User talk:Albertus teolog/Archiwum3

Nominacje do VI

Cześć. Fajnie, że zacząłeś nominować swoje zdjęcia do VI. Pamiętaj o tym, że w scope dużych obiekktów, jak kościoły i kamienice powinien być podany kierunek, z którego zostało zrobione zdjęcie, a jeżeli w nazwie kategorii, nie ma nazwy miasta, to trzeba ją dopisać w scope. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cieszyn Studnia Trzech Braci 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. Even, when the background is a bit dark. --Hubertl 22:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bratyslawa Cumil.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jacek Halicki 11:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment The picture is not bad but you got a big problem contrast and RGB curve. But it is easy to fix. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:22, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
  
•  Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC) I corrected this picture. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:11, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Very good (@Jacek Halicki: If you modified a picture you should not vote. But thank you for doing. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

  I didn't now. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

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

review

 Comment It should bring up the name of the city in the scope. It is recommeded to give orientaion of sight; because in the scope that you porposes this picture is not the best to understand the building. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
*  Comment I'm confused Didier. You told me that it was not necessary for this image to have the city name in the scope. --Charles (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 Support I corrected the scope. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 Support Interesting building. --Mile (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment @Charlesjsharp: It is necessary that the place should easily identifiable. Either because it is in the scope or in the legend in English. In this case it was not in one or the other. Now it's perfect.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

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

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:26, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Я считаю твой фото "Чумил" хорошое для фото дня - будет на Википедии Сербии 15.6. у виду "фото дня". Я смотрел Чумила в Омске, Россия. пока --Mile (talk) 06:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

Previous reviews

•  Info Opened for MVR, because there is image within the same scope. --Halavar (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Close race, but the composition and framing is best on this one, although the light is better on the alternative. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support I agree with Slaunger.--Jebulon (talk) 09:31, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

1. Commons:Valued image candidates/Studnia Trzech Braci 2.JPG: +1 
2. Commons:Valued image candidates/Cieszyn Studnia Trzech Braci 2.JPG: +2<--
=>
File:Studnia Trzech Braci 2.JPG: Declined and demoted to VI-former.
File:Cieszyn Studnia Trzech Braci 2.JPG: Promoted.<--

--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support, best in scope (I had to look up the meaning of tympanon!). I wonder if you could add more detail to the image's English description too to further educate me please? I see "1300" in the Polish description, is that the date of this? DeFacto (talk). 21:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment Done Albertus teolog (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

 Comment, thanks for making that detail accessible to a much wider audience. DeFacto (talk). 06:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 22:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:52, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 18:53, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 18:51, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wloclawek - kosciol Witalisa.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:12, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Albertus teolog,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2017! ;)

		* * * * * * * Happy Holidays 2017 ! * * * * * * *
		* Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! * Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! * Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! * Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! * ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! * Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:23, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bydgoszcz - Pod trzema orłami 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 00:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)