support OK with me, shows mimicry better than a low-DOF image. -- H005 17:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pholidoptera griseoaptera.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 but please correct the name. Lycaon 00:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Olkiluoto 1&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 Not actually the sharpest image, but OK. -- H005 20:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rupikonna-Bufo bufo.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 composition, DOF could be better but I think its allright.--Korall 15:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Stop misunderstanding

Hi, Kallerna!

Ohhh....

First, I offer friendship! Conflicts grow out of misunderstanding.

Two times to You did earlier the remarks. Whether You read it before discussion of users about photos of spiders? Absence of uniqueness is not criterion QI. It only check of technical parametres of a photo.

You can always decline any nomination. This Your Right, and I respect Your opinion.

However the hasty opinion is frequent can wrongly. Your phrase "I do not want to see" is very impolite and not friendly. It is the direct offer to a conflict. I am not afraid of conflicts. In my real life I had to be at war against criminals and to face threats.

I always consider the nominated image in 100 % resolution, and I always attentively read the description. I think some minutes before voting. Sometimes I defer the vote the next day.

That seems too similar, not always is simple actually.

Fish has changeable colouring. Males and females differ the head shapes. It is important for a expert.

Flameknee spider in general is ultra-rare. It is protected by the law (catching in the nature is forbidden). The size with legst approximate 18 cm. Poison is similar to a wasp, however a dose much more. Hairs on a body is too poisonous. Speed of movement of 5-7 km/h.

I'm sorry, if I has tired You with biological details. I wished to justify only my opinion: it is not necessary to decline hasty if work seems too similar. It is to concerns a nomination of any user, not only for me.

In summary... friendship?

Yours faithfully, --George Chernilevsky (talk) 08:42, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, if "... I don't want to see" seemed impolite, I always try to be polite. Your message is really positive, and I do thank you of it. :)

I like your photos, I just thought that just one of the gallery should be QI, as I always chose only the best of my galleries to QI-nomination. But people have different habits, so that of your should be ok. IMO if you (or anyone else) take(s) couple good photos of the same animal/plant or something with same composition and same point of view and same equipment, only one of them should be QI (for instance, this is QI but this isn't. Both of them are tecnically good enough for QI, but the composition is just too similar. But it's another case when the photos have for instance same composition and stuff, but female and male. Then IMO both of them could be QIs. So I'll withdraw my votes. —kallerna™ 16:42, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Now all ok, thanks You.

In my opinion, You can nominate the second photo of a goose. However there not absolutely good color balance: bit some blue.

Two nominations of a sunsets You can rescue if reduce the size of this images. The big size not always well for weak illumination. Places in this photos beautiful, but the engineering photocamera not always can transmit Beauty of the World.

With best regards, --George Chernilevsky (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Luokkien nimet

Terve, kuuluuko luokat nimetä Commonsissa ensisijaisesti englanniksi vai alkuperäisellä nimellä? Esimerkiksi tein tämän luokan Ukko-Pekka Bridge, olisiko sen voinut nimetä oikealla nimellä eli Ukko-Pekan silta? Täällä on ainakin luokiteltu sekä suomeksi että englanniksi, ja samaan olen törmännyt myös muuallakin. --Makele-90 (talk) 03:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

En ole täysin varma, mutta englanniksi kai ensisijaisesti, mutta jos kyseessä on yhdyssana, on kai pakko kirjoittaa suomeksi. Mielestäni teit täysin oikein ja kannattaa kirjoittaa englanniksi ellei kyseessä ole yhdyssana. —kallerna™ 10:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mantukimalainen -.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 composition. Maedin 10:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tykki Helsinki.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 --Mbdortmund 23:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sparkler 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 Cool! Shame it's cut off top and right, but don't think it's a big problem. Maedin 10:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porin merivartioasema Kallo.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 Looks slightly tilted CCW. -- Smial 12:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)  Comment Definitely tilted CCW. --Relic38 17:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)  Info Fixed. --kallerna 06:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)  Support, I think now is good --Cesco77 07:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Multiharju-opaste.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok, though needs a crop, I think. Maedin 10:07, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Levi 293.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments very good --George Chernilevsky 17:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kallo sunset.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kallo aalto.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}}}

Photos request

Photos are necessary of a crucian carp. Approximately 10-15 years ago it was the most usual fish in Europe. Now it is uncommon or rare fish in the Central and Southern Europe. I cannot caught it. It is result of invasion of a prussian carp. A photos with good showing fins is needed (composition like this). And a head of a Crucian carp with close up view.

If You can make it, I will support You with a VI nomination.

I am the writer in Russian Wiki: biology, transport, military vehicles, knives (i good know puukko).

With best regards, --George Chernilevsky (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a photo, when it next time comes in my webs. Can take a while, but I've had them before. :) —kallerna™ 11:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok :). All other biological species of fishes too are welcomed. --George Chernilevsky (talk) 12:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scale Common Roach.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! You can almost determine the fish's age. Lycaon 08:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niittyhopeatäplä.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not really FP but definitely QI. --Korall 15:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Chamerion angustifolium (Fireweed).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Oppose as not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (should be geocoded, but is not). "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so". Rastaman3000 (talk) 17:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC) I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page.

Sorry, I forgot. The image is now geocoded. —kallerna™ 18:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

•  Support - The image is now geocoded. best IMO. --Rastaman3000 (talk) 12:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 09:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kustaanmiekka majakka.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 composition --Cayambe 15:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Request of Information about Image Deletion

I request information about the deletion of image "Elcosmonauta-logo.jpg" in the field of alleged copyright infringement, and the rectification of that deletion under the basis that a) I, the uploader, work with the author of the image, b), the image was uploaded by his personal request, and c) the author licensed the image under a Creative Commons Share-Alike 3.0 license. Thank you very much for your time--ErCradel (talk) 12:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I restored it, try to do convince us. —kallerna™ 10:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Tiedosto:Wir Lernen Finnisch.jpg

Terve kävisitkö kommentoimassa Commons:Kahvihuone-- D100a (talk) 19:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

En ole näiden juttujen ekspertti, mutta kirjoitin jonkinmoisen vastauksen. —kallerna™ 09:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Elcosmonauta-logo.jpg

Hi, could you please leave a message there explaining why you restored File:Elcosmonauta-logo.jpg? Your restore summary (discussion) is a bit vague (no link to said discussion), and I don't think the copyright issues have been sorted out. Thanks. –Tryphon^☂ 08:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Check this. IMO the image can be now deleted. —kallerna™ 09:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I see, thanks for pointing it out (I feel ashamed I didn't even look two threads up). I would wait a few days to see if more details are provided about the original image, but feel free to delete it anytime you see fit. –Tryphon^☂ 14:36, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lilium Pori.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 bit spotty second plan (imho). - Darius Bauzys 17:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

FPs

People riding Kirnu

Hi, Thanks for pointing out the bad colour balance on my robin picture, I often find it is difficult to spot obvious problems with my own photos. It is probably because I am recalling taking the photo, and the pleasure of capturing the moment instead of looking objectively at the photo :-). It is nice when a problem with a photo can be easily fixed (like colour balance). My old camera has a few limitations, resolution, inability to focus in low light conditions, high noise unless you take everything at ISO 50! So I have to work quite hard sometimes to get decent pictures :-). My biggest problem though is composing a good picture, taking notice of all the distracting elements in the field of view, getting the angle right, making a pleasing picture. Anyway what do you think of this, shall I submitt it to FPC? --Tony Wills (talk) 23:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Np :). You can submitt it to FPC if you want, but the original was already FPC and it was declined. People could still prefer composition of that one. —kallerna™ 07:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that, it struck me that the subject of the photo was neither really the whole ride, nor the people riding it but something in between. I think this crop is quite striking. I might have a further play though :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 12:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, I nominated it but its reception was a bit flat :-(. There was me thinking it was quite a strong composition, but I obviously have to work on composition a bit more :-) :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Sad but true. :( —kallerna™ 12:23, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Old recordings of music suitable for commons?

By accident while looking for legal information about sound recordings I came over this link. In the end of the text it says something about that there are old recordings of in the public domain that are possible to access through the National library of Finland. I tried to find the actual recordings but it seems like the rest of the website is in finnish and I do not understand finnish. If you have the time and interest, maybe you could have a look at the library site and see if it contains something that could be good for uploading on commons? Or maybe it has already been discussed on finnish wikipedia?

Best regards

-- Korall (talk) 19:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look of it later, I'm quite busy at the moment. Aren't all old recordings suitable (PD when they are over ~80 years old or so)? —kallerna™ 14:55, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I found a link to all of the recordings, so dont mind if your busy, thanks for the reply anyway. =) --Korall (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Olvi.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 and nice and useful. --Cayambe 07:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Epäilyttävä kuva

Moi, tämä kuva taitaa olla tekijänoikeusrikkomus. --Makele-90 (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Olihan se, poistin. Noihin voi merkata {{Copyvio}} niin ne poistetaan. —kallerna™ 09:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pihlavanlahti.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 IMO, despite some noise on the beach. --Cayambe 13:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Woodpile.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. Lycaon 13:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tikkataulu.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. --Cayambe 15:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Water in boat.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 subject; image a little too dark --Archaeodontosaurus 13:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sigma 105.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 -- H005 15:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tamron 70-300.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 -- H005 15:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ahlaisten kirkon kellotapuli.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 think that now is good - Darius Baužys 19:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

FP Nomination

Nomination Notification

G'day! I love File:Alluvial fan, Taklimakan Desert, XinJiang Province, China, NASA, ASTER.jpg, that you've uploaded to Commons, so I've nominated it for Featured Picture status. Its nomination is at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Alluvial fan, Taklimakan Desert, XinJiang Province, China, NASA, ASTER.jpg. Best of luck! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

• Also, I think you should nominate some of these pictures: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. I'd support all of them. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! :) One of those has already been nominated, but it didn't got the status. But couple of my new photos, that I haven't uploaded yet may have potential to FP :). —kallerna™ 13:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Asa & Jätkäjätkät @ Bar Kino - Puppa J.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments not perfect, some noise and crop of the hand, but shows the atmosphere of the concert --Mbdortmund 16:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toller Enäjärvi.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 Interesting portrait in nice setting. For me this has a better chance of FP than the snowfall one you nominated. --99of9 00:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Puro Enäjärvi.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok for me. --Cayambe 14:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jäätynyt ruoho.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 Cool shot, decent quality. Juliancolton 17:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Tireless contributions

I just want to say that I admire your recent commons contributions beacuse the weather this time of the year so booring and unispiring so I cant really understand how you go out with your camera and document it. Way to go and keep up the nice work!!--Korall (talk) 00:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

And I thought that I've been lazy... :D But I try to take as many photos as I can, althought there isn't too much to take photos from. Thanks, this made my day!

ps. Om du vill, du kan också prata svenska med mig. :) —kallerna™ 10:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Det tråkigaste med att bo på dessa breddgrader är att det är så himla mörkt på hösten. Det är bara dagsljus några få timmar om dagen och i princip hela november har det varit grått och muggigt och ingen sol i Stockholm, ingen snö. Snön lyser i alla fall upp lite när den kommer. Så det gäller att uppskatta de små sakerna.Det blir helt enkelt så att jag inte går utanför dörren om jag inte måste. Jag får spara fotandet till våren och sommaren. --Korall (talk) 15:25, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Jo, men jag väntar på snö. Det är inte så mörkt när det kommer :). Och vinterlovet ska jag kanske gå till Lappland och njuta av snö. Och det är också så vacker... Hoppas att mina kameran fungerar i kallt Lappland! :) Och om du lever i Stockholm, du kan fotografera arkitekturen där (förstas inomhus), det är fager stad! :) —kallerna™ 18:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Pluggar du? Vad läser du för något? Lappland kan nog vara jättefint. Jag brukar åka till Jämtland på vintern och åka skidor. I år skall jag åka till Florida i stället över jul och nyår. Jag hoppas att jag kommer att hitta något intressant där att fota. --Korall (talk) 12:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Till Florida, jättefint! Det ska vara olik jul i varm klimat. :) En av mina kompisar levde i Pensacola, men han lever idag i Seattle... Jag hoppar att du ska hitta något intressant att fota, kanske alligators? —kallerna™ 15:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Jag hade hoppats på fjärilar och fåglar, alligatorerna ligger ju i vatten hela tiden.--Korall (talk) 17:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Inte hela tiden. :) —kallerna™ 12:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jäätynyt pensas.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'd love a little deeper DOF, but it's good otherwise. --99of9 05:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

FP votes

Hey there, thanks for all your hard work at FPC. If possible, could you please provide more in-depth explanations to justify your votes? "Poor quality" or "poor composition", while certainly valid concerns, are very vague statements—and they don't give the nominator much info to use towards making necessary edits. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Camel Active shoes.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me --Herbythyme 11:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Question?

Do you want me to sharpen the logs one? I just want to be clear :). I'll respond to the others as soon as I can. While I'm here.

Some snow for you! Fresh off the camera - regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:17, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

If you can. :) Cheers! :) —kallerna™ 09:57, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

OK - re-uploaded, let's see if it is QI now :) Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:58, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! —kallerna™ 11:05, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hepan silmä.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. --MattiPaavola 16:40, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Courtesy of Chico, the Official Commons Christmas Puggle. :P

We've had our differences, I know, but I can honestly say it's been a pleasure working with you on FPC, Kallerna. Let's hope next year is just as exciting! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 07:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Happy holidays! —kallerna™ 10:33, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suomenlinnan kirkko kallerna.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. --Cayambe 19:20, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Frozen stream Enäjärvi, Pori.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}}}