User talk:MirandaAdramin

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, MirandaAdramin!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: `[[:Image:Foo.jpg]]`, which produces: `Image:Foo.jpg` If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: `{{bad name\|correct name}}` For more information read the full deletion guidelines.
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Image:Pano-depuis-le-sud.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Pano-depuis-le-sud.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This deletion request also included Image:Détail-puits-lumière-circulaire.JPG, Image:Détail-des-gouttières-en-façade.JPG and Image:Détail-conduite.JPG. --Cecil (talk) 22:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fusil levier grave ours.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 QI (despite some noise). - A.Savin 10:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pistolet Treuille Beaulieu 1854

Bonjour et un très grand merci ! En effet, depuis début novembre, je travaille à la réécriture de l'article fr:Escadron des Cent-gardes que je viens de mettre en ligne. Il y a quelques jours, en faisant des recherches, je suis tombé par hasard sur quelques lignes d'une revue spécialisée faisant état d'un pistolet Treuille de Beaulieu, totalement inconnu, créé spécialement et uniquement pour les cent-gardes et jamais utilisé. Aussi, quelle a été ma (divine) surprise en découvrant qu'il en existait une photo (parfaite) sur Commons, et qu'elle avait été mise en ligne quelques jours plus tôt !!! Votre photo est donc en bonne place dans l'article et si, par hasard, vous aviez dans vos tiroirs une photo du mousquet Treuille de Beaulieu je suis évidemment preneur. Bien cordialement. --Licorne37 (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 1.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 10.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 10.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 2.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 3.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 3.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 4.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 4.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 5.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 5.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 6.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 6.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 7.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 7.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 8.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 8.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cité administrative Grüner 9.jpg

File:Cité administrative Grüner 9.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hotel-des-Impots---Contraste.jpg

File:Hotel-des-Impots---Contraste.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Aga (d) 16:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image du jour de Wiki Loves Earth 2017 en France, 27 May 2017

Votre photo « RNN du Haut-Rhône, Sentier des lônes, Île Reflet.jpg » a été choisie par les bénévoles de Wiki Loves Earth 2017 comme image coup de cœur (ou image du jour) du 27 May 2017.

Cordialement, Pmau (talk) 07:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sainté Pano Ouest.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. Vue magnifique. Tournasol7 22:54, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! RNR Gorges de la Loire, Églantine.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --W.carter 08:17, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mégère.jpg et File:Mégère 2.jpg

Bonjour, juste pour vous prévenir que votre Mégère est en fait un Tircis (Pararge aegeria) :-) --LamBoet (talk) 00:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour ; en voici d'autres : File:Moiré Sylvicole Portrait.jpg et File:Moiré Sylvicole Profil.jpg montrent en fait Erebia meolans (E. aethiops ne vole que plus tard dans l'année), tandis que File:Tortue Sol.jpg / File:Tortue Close Up.jpg est Nymphalis polychloros. --LamBoet (talk) 20:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! RNR Gorges de la Loire, Digitale.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. --Ralf Roletschek 09:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pano Plateau de la Danse.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 C'est tres beau. -- Ikan Kekek 20:00, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Araignée Citron Scabieuse.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. --Cvmontuy 16:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Aporia crataegi couple.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sentier Nord.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 C'est bon. -- Ikan Kekek 22:30, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hopital Facade.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. --Livioandronico2013 10:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Esplanade Est.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.--Manfred Kuzel 07:26, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pieride.jpg

In this photo's description section, it says "English" but the description is in French. PumpkinSky talk 01:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, it's corrected now. --MirandaAdramin (talk) 04:31, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bas en Basset Étang.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 In the trees (2 large, 1 small and leaning) in the foreground on the left, there are several spots of purple CA where branches and leaves are purple. On the other hand, I really like the composition. Can you fix the CA? PumpkinSky 21:57, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Is it better ?--MirandaAdramin 18:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC) It's better but I still see it in several leaves. It's so easy to spot I can even see it in thumbnail view. PumpkinSky 19:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)...I've added 4 image notes to the spots that don't look right to me (purple and CA). Hope this helps. PumpkinSky 22:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done I tried another way to built HDR. Hope it works ! --MirandaAdramin 18:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC) Comment Nice job fixing that! PumpkinSky 18:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Agrion Fond Or.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. --Basotxerri 20:28, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grangent Château.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. --Basotxerri 20:28, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Libellule Rouge Vert.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 Sorry, the filesize is very small. Please upload an uncompressed image. --XRay 07:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC) Done Sorry, I uploaded the wrong files ! Thanks. --MirandaAdramin 12:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support No problem. Thank you. IMO OK now. --XRay 13:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Orthetrum Assemblés.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 Sorry, the filesize is very small. Please upload an uncompressed image. --XRay 07:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC) Done --MirandaAdramin 12:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support No problem. Thank you. IMO OK now. --XRay 13:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pieride.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.--Manfred Kuzel 08:45, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Myrtil Soleil.jpg

Bonjour, celui-ci est Coenonympha pamphilus ;-) --LamBoet (talk) 07:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LamBoet Ah, ben moi qui pensais être tranquille avec ces "petits marrons"... Que nenni, voilà qu'ils ne sont pas tous des "myrtils" !! C'est corrigé et j'ai demandé à renommer le fichier.--MirandaAdramin (talk) 07:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Et pour cette femelle de Thymelicus (1, 2), il faudrait voir le dessous des massues antennaires (autrement dit, voir le papillon de face) pour pouvoir choisir entre sylvestris et lineola. --LamBoet (talk) 07:02, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LamBoet Je range donc dans "unidentified thymelicus". Merci ! --MirandaAdramin (talk) 07:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Piéride Ponte.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. --Vengolis 01:21, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Coccinelle Achillée.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. --Vengolis 01:21, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cuivré Flamboyant 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 11:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Myrtils 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 Nice job here. F8 worked fine for this one. PumpkinSky 11:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Noble Œdemere Mâle 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 11:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ferdinande dorée 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 06:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Éristale Tenace 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 quality. --Ermell 06:48, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vulcain 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 12:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Orthetrum Réticulé.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 12:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cionus 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality: the animal seems sharp and that is what counts here, IMO. --Peulle 10:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Téléphore Balcon.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. --Basotxerri 21:58, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Carpocoris Juvénile 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support QI for me. --C messier 13:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Demi Deuil Sex 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:01, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Citron Rubus 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality and pleasant light and shade, including in the bokeh. -- Ikan Kekek 23:52, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Combe Pichon et Loire.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, Tournasol7 20:59, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tabac Espagne 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ermell 12:34, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fourmi Régal-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 Done @Ezarate I did, but I can't really reduce noise without adding some other artefacts... It were very bad light conditions.--MirandaAdramin 07:51, 24 June 2017 (UTC) So I'm neutral, another reviewer please QICbot (talk) besides the noise it's a great photo with high quality. In my opinion it meets QI criteria. --J. Lunau 18:02, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Piérides

Bonjour, c'est encore moi, ces trois piérides 1 2 3 sont de la rave :-) --LamBoet (talk) 07:35, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LamBoet Bonjour, c'est toujours un plaisir ! Ok. Je fais donc basculer vers Pieris Rapae... Mais comment diable les distinguez-vous ? :-D --MirandaAdramin (talk) 09:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sous cet angle, la plupart du temps, l'identification se joue au niveau de la forme de la tache apicale noire. Ici, cette tache n'est ni en forme de faux (P. brassicae), ni accompagnée de traces sombres au bout de chaque nervure (P. napi), ni ne descend jusqu'à la nervure 4 (P. mannii, plus difficile). Bonne soirée --LamBoet (talk) 16:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LamBoet Merci pour ces précieuses informations ! Les pieris croisent souvent mon objectif, me voilà armée pour les reconnaître maintenant ;-) --MirandaAdramin (talk) 17:46, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

C'est avec plaisir ; je viens aussi de repenser à ce document qui pourrait vous aider :-) --LamBoet (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LamBoet Excellent ! Je le garde précieusement en onglet :-) Merci encore. --MirandaAdramin (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Asilinae Loire.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. PumpkinSky 00:51, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tourbière St Régis du Coin 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --XRay 18:33, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tristan Tourbière 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 10:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pyrale Condamine.jpg

Bonjour MirandaAdramin, celui-là n'est pas un Crambidae, sauf erreur cela doit être Scythris scopolella. Bonne soirée --LamBoet (talk) 16:49, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir LamBoet. Merci pour cette indication, j'avais tourné en rond (comme les papillons...) dans les Crambidae sans trouver un satisfaisant... et pour cause ! Je corrige la description, mais est-ce que ça reste une pyrale ? Faut-il que je renomme aussi le fichier ? J'avoue que je suis perdue dans ces espèces tentaculaires ;-) --MirandaAdramin (talk) 21:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Le mot pyrale ne concerne que les Pyralidae et les Crambidae, tandis que cette espèce fait partie des Scythrididae, donc c'est mieux de renommer. Je ne sais pas si elle a un nom français. Oui, je m'y perds souvent aussi : ces microlépidoptères sont moins bien connus/documentés... --LamBoet (talk) 00:45, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Voilà qui est demandé ! Merci pour votre vigilance ! --MirandaAdramin (talk) 06:34, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Abeille Cirse 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 quality. --Poco a poco 20:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Condamines Gorges Essalois Grangent Plaine.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, Tournasol7 20:40, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Condamines Essalois Grangent.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, Tournasol7 20:44, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sauterelle Nymphe 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cvmontuy 19:52, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Trompettes Virginie Condamine.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. PumpkinSky 12:19, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jacobée Tyria Condamine.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. Slightly low DOF, but sharp where it matters. QI for me. --Shankar Raman 04:21, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Asiatique Verrières.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 and QI -- Spurzem 12:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hibiscus Verrières.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Doryphore Verrières 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality -- PumpkinSky 22:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mélitée Orangé Verrières 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality -- PumpkinSky 22:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Demi Deuil Vipérine Verrières.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. --Vengolis 07:47, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Demi Deuil Verrières.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Acidalie Tourbière 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zygène Diaphane Verrières.jpg

Bonjour MirandaAdramin, qu'est-ce qui vous fait identifier celle-ci comme Z. minos ? (Cette espèce est réputée indiscernable de Z. purpuralis sur photo). --LamBoet (talk) 02:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour LamBoet. J'ai suivi une clé d'identification puis comparé longuement des galeries de minos et de purpuralis et ai constaté que les tâches rouges étaient plus nettes sur minos... Maintenant que vous me le dites, j'avoue ne plus être très sûre ;-) Je vais mettre les deux espèces dans la fiche descriptive. --MirandaAdramin (talk) 13:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Thymelicus Verrières 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
Done Ooops ! This is what happens when you use copy-paste... Thank you for your review ! --MirandaAdramin 18:26, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good quality. Tad low DOF but still QI IMO. --Shankar Raman 01:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Téléphores Verrières 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 Comment. Can you reduce noise?--Famberhorst 16:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done I did, but I don't want to create new artefacts. I let you judge the result. --MirandaAdramin 18:26, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support--Famberhorst 16:37, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cétoine Grise Verrières 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 QI for me --Alandmanson 11:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Euphorbe Réveil Matin Verrières.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 me --Alandmanson 11:59, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Thomise Verrières 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 {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lygus Cirse Verrières 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Alandmanson 13:07, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Arlequins Verrières.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. --Ralf Roletschek 22:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sangle Hurtières Voironnais.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. -- PumpkinSky 02:44, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cret Hurtières Grenoble.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. -- PumpkinSky 02:44, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 02 Centaurée Montagne.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. --Funcrunch 17:12, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Volucelle Transparente.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. Charlesjsharp 11:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gentiane Champêtre Pistils 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 quality. PumpkinSky 21:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tachinaire Sauvage 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 21:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zygène Transalpine.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. PumpkinSky 23:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pachyta 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 23:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dianthus 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 quality. PumpkinSky 16:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bourget vers Chartreuse 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 The same dust spot here, too. If you can, you could try to remove the haze a bit (although already good enough for a QI). --Basotxerri 16:44, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thanks. I fixed the dust spot but I don't understand what you mean for "haze". --MirandaAdramin 17:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@MirandaAdramin: Je me réfère à la brume, peut-être on la peut réduire (augmenter la clarité). Good quality anyway. --Basotxerri 18:49, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Canal Savières Chanaz Passerelle 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 quality. PumpkinSky 16:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Canal Savières D18 Peupleraie.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. PumpkinSky 16:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Canal Savières frontière Savoie Ain.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 is a dust spot in the sky, could you remove it, please? --Basotxerri 16:42, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps FP after dust spot fix? PumpkinSky 16:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thanks ! --MirandaAdramin 17:16, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For nominating at FPC, I would crop a bit of the right border (for removing the cut-off house). Good quality. --Basotxerri 18:51, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ecluse Canal Savières 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 15:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belledonne Lac de Sitre.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 panorama. Maybe you can add a "Panorama" template to description? --Shansov.net 18:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your report. I didn't know this template. I'll use it ! --MirandaAdramin 20:47, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Montée Crozet Nuages Chartreuse.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. --Aeou 17:54, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cret Hurtière Cirque Sure.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:04, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pic St Mury Vallée Grésivaudan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marlhes Eglise St Saturnin Chevet Ville.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, Tournasol7 21:40, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Riotord St Jean Baptiste Façade Ouest.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 Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 05:08, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Riotord St Jean Fronton Détail.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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lapte Eglise St Jean Nef Voute.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. --Ercé 06:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cimetière Cret Roc Moïse.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. --Piotr Bart 16:20, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cimetière Cret Roc tranchant.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 Foto could have been sharper in its entirety with a different f number. But good enough for me.--Famberhorst 15:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cimetière Cret Roc Tempier.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. --Eatcha 20:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Cité design Entrée Biennale Tunnel.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:33, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Cartonnages stéphanois 04.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:09, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Couriot Salle Pendus Cadenas large.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 Quality photo. --Acabashi 15:49, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Couriot Atelier Locomotives.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. --Ermell 19:05, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lampisterie Atelier Lampes anciennes.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 br/> Support Quality photo. --Acabashi 15:50, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chevalement Ascenseurs.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 br/> Support Quality photo. --Acabashi 15:50, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chevalement Voies Frontale.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 An excellent photo --Michielverbeek 17:17, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chevalement Face.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 --Michielverbeek 07:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nivolas Monument Morts Clocher.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. --Poco a poco 08:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vermelle Vallon Chapelle.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 QI but the file size is too big. In mz 50 MPx images mostly you cannot see a difference of quality if I go bigger than 10 MByte --Poco a poco 08:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chevalement Pano SO.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Maubec Pano Alpes.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 If you delete these dust spots, it will be a good QI --PtrQs 14:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thanks ! I think I got 'em all.--MirandaAdramin 20:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You have - nice snowy mountains with eagle. --PtrQs 23:24, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ste Anne Perspective.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. --Poco a poco 08:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ste Anne Champ 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chezeneuve Colza 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Michielverbeek 08:55, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can you please delete these 5-7 dust spots? Thank you in advance. --PtrQs 14:28, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thank you ! I hope I got 'em all too.--MirandaAdramin 20:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vermelle Saint Blaise Abside Sud Chandelier Vierge.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. --Poco a poco 08:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Artas Vaches 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Seven Pandas 22:09, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Maubec Paturages Alpes.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. FP? --Seven Pandas 22:09, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Champs Aboen.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. --Seven Pandas 22:09, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This is lovely and has a wonderful sensibility like that of good landscape painters. I think it's better than the other one, but I'm guessing it might fail at Featured Picture Candidates because the scene is "too ordinary" or because some people don't like where the shadows are or something. Either way, though, I think it's great. -- Ikan Kekek 05:04, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your comment, Ikan Kekek. Concerning FP, I prefer right now let more practiced eyes decide ;-)
Comment @MirandaAdramin Lovely, I'd support this at FPC. --Podzemnik 00:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:45, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vermelle Église Chevet Cimetière.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
Needs a perspective correction, on the left there is a lens flare and at least one dust spot --Poco a poco 08:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review but the perspective correction would be too artificial : the church is on a tumulus, there is no close point of view which suppose vertical lines. I cleaned up the dusts. The flare is a wink ;-)--MirandaAdramin 09:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A wink? the image is not a QI with that imperfection. Regarding the perspective, I do see room for applying it. This image is not a QI to me like this. --Poco a poco 10:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't say it's not possible to correct perspective (you can see it here), just that it is inaccurate. This one is simply not a QI. Thank you for your review.--MirandaAdramin 21:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Helene, for me your corrected version is ok. Very beautiful shot of this church. --Tournasol7 12:39, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tournasol7, thank you for your comment. Do you know this church ? Don't you think the corrected perspective distort the real building's proportions ? --MirandaAdramin 08:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As the horizon line is at, or below, the base of the church, it certainly would distort proportion and give the upper part of the building an unnatural bloated appearance. --Acabashi 10:53, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, perfect. Thank you for this precious comment, Acabashi. I will think about it.--MirandaAdramin 10:20, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sanzieux Orge Cordeau.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. --Podzemnik 01:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sanzieux Orge Perspective.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. --Podzemnik 01:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Les Massards Blé Seigle.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. --Podzemnik 01:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Les Massards Labour Centre.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. --Podzemnik 01:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Meyrieu Eglise Mur Chevet Galets.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. --Podzemnik 01:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Earth France 2019 a commencé !

Bonjour ,

J'ai le plaisir de vous annoncer que la cinquième édition du concours Wiki Loves Earth en France est ouverte !

Le concours concernera 368 zones de toute la France, des parcs nationaux jusqu’aux réserves naturelles régionales englobant ainsi des paysages et biotopes variés.

Pendant le mois de mai, n'hésitez pas à mettre en ligne des photos de ces zones que vous auriez sur vos disques durs ou à vous rendre dans une zone concernée près de chez vous (à l'aide de la carte). Le règlement est disponible sur la page du concours.

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé de commonistes, d'acteurs de l'environnement et de photographes professionnels. Un jury international constituera ensuite une sélection des meilleures photographies mondiales. Vous pourrez retrouver toutes les informations détaillées sur le site du concours

P.S. : si vous ne pouvez pas participer au concours cette année, faites passer le message autour de vous pour que de nouveaux et nouvelles photographes rejoignent l'aventure !

Bonne journée, Sarah Krichen WMFr (talk) 08:58, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Désert Rousseau Sud Serpent Roche.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. Sunny areas are a little bit too bright. --XRay 03:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chemin du Sabot Panorama Est N.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 photo. --Acabashi 21:39, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ferme des Visons Arbre Lumière.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 photo. --Acabashi 21:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ferme des Visons Panorama.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 photo. --Acabashi 21:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tour Sans Venin Chapelle Contrebas.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 photo. --Acabashi 21:38, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Désert Rousseau Cœur Haut.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:06, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Désert Rousseau Cœur Rideau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Désert Rousseau Cœur Lumière.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support OK. --C messier 17:57, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pano Saint Etienne Ouest Deschanel.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 and very large resolution. --Tournasol7 14:44, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Soleymieux Monument Morts.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. --ArildV 09:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Margerie Plaine Pneus.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. --Manfred Kuzel 10:49, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marols Chemin Genet.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. --Manfred Kuzel 10:51, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marols Pre.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. --Podzemnik 08:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marols Toit Plaine Lumier.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. --Carlos yo 20:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tour Sans Venin Chapelle Pano.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, just the perspective correction to improve. --Tournasol7 14:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The horizon line is at the eave of the bell gable, everything below it is kicked-in perspective. I've taken the file and forced it into the typical unnatural/unrealistic parallels and all the salient parts remain. MirandaAdramin may want to apply a distorted rendering, but I'll leave it in those hands. Thanks. --Acabashi 16:00, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just found your review. I tried to correct distorsion and uploaded a new version. You can see it in the file's history. Unfortunately, the thumbnail is not the good one ; I don't know what happened. Thanks.--MirandaAdramin 11:26, 14 May 2019 (UTC) Support To me it looks like a QI. --Milseburg 20:48, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chapellerie Expo Temporaire.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. --Tournasol7 22:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chapellerie Cour Flechet.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. --Tournasol7 22:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chapellerie Coursives.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. --Manfred Kuzel 07:57, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chapellerie Douves Machines.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. --Manfred Kuzel 08:01, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chapellerie Pano.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. --Manfred Kuzel 08:01, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Affiche Cadeaux.jpg

File:Affiche Cadeaux.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:44, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chapellerie Transformation Appropriage Formes 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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 08:09, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 15 Vaujany Aiguillettes Détail Ombre Plissée Theatre.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. --Tournasol7 13:13, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sentier Cochettes Gouffre.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. --Tournasol7 13:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cabane Sabot.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 14:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sentier Cochette Moutons.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. --Ermell 07:27, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sentier Cochettes Lac Panorama.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. Très belle photo, ça donne envie d'aller là-bas :) --Tournasol7 13:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merci Tournasol7! Balcon magnifique, à pratiquer uniquement par temps sec ;-) --MirandaAdramin 07:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments France 2019

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est de retour et ouvert jusqu'à 31 septembre ! Déjà 8310 photos ont été importés cette année, vous aussi rejoignez le concours !

Le concours concerne tous les monuments présents dans la base Mérimée (qu'ils soient classés, inscrits ou simplement classés). De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la chapelle au coin de la rue aux mégalithes en forêt, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Où que vous soyez il y a des monuments autour de chez vous. Enfin, vous pouvez mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments. Pour information, le règlement est disponible sur le site du concours. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international sélectionnera ensuite des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France les années précédentes. Si vous avez déjà ou si ne pouvez pas participer au concours cette année, faites passer le message autour de vous pour que de nouveaux et nouvelles photographes rejoignent l'aventure !

Bonne journée,

Sarah Krichen WMFr et Nicolas Vigneron, pour l'équipe de Wiki Loves Monuments France, 14:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Ste Anne Perspective.jpg, that you uploaded is now assessed as one of the finest pictures on Wikimedia Commons, the nomination is available at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ste Anne Perspective.jpg. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate, please do so at this nomination page.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Panorama sur Quaix et le Néron.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 and nice composition. If you take this kind of photo with less glare, it might be a good Featured Picture candidate. -- Ikan Kekek 06:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plus que quelques jours pour participer à Wiki Loves Monuments France !

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est ouvert pour une semaine encore, jusqu'au 30 septembre. Déjà plus de 6 000 photos ont été importées cette année alors vous aussi rejoignez le concours ! Cette campagne de contribution concerne tous les monuments et objets mobiliers présents dans la base Mérimée et dans la base Palissy. De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la verrière décorative au reliquaire, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Vous pouvez dès à présent mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments et objets du patrimoine français. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international constituera ensuite une sélection des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:MirandaAdramin

Quality Image Promotion

Pistolet Treuille Beaulieu 1854

Image du jour de Wiki Loves Earth 2017 en France, 27 May 2017

Quality Image Promotion

File:Mégère.jpg et File:Mégère 2.jpg

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

File:Pieride.jpg

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Piérides

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Wiki Loves Earth France 2019 a commencé !

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Wiki Loves Monuments France 2019

FP Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Plus que quelques jours pour participer à Wiki Loves Monuments France !

Navigation menu

Search