User talk:Mbdortmund/Archive/2008/May

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grasshopper April 2008-3.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 great details, good choice of background --Ianare 19:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Agfa Click BW 1.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 details --Ianare 19:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lamium maculatum MdE.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 You are not the photographer? -- carol 08:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC) It's by MdE/FotoCC2DE, when the description is right. --Mbdortmund 08:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC) Good enough for QI. Lycaon 08:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Entoloma sp(cherry-type)-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 You are not the photographer? -- carol 08:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC) This is a nice photograph of the subject. -- carol 23:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

QI nomination for Image:Mardin P1030274 20080423101837.JPG

Building is tilted about 0.4° CW, could you fix this? --Leafnode 19:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not my picture, I don't know, if the author would like that. --Mbdortmund 20:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry, nomination didn't mention author. I'll notify him, thanks. --Leafnode 20:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

OK --Mbdortmund 20:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Dupe

Sorry, deleted the right image. CommonsDelinker will replace all the image with the old file name with the right one. Bye, --Filnik^{\b[Rr]ock\b!?} 10:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

thx --Mbdortmund 18:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Atv comparision.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Atv comparision.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 11:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PohutukawaCornwallis.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment There seem to be artifacts in the sky just above the point where both trees meet. Dirt* on the lens? Otherwise it's a lovely photo. Pōhutukawas are gorgeous trees. Arria Belli 23:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC) "Reduction" artifacts ? (not visible on full size image). Thanks to the gardener for the perfect lawn --B.navez 07:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC) *Ok I see what you mean now : probably bees. --B.navez 07:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mardin P1030274 20080423101837.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  Question Building is tilted about 0.4° CW, could you fix this? --Leafnode 23:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC) I've fixed this myself. Great composition, interesting subject --Leafnode 21:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC) Thankyou for fixing the tilt. --Nevit 21:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PfarrkircheMöggers.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 chosen Point of view. Very sharp. --Ikiwaner 21:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

File:Temple Saint Sava edit1.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple Saint Sava edit1.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 in any sense --Ikiwaner 17:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Helle Blattlausschwebfliege Parasyrphus annulatus 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 There are no series flaws here and it is solid technical work. Ram-Man 02:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Kategorien

Hallo Mbdortmund, da ich inzwischen nun einige Tage lang hinter Dir hergeräumt habe, möchte ich Dich dringend bitten, weniger Chaos zu verursachen und deutlich sorgsamer zu kategorisieren. So waren von Deinen Bildern von Soest etliche mit Category:Timber framing in Soest versehen, obwohl in denen nicht die Spur von Fachwerk zu sehen war. Die Bilder einfach ohne Nachzudenken in die Hauptkategorien der Städte zu stecken, macht keinerlei Sinn. Noch weniger Sinn macht es, die Bilder, obwohl schon sauber in passende Unterkategorien gestellt, noch zusätzlich in die Hauptkategorie zu stellen, wie beispielsweise hier: Image:IMG 6576-Franziskanerkirche.JPG, Image:IMG 6596-Franziskanerkirche.JPG, Image:Nicolai-Kirche-IMG 0206.JPG. Ebenfalls sinnlos ist es, Gemälde wie Image:Paula Modersohn-Becker 019.jpg und Image:Paula Modersohn-Becker 017.jpg mit Category:Dortmund zu versehen. Weder ist Dortmund auf den Gemälden abgebildet, noch ist irgendwie erkennbar, was diese Bilder mit Dortmund zu tun haben könnten. Sind sie in einem Dortmunder Museum zu sehen? Wenn ja, kategorisiere sie doch dort ein! Auch Bilder von Schulen in Witten wie Image:Witten-Bachschule-IMG 8297.JPG und Image:Witten-Bachschule-IMG 8298.JPG gehören natürlich nicht ins Hauptverzeichnis Category:Witten, sondern in Category:Schools in Witten. Das sind nur ganz wenige Beispiele von vielen hundert falschen und unsinnigen Kategorien, die Du verteilst. Teils überschreitet das schon die Grenze zum Vandalismus. Gebe Dir also bitte mehr Mühe beim Kategorisieren! Danke. -- Ies 14:24, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Auf meiner Disk bitte ich um mehr Respekt und Höflichkeit, sonst lösche ich Deinen Beitrag beim nächsten Mal kommentarlos. Du bist hier nicht der Oberaufseher, auch wenn Du Dir so vorkommst.

Bei den Modersohn-Becker-Bilder ist der Bildbeschreibung leicht zu entnehmen, dass sie im Dortmunder Museum am Ostwall hängen oder in einer Dortmunder Privatsammlung, wer lesen kann, ist klar im Vorteil:

Current location Deutsch: Museum am Ostwall Deutsch: Dortmund

Wenn es Dir keinen Spaß macht, die Kategorien zu verbessern, lass es einfach sein. Wenn Du Vorwürfe formulierst, recherchiere genauer, auch wenn Du Deinen Editwettlauf unterbrechen musst.

So entferntest Du mit pampigen Kommentaren von diversen Bildern vom Hoesch-Gelände mit Industrieanlagen sinnlos die category «steel industries», z.B. hier: Image:Phoenix-DSCN2890.JPG, zum Teil mit dem rotzigen Kommenatar: "no steel visible", etwa bei den Gebäuden der Thyssen Krupp Stahl AG, was sogar noch dransteht, dem größten deutschen Stahlproduzenten. Arbeite langsamer, genauer, dann können wir Freunde werden. Mach keine Arbeiten, die Dir keinen Spaß machen, ich stelle hier haufenweise Bilder zur Verfügung und erwarte Respekt für meine Beiträge. Punkt.

--Mbdortmund 15:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nordkirchen-Schloss-0087a.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 Sehr gut :) Fvasconcellos 14:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Uploadformular

Wenn du in deiner monobook.js var UploadForm_forcebasic = true; einträgst, kriegst du wieder ein einfaches Uploadformular. -- Cecil 21:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Danke Dir, das hat geholfen. --Mbdortmund 22:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)