User talk:Tuxyso/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 9

Warburg

Hallo Tuxyso, pardon, dass ich Deine perfekten Bilder nach Thüringen verfrachtet habe. Bei den Geodaten habe ich "Warburg" zu schnell als "Wartburg" gelesen. (und das, als ehemaliger Schüler aus Ostwestfalen). Grüße. Orchi (talk) 15:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die Rückmeldung und Kategorisierung. Wie hattest du die neuen Fotos eigentlich so schnell gefunden? Hattest du die anderen Orchideen-Fotos auch entdeckt? z.B. dieses File:Orchis-mascula-Formation.jpg? Falls du als Orchideen-Experte noch etwas verwenden bzw. einbauen möchtest, kannst du ja noch mal einen Blick in meine aktuelle Dateiliste werfen. Ich selbst fotografiere "nur" und hätte diese wunderschönen Pflanzen ohne die Hilfe eines befreundeten Biologen dort nie entdeckt und auch nicht korrekt klassifizieren können. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

...ich habe Dein Bild in die gallery übernommen. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Besten Dank. Dann noch weiterhin frohes Schaffen! --Tuxyso (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadtpanorama-Warburg-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 21:10, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Blick-ueber-Altstadt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 21:10, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Marktplatz-Marienbrunnen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --NorbertNagel 20:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Altstadtkirche-St. Mariä Heimsuchung.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Malchen53 14:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick-auf-Warburg-Landschaft.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Christian Ferrer 12:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis-mascula-Pflanze-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 --Malchen53 13:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Panorama-von-Fuegeler-Kanone.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Florstein 16:47, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Blick-auf-Ev-Altstadtkirche-Marianum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis-mascula-Pflanze.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 QI, --Arcalino 09:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis-mascula-Formation.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Switzerland II (ship, 1991) 018.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Orchids.

Hi. I don't know the legislation in Germany concerning rare and/or protected species, but I think it might be better not to give the exact coordinates of orchids. Unscrupulous people travel far to dig up rare plants. (I use e.g. File:Dactylorhiza incarnata f. rosea (flower spike).jpg or File:Neotinea ustulata (plants).jpg). Regards.  B.p. 07:47, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I have thought about it for a moment. What do you think are "exact corrdinates"? The coordinates I used for the orchids are all the same and are about 500 metre from the real place. The orchids are located on grassland and not near a footpath thus I think without exact coordindates you have no possibility to find them. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

That's already a good move but I personally would even widen that area. I'm quite good a spotting stuff and then I'm only interested in the photograph... Maybe it also might depend on the species.  B.p. 09:05, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

...ich persönlich halte nicht viel von sehr genauen Angaben seltener Arten (nicht nur Orchideen). Grabelöcher sprechen eine eindeutige Sprache. User:Biopics, der von mir auch schon einige Infos über Vorkommen von Orchideen auf Mallorca erhielt, hat die Geodaten ziemlich ungenau gemacht. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 10:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Gut, dann werde ich mich heute Abend mal dransetzen und die Koordinaten noch etwas ungenauer machen. Allerdings finde ich schon, dass man grob wissen sollte, wo die Orchidee zu finden ist. Allerdings sind die Informationen auf den Standort ohnehin öffentlich zugänglich (und auf etlichen anderen Seiten). --Tuxyso (talk) 11:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

@Biopics / Orchid: Thanks a lot for your hint. I've modified the metadata and file description to the next larger town (Warburg). --Tuxyso (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Great! Much appreciated.  B.p. 18:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Philipp Wendler

Hallo Tuxyso! Ich denke, dass es bei meinen Bildern grundlegende Auffassungsunterschiede gibt. Ich mache im Regelfall „Porträts“ während des (Fußball)spiels oder während des Aufwärmens vor dem Spiel machen. Da hat ein Spieler weder Zeit, noch Muße, sich dem Fotografen zu stellen, da er auf das Spiel konzentriert ist. Wenn Du es so bezeichnen willst, sind diese Bilder Live-Porträts. Daher mache ich die Bilder auch bei gutem Wetter wegen der Bewegungsunschäfe im Sportmodus. Mir bleibt nur ein Sekundenbruchteil, um ein gutes Biuld zu machen. Ein Fußballstadion ist eben kein Fotostudio, wo man mit Lichtwanne, Stativ und anderen Utensilien so lange feilen kann, bis man einen „fehlerfreies“ (aber völlig unnatürliches) Bild in höchster Auflösung hat. Diese Bilder sind auch nicht reproduzierbar, wie gestellte Aufnahmen. Ich versuche den Menschen so abzubilden, wie er in der momentanen Situation ist. Es ist wirklich schwierig, mit Fotografen die Qualität zu beurteilen, die noch niemals versucht haben, solche Bilder zu machen. Wie schon einmal betont, wieviele gute Bilder von Sportlern, insbesondere Porträts haben wird denn auf commons? Ich denke, dass es wirklich besser sein wird, meine Bilder nicht mehr zur Diskussion zu stellen, denn die Bemerkungen nerven und diskreditieren die Arbeit, die man sich macht. Ich bin keineswegs von mir eingenommen, aber Du darfst mir glauben, dass ich mit 22-jähriger semiprofessioneller Fotografie (Nebejob) für Zeitungen, Zeitschriften und Bücher einiges an Erfahrung mitbringe... – Gruß --Steindy (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Ich habe eben die Kadidatur zurückgezogen und hoffe damit, dass alle zufrieden sind. --Steindy (talk) 22:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Steindy! Ich habe befürchtet, dass du dich nach der Bewertung direkt wieder ärgern wirst und deine Arbeit diskreditiert siehst, dich angegriffen fühlst und auf deine Erfahrung berufst - schalte das doch mal aus und bleibe bei dem Foto und der Aufnahmesituation und der Frage, ob man es hätte besser machen können. Ich versuche in der Regel (auch wenn du meinst ich könnte das alles nicht beurteilen) mit viel Fingerspitzengefühl zu bewerten. Ich bin völlig auf deiner Seite, dass man währened des Spiels sicher nicht mit ISO 100 fotografieren kann. Da nur immer nur "Sportmodus" schreibst kann ich nur über deine Kamera-Einstellungen mutmaßen: Ich tippe auf Auto-ISO um auf 1/1250 oder noch kürzer. Ich sehe bei deinem Foto überhaupt gar keinen Unterschied zu einem Spontan-Porträt-Foto, das z.B. von Gästen auf einer Hochzeit oder Familienfeier entsteht (außer das der Fotografierte hier ein Trikot anhat). Sportfotografie ist es ja nicht automatisch sobald du den Rasen betrittst. Aus naheliegenden Gründen kann ich die Fotos hier nicht zeigen, kann dir aber versichern, dass diese nicht mit > ISO 2000 bei > 1/1250 sec gemacht sind, insbesondere nicht, wenn ich daußen fotografiere. Auf QI muss man die Fotos im Kontext der Aufnahmesituation sehen. In Fall von Philipp Wendler ist der Sportmodus (was immer das bei dir ist, das verrätst du ja nicht) schlicht die falsche Einstellung, trotz deiner umfangreichen Erfahrung. Ich habe das Foto nicht als QI gesehen, weil du sehr leicht mit einer anderen Kameraeinstellung (nein, keine 1D + 10000 EUR Tele) ein deutlich besseres Foto hinbekommen hättest. Eine Möglichkeit, wie es professionelle Fotografen z.B. auch auf Hochzeiten nicht selten machen, wäre z.B. mit einem zweiten Body unterwegs zu sein (einer mit Tele und "Sporteinstellung", einer mit guter FB für solche Fotos). Bei Nikon würde im Prinzip sogar eine Kamera reichen, weil du mit einem Dreh zwischen zwei User-Modi U1 und U2 wechseln kannst, da könntest du dann Auto ISO für 1/1250 sec für die Aufnahmen im Spiel und Auto ISO 1/160sec für die Aufnahmen am Spielfeldrand einstellen.
Um eine Analogie aus der Tierwelt zu bedienen: Einen Adler im Flug fotografiere ich ja auch anders als einen Adler im Sitzen oder einen Ara im Sitzen. Ich muss nicht auf ISO 1000 (oder mehr) und einem 500mm Tele gehen, nur weil es "Vogelfotografie" ist. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Tuxyso! Wenn Du von ISO 2000 + 1/1250 sec schreibst und Du die Situation (Bewegungsabläufe) mit einem Hochzeitsfoto gleichsetzt, dann erübrigt es sich, hier weiter zu diskutieren. Ich schleppe auch keinen zweiten Body herum und habe auch keine fünf Objektive zur Auswahl, sondern begnüge mich mit zwei Objektiven. Ich bin Pensionist und muss mit meinem Geld haushalten, wo mir die Familie und Haus und Garten wichtiger sind. Idch gebe auch so schon genug Geld für die Fahrtkosten bei den Fototouren aus. Also sucht euch auf commons eure „Profis“, die kostenlos ihre Bilder zur Verfügung stellen, denn die gehen ja nicht ins Stadion, um dort ihr Geld zu verdienen, sondern um die „Qualitätsansprüche“ der Kritiker zu befriedigen.

Er herzliches Dankeschön für die „sachlichen“ Ausführungen! --Steindy (talk) 09:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC) Übrigens reicht die Qualität meiner Bilder immer noch aus, um immer die Bilder immer wieder einem Freund, der eine Fotoagentur betreibt, zur Verfügung zu stellen; und dies kostenlos, da ich aufgrund der Ruhensbestimmungen maximal 83 Euro monatlich dazu verdienen dürfte.

Bitte lies noch mal genau, was ich geschrieben habe. Kurze Preisinfo: Gebrauche EOS 450d + 50mm/1.8 liegt bei 200 EUR, also durchaus überschaubar. Bei Herrn Wendler von schnellen Bewegungsabläufen zu sprechen, verstehe ich allerdings immer noch nicht. Das Foto ist nichts anderes als ein Spontanfoto eines Party-Gasts auf einer beliebigen Feier, der kurz in die Kamera guckt. Dass deine Fotos gut und wertvoll sind, bezweifelt doch auch niemand. Gemessen an den Kriterien auf QIC handelt es sich bei Herrn Wendler nicht um ein Qualitätsfoto. Wenn du das anders siehst: CR. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Denkst Du wirklich, dass ich, als erfahrener Fotograf, Deine Weiheiten benötige? Du kennst nicht die Bedingungen, unter denen wir unsere Bilder machen müssen, nimmst Dir aber heraus, Ratschläge zu erteilen. Abgesehen davon, dass Dir ein 50-mm-Objektiv genau gar nichts nutzen würde, wenn die Spieler zumindest 20 Meter von Dir entfernt sind – weil Du das Spielfeld vor, während und nach dem Spiel keinesfalls(!) betreten darfst, darfst Du auch den TV-Kameras nicht im Weg stehen – würdest Du sofort die große Tiefenschärfe, die bei solchen Bildern genau nicht erwünscht ist, beklagen. Es ist aber zwecklos mit Dir darüber zu diskutieren, da Du immer alles besser weißt als ich, der Woche für Woche damit konfrontiert bin. Ich werde weiterhin in Bruchteilen von Sekunden meine schlechten Fotos ohne wesentliche Nachbearbeitungen am PC machen; mache Du deine QI-Bilder mit Stativ und verschiedenen Kameraeinstellungen sowie umfangreichen Nachbearbeitungen am PC. Ich geniere mich auch nicht meiner Fotos – Beispiel 1, Beispiel 2 (jene, die eine Bildnummer haben, sind von mir, die anderen von Fotografen, die von Wikimedia Österreich gefördert wurden) – und werde auch weiterhin meinen „Pixelmüll“ hier abliefern. – Gruß Steindy (talk) 12:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Offensichtliche technische Unzulänglichkeiten deiner Fotos mit autoritärer Tonlage (wie gerade hier eindrucksvoll vorgeführt) zu überspielen ist ganz schlechter Stil und zieht bei mir nicht. Deswegen betrachte ich die Diskussion gerne als beendet. Wenn du sowieso alles weißt und kannst frage ich mich allerdings, wieso du dich überhaupt in die Niederungen von QI herabbegibst, um dich über Bewertungen von drittklassigen Fotografen (wie mir) aufzuregen und Leute zu beschimpfen (noch mal schlechter Stil). Mal im Ernst: Welchen Sinn macht es deine Fotos auf QI zu nominieren, wenn du zukünftig weder vorhast deine Aufnahmetechnik zu verbessern / zu verändern, oder Fotos, die knapp an QI vorbeigehen via Bildbearbeitung zu verbessern? Meine Auffassung von QI und Wiki im Allgemeinen ist, dass man voneinander lernt und kritikfähig ist - beides sehe ich bei dir nicht. Unterlasse bitte zukünftig persönliche Attacken wie auch schon auf der Benutzerseite von Manuela (damals noch gegen Manuela und nicht gegen mich), sonst würde ich nicht zurückschrecken, deine Attacken an entsprechender Stelle zu melden.
Nachtrag (da du das Bild auf CR verändert hast): Dazu bestand bisher gar kein Grund, weil ich nur ein Kommentar abgegeben habe, das Bild aber nicht abgelehnt habe. Damit aber nun alles seinen korrekten Weg geht, habe ich ein  Oppose-Vote hinzugefügt, damit das formale Prozedere nun korrekt ablaufen kann. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

„Bewertungen von drittklassigen Fotografen (wie mir)...“ Wenn Du Dir den Schuh anziehen möchtest...

„...via Bildbearbeitung zu verbessern“ Hat das auch mit Fotografie zu tun? Ich dachte wir beurteilen die fotografischen Leistungen und nicht, wer Bildbearbeitungsprogramme besser beherrscht.

„...sonst würde ich nicht zurückschrecken, deine Attacken an entsprechender Stelle zu melden.“ Mache, was Du nicht lassen kannst. EOD --Steindy (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathausmarkt-Rathaus-Abend-2013.jpeg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Better now, QI in spite of minor CA --Poco a poco 10:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus-Nordseite-Strassenansicht-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 10:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Restaurant-Ratskeller-Muelheim-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 10:21, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Muelheim-Loehberg-Loehstrasse-Droeppelminna-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 10:21, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus-Muelheim-Nordseite-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- Arcalino 09:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brunnen-Droeppelminna-Muelheim-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well-chosen position, less DOF would have been nice, but is difficult --Smial 10:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC) I agree with you, but you are very restricted here to get reasonable light and perspective on the fountain and a background which distracts not too much (take a look on the coordindates). --Tuxyso 10:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus-Muelheim-Nordseite-Friedrich-Ebert-Strasse-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 14:41, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altstadtkirche St. Maria in vinea in Warburg 03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Christian Ferrer 17:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sackturm-Warburg-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 16:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Diemel-bei-Warburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 19:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Eckmaennecken.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Moonik 13:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Altstadt-Marktplatz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Florstein 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis-mascula-Blueten-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. Please put Orchis mascula in italic type in the file descr. --Cayambe 19:47, 21 May 2013 (UTC)  DoneIs there a convention for it? --Tuxyso 06:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)  Comment Yes, it is the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. Only the names of species and genera are to be written in italic type (when the remaining text is in regular style). 'sp.' is not a species name. Regards, --Cayambe 14:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Nepomuk-Denkmal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Arcalino 08:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis tridentata-Blueten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 08:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Talbruecke-Twiste.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Coyau 23:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Blick-auf-Ev-Altstadtkirche-Marianum-v-Fuegeler-Kanone.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Dirtsc 16:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Warburg-Blick-auf-Rathaus-Neustadtkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 You're right, thanks. Please re-review. --Tuxyso 18:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ehemalige-Krupp-Hauptverwaltung-2013-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Arcalino 08:46, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! WAZ-Haus-Essen-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 09:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mausegattstrasse-47-Muelheim.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ehemalige-Krupp-Hauptverwaltung-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- George Chernilevsky 05:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick-auf-Essen-Hbf-Skyline-Abend-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 00:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Postbank-Hochhaus-Essen-Abend-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- George Chernilevsky 06:02, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis-mascula-Pflanze-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 --Rjcastillo 13:56, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis tridentata-Blueten-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 nice --A.Savin 11:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchis-mascula-Blueten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 21:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Junges-Warzenschwein-Zoo-Muenster-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Absolute QI imo.--ArildV 15:46, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche-St-Gertrud-Essen-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 21:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gnadenkirche-Heissen-Highres-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments But now... Good quality. --Cayambe 10:00, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Warburg-Panorama-von-Fuegeler-Kanone.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Warburg-Panorama-von-Fuegeler-Kanone.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm-Essen-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 16:26, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St-Antonius-Abbas-Kirche-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 09:08, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St.-Fronleichnam-Kirche-Essen-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 09:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Christuskirche-Essen-Altendorf-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 09:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Wiesentheid BW 2013-03-27 09-53-04.JPG

Hallo, das Motiv lag im Schatten und das Licht war nicht so doll. Das Histogramm war dann sehr schmall. Durch die starke Spreizung entstand dann wohl das Rauschen. Da hilft wahrscheinlich nur neu fotografieren. --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:14, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Das stimmt, da kommt schon mal schnell Rauschen ins Bild. Vor allem finde ich bei deutschen Gebäuden immer diese Netze fotografisch störend, aber da kannst du natürlich nichts für :) Ich kann gerne mal über das Foto schauen, wenn du mir das RAW schickst. Mich stört glaube ich am meisten das Farbrauschen. Vielleicht kann man da ja doch noch etwas machen. Anwendung extremer Rauchunterdrückung, die alle Details killt, ist natürlich keine Option. Email: [email protected] Grüße, --Tuxyso (talk) 08:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GFKL-Hochhaus-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mattbuck 17:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kreuzeskirche -Weberplatz-Essen-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 23:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kreuzeskirche -2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Limbecker-Platz-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 23:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Rheinbruecke-Emmerich-Panorama-2013.jpg

I use Hugin a lot and therefore I know, that sometimes it doesn't correct verticals as needed. So, I do it manually in Hugin ("drag and move" part if I remember correctly, you need some experience to do it correctly there) or use another program. Tilt on your image is not big, but imho the towers on the background must be vertical. Good luck, --Ivar (talk) 19:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

It's better, I see one stitching error. --Ivar (talk) 05:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I've again worked on it and nominated again. Please re-review and support if possible. Thnaks for your help. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Orchis tridentata-Blueten-2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Orchis tridentata-Blueten-2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss-Moyland-2013-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 21:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinbruecke-Emmerich-Panorama-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Moonik 06:42, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss-Moyland-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 06:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bahnhof-Emmerich-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 04:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St-Antonius-Abbas-Kirche-2013-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Dirtsc 17:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gebirgslori-Zoo-Muenster-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Hand is annoying, but nice sharpness on the head. --Mattbuck 17:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC) Why is the hand annoying? Have you read the description? You can go into the cage and fed the birds with honeypods. --Tuxyso 23:15, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss-Moyland-2013-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 08:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aldegundiskirche-Emmerich-Ostseite-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 08:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Martinikirche-Emmerich-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! U-Bahn-Heissen-Kirche-Markt-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Myrabella 06:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhein-Herne-Kanal-Abendstimmung-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Excellent mood, but are the shadows meant to be that dark? If so, it's probably promotable, but thought I should ask. Mattbuck 06:29, 13 June 2013 (UTC) Yes, I did it on purpose. Brightning the shadows would kill the mood here. There is still a brigther photo from a different perspective But in the case here I like the strong shadow-highlight contrast. --Tuxyso 07:44, 13 June 2013 (UTC) OK then. Mattbuck 16:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Petri-Kirche-Innen-Altar.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --JLPC 18:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 85mm-1.8-AF-D-diaphragm-blades.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 useful. --Kreuzschnabel 18:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Schloss-Moyland-2013-02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss-Moyland-2013-02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Plan Rathaus Mülheim von 1912 / Lizenzbaustein auf Commons?

Hallo Túrelio! Nachdem ich auf [1] keine wirklich befriedigende Antwort auf meine Frage bekommen habe, wende ich mich direkt an dich. Ich habe soeben unter [2] einen Plan des Rathaus Neubaus von Mülheim aus dem Jahr 1911 hochgeladen (vgl. auch dortige Quellenangabe). Der Plan stammt aus einem Buch aus dem Jahr 1912, der Urheber des Plans ist nicht bekannt, im Buch steht keine Quellenangabe dazu. Ich habe den Plan erst mal auf de-WP mit der Vorlage {{Bild-PD-alt-100}} hochgeladen. Nachdem ich mich nun noch mal durch etliche alte Bilder aus de:Essen und de:Mülheim an der Ruhr durchgeklickt habe, habe ich gesehen, dass wirklich niemand mehr Bilder auf de-WP hochlädt, sondern ähnliche Lizenzbausteine auf Commons verwendet. Deswegen meine Frage an dich:
Gibt es eine Commons-Vorlage, mit der ich den Plan auch auf Commons hochladen kann? Ich blicke bei der Vielzahl der Lizenzbausteine einfach nicht mehr durch. Danke schonmal + Grüße, --Tuxyso (talk) 10:24, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Du könntest es mal mit den Lizenzbausteinen wie in File:Karte von Berlin und Umgebung (1922) in 12 Blättern I Nauen.jpg versuchen, da beide ja durchaus ähnlich sind. --Túrelio (talk) 20:44, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die Info! Ich habe es gelesen, es aber noch nicht näher verarbeitet, deswegen auch noch nicht geantwortet. Ich finde die verschiedenen Lizenzbausteine z.T. recht verwirrend. Wenn man sich dann noch überlegen muss, ob man es Foto nur auf de-WP hochladen darf mach es das nur noch schlimmer. Teilweise widersprechen sich die Informationen auch. Gibt es denn eindeutig Fotos, die man, auch nach neusten Policies, nicht auf Commons hochladen darf? --Tuxyso (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

So etwas nettes File:PD-US table.svg gibt es für deutsches Urheberrecht m.W. bisher nicht (weil es halt keiner gemacht hat), obwohl sich ja auch in Deutschland die Schutzfristen im 20. Jahrhundert mehrfach geändert haben. Ich denke, dass die Lizenz-Kombi aus der o.g. Karte {{PD-Art-two|PD-Germany-§134|PD-1996}} bei deinen Karten auch gut passt. Davon abgesehen passiert ja nichts, wenn jemand meckert und es eben geändert werden muss. No risk, no fun ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 16:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Vielleicht sollte ich es einfach mal wagen, da hast du recht. Ich bin ein eher vorsichtiger Mensch und kläre gerne vor dem Upload alle Eventualitäten. Ggf. sollte ich mich auf die Selbstorganisationsfähigkeit des Wikipedia-Systems verlassen :) Danke auf jeden Fall für deine Hilfe und ermunternden Worte. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche-Zoutelande-2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kadellar 16:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bahnhof-Wattenscheid-Eingang-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herz-Jesu-Kirche-Sevinghausen-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 16:53, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen-Hauptbahnhof-Bahnsteig-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:16, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund-Hauptbahnhof-Abends-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Some noise but i think its a good choice here with all people to use fast shutter speed.--ArildV 06:34, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review. It was hand-held (shutter speed: focal length * 2; Auto ISO at 1/60). --Tuxyso 07:08, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund-Hauptbahnhof-Abends-2013-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Please remove some CA, otherwise QI imo.--ArildV 22:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)  Done Thanks for the hint. IMHO it is remarkable that an quite old Tokina 28mm RMC f2.8 (my to last noms) can produce such sharp photos. Please take another look. --Tuxyso 22:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC) I still see the same CA (even then i use a different browser, and reload). Maybe I have some problem with Commons, I will try again later. I have never used old Tokina-lenses, but Im very happy with my 30+ year old Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AI.--ArildV 22:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I don't know what went wrong with the upload. New version uploaded. --Tuxyso 06:09, 3 July 2013 (UTC)  Support --ArildV 06:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kreuzung-Friedrich-Ebert-Straße-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not very exciting, but good to go --Poco a poco 20:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Not every motive is exciting :) Also motives of medium interest should have a good quality. --Tuxyso 21:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Muelheim-Marina-Ruhrbanina-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Moonik 14:12, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! TU-Dortmund-Mathetower-Mensa-Emil-Figge-50-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 10:25, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barbarakirche-Innenraum-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Nino Verde 12:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tokina-28mm-RMC-f2.8-NikonF-Front.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Nino Verde 13:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tokina-28mm-RMC-f2.8-NikonF.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 22:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)  Comment Yes, now the focus is on the right place. Thank you! --Nino Verde 04:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Orchis-mascula-Formation.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Orchis-mascula-Formation.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Schweizerhaus Schloßpark Ritzebüttel 2013.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schweizerhaus Schloßpark Ritzebüttel 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support very nice --A.Savin 21:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cuxhavener-Kuestenheiden-Panorama-2013-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hamburger Leuchtturm Cuxhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 21:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hapag Hallen Cuxhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 21:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama-Zoo-am-Meer-Bremerhaven-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good quality imo. --JLPC 17:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Ritzebüttel Cuxhaven Nordseite 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Coyau 06:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kurhaus Döse 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Ritzebüttel Cuxhaven Eingangsportal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 11:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cuxhaven Hafenamt 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 08:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Einkaufsstraße Cuxhaven 2013 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 tilt correction at the left --A.Savin 14:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 21:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)  Support OK to me --A.Savin 08:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hapag Hallen Cuxhaven 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 tilt correction at the right --A.Savin 14:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 21:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)  Support QI --A.Savin 08:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Theodor-Heuss-Platz Bremerhaven 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 14:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zoo am Meer Bremerhaven Außenfassade 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 23:24, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Einkaufsstraße Cuxhaven 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good DOF and good quality--Lmbuga 23:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bürgermeister Smidt Straße Bremberhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--ArildV 09:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Theodor-Heuss-Platz Bremerhaven 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good -- George Chernilevsky 20:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Watt Reiten Sahlenburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Vassil 17:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Havenwelten Überblick Bremerhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Vassil 17:21, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hafenkontrollturm-Cuxhaven-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I'd probably up the contrast a bit, but good. --Mattbuck 08:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I've improved the contrast. Better? --Tuxyso 21:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg-Bederkesa-Ostfront-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Seems OK to me though the dark parts show some noise. --Dirtsc 18:02, 16 July 2013 (UTC) It was a difficult shooting situation: Contra-light. --Tuxyso 21:05, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seehunde Medemgrund Cuxhaven 2013 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Nice and QI--Lmbuga 22:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seehund Einzeltier Medemgrund Cuxhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Vassil 14:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good IMO--Lmbuga 11:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC) You beat me to it. Absolutely excellent. FP? --Mattbuck 11:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seehunde Medemgrund Cuxhaven 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Cute. --Mattbuck 10:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St.-Johannes-Bosco-Kirche Essen 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 22:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gedenkstein Park Schloss Ritzebüttel 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arabian Breeze in Cuxhaven 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 19:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arabian Breeze in Cuxhaven 2013 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 19:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Maria Rosenkranz Essen-Bochold 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:12, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cuxhaven Bahnhof Westseite 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 19:06, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche St. Joseph Nordfassade 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks like the denoising has gone too far here --A.Savin 18:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I've uploaded a new version with less denoising. IMHO level of detail is more than sufficient (look at the resolution). Please take another look. --Tuxyso 18:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC) OK to me --A.Savin 18:56, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama Sahlenburg am Morgen 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OH!, perhaps FP--Lmbuga 22:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the positive review. I will think about an FP candidature, but probably the light is not special (and good) enough. This photo has "only" a very high resolution. BTW: It is stitched from more than 30 single shots. --Tuxyso 05:37, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Nice view but the horizon seems to be a little tilted on the left side. The curved coast could be corrected in Photoshop for example. --Ximonic 09:30, 25 July 2013 (UTC) I think it depends on the kind if projection. All verticals are completely straight. --Tuxyso 21:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mützefeldwerft Schwimmdock mit Arbeitern 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 21:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kutterfisch Iris NC300 in Cuxhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 21:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Morus bassanus Zoo Bremerhaven 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Schweizerhaus Schloßpark Ritzebüttel 2013 edit (MK).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schweizerhaus Schloßpark Ritzebüttel 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Theodor-Heuss-Platz Bremerhaven 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Theodor-Heuss-Platz Bremerhaven 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schweizerhaus Schloßpark Ritzebüttel 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 10:26, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Bederkesa Steinplatte 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 14:50, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Realschule Cuxhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, but in my opinion it needs a bit less of perspective correction--Lmbuga 18:58, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amandus Abendroth Gymnasium Cuxhaven 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Perspective distortions --A.Savin 14:44, 27 July 2013 (UTC)  Done Thanks for the hint. Please take another look. Just forgotten the correction. --Tuxyso 15:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)  Support --A.Savin 15:24, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spathiphyllum-Flower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 13:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cactaceae Neobuxbaumia polylopha flower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teichfrosch Pelophylax esculentus Gruga 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 IMO --Christian Ferrer 07:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cactaceae Neobuxbaumia polylopha with flower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 03:37, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clerodendrum speciosissimum Tropenhaus Gruga.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 15:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teichfrosch Pelophylax esculentus Gruga 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Nice and QI--Lmbuga 15:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flower of Cleistocactus baumannii.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 11:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scadoxus multiflorus Blutblume 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Sputniktilt 18:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ronald Mc Donald Haus Essen 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok for me. --Sputniktilt 18:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nymphaea alba-Flower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 03:10, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Monsters of Liedermaching

Die Monsters sind eigentlich keine Band, sondern eine Kollaboration von sechs Liedermachern, die allesamt primär eigene Projekte verfolgen, Pense z.B. spielt u.a. auch Punk. Bei den Konzerten spielen die Leute auch überwiegend jeweils ihr eigenes Solo-Material, von den anderen Beteiligten gelegentlich mit Instrumenten und Show-Einlagen unterstützt. Inzwischen haben sie aber wohl auch einiges "gemeinsames" Band-Material entwickelt. Das Rio-Reiser-Festival ist völlig neu. Der Bruder von Rio lebt in Unna, letztes Jahr gab es ein kleines musikalisches Event zur Benennung des Rio-Reiser-Wegs, dieses Jahr ein eintägiges Open Air, in den kommenden Jahren soll es zweitägig laufen, aber das sehe ich noch nicht so sehr erfolgsversprechend. Unna ist einfach zu klein, zu sehr Provinz, keine studentische Szene, zu große Konkurrenz durch die benachbarten Großstädte. Abere ok, versuch macht kluch, besser, als wenn gar nichts passieren würde... -- Smial (talk) 09:10, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Du scheinst dich sehr gut in der Szene auszukennen - sieht man ja auch an deinen Fotointeressen :) Ist ja enorm, dass es inzwischen einen "Rio-Reiser-Weg" geht, das wußte ich nicht. Sind denn die "Monsters of Liedermaching" ähnlich gesellschaftskritisch wie seinerzeit die Scherben? --Tuxyso (talk) 17:13, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Ich bin zwar allgemein sehr musikinteressiert, habe aber tatsächlich keinerlei näheren Einblick in "die Szene". Allerdings forsche ich für meine Fotos recht ausführlich auf den diversen Seiten der Bands herum, die ich fotografiere, um bei den Bildbenennungen und -beschreibungen keinen Unfug zu fabulieren. Das ist auch einer der Gründe, warum ich mit den Uploads meiner Festivalsommerknipserei so furchtbar langsam zu Potte komme. Bandname und Datum reinschmeißen reicht mir nicht. Die Monsters stehen nach meinem Eindruck nicht in der kritischen Tradition der Scherben. Das geht bei denen von bissiger Satire über Alltagsthemen bis zu akustisch instrumentiertem Spaß-Punk. Bunter Strauß. -- Smial (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim Rathausmarkt Durchgang.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 23:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Bederkesa Steinplatte 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 12:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Don-Bosco-Gymnasium Essen 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 12:34, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasserfall Grugapark 2013 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 IMO. A bit of noise but I think that is a difficult image--Lmbuga 19:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC) It was difficult. I used a grey gradient filter for this image. The dynamic range of this motive was quite high. --Tuxyso 20:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grugapark Waldteich 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 17:,38 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasserfall Grugapark 2013 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Martin Falbisoner 05:39, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Acmella oleracea Grugapark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Martin Falbisoner 05:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Opuntia elatior with Flower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Slaunger 18:58, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teichfrosch Pelophylax esculentus Gruga 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fine. --Mattbuck 09:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Teichfrosch Pelophylax esculentus Gruga 003.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Teichfrosch Pelophylax esculentus Gruga 003.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Clerodendrum speciosissimum Tropenhaus Gruga.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Clerodendrum speciosissimum Tropenhaus Gruga.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Centro Promenade Abends 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 13:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Müga Wasserspiele 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 09:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick auf Ruhrbania von der Schloßbrücke 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Schönes Bild und gute Qualität. -- Spurzem 21:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Müga Wasserspiele sw 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schön gesehen und umgesetzt. --Ralf Roletschek 08:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brenntag AG Teilansicht 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Smial 01:58, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	An deinen Fotos gefällt mir besonders, wie du den Bildaufbau komponierst. Durchgehend sehr schön! Grosser Schlumpf (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Müga Wasserspiele sw 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Müga Wasserspiele sw 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Onam greetings!

Have a nice Onam tomorrow! JKadavoor Jee 17:18, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

OnaSadya

Thanks for your greetings. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sun rays at Hopi Point Grand Canyon 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Poco a poco 21:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Upper Antelope Canyon Stick 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Óðinn 22:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Upper Antelope Canyon 03 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Óðinn 22:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Upper Antelope Canyon 02 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Some noise in the shadows, but nevertheless QI for me. --Iifar 15:26, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bryce Amphitheater from Sunrise Point Highres 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very impressive! --Óðinn 04:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grand Canyon Hopi Point with rainbow 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Martin Falbisoner 11:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Diego Skyline Panorama 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 well done --Rjcastillo 00:32, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Deleting my photos

Who give you the right to delete my photos as Quality images candidates?? It's not right you know...

No one. I have no photo deleted. Just commented. If a photo disapperared on my action it was not on purpose. The same happened today with a comment of mine my Smial. Can you give me the diff then I take a look and undo the deletion. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:49, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list&diff=105310901&oldid=105310714 Time: 14:30

Halavar (talk) 13:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I've deleted it by accident. I have never seen the image before. Sorry. I've recovered it on QIC. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Joshua Tree Park approaching thunderstorm 03 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 impressive -- MJJR 18:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rocks at 17-Mile Drive 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Óðinn 14:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Joshua Tree Park approaching thunderstorm 02 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Óðinn 14:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Girl Posing at Glacier Point Yosemite 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kadellar 11:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yosemite Park in Evening Backlight 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --King of Hearts 08:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yosemite Half Dome from Valley 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! I was in Yosemite too recently. --King of Hearts 08:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC) I've seen from your contribs. My time there was unfortunately very limited (half of a day) :( Very nice there.--Tuxyso 08:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kalifornischer Ziesel Yosemite 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. It seems a BW picture. --Kadellar 11:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC) That was the interesting point with this photo. The animal was completely surronded by gray rocks. --Tuxyso 12:05, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Glen Canyon Dam 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 01:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wedding Skyline San Diego 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 10:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Upset

Hey,

IMO its arrogant, rude and patronizing to call people "upset" and ask them to be "keep cool and friendly". I was not upset, I answered your question and corrected the incorrect suggestion you made about my views on wow (and subjectivity). I also explained the historical relevance of the fort (since you seemed to question it, despite all the information given in both the nomination and the image's description. Why else use the words "if" and "really"?).

Best friendly non-upset regards, --ArildV (talk) 21:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Probably upset was the wrong word, I am no notive speaker. My point was that your suggestion to me to read the file description for historical relevance + your full cite was at least unnecessary because you made this argument already in a previous post. I felt somehow treated as stupid person who cannot read. You should know that I really appreciate your work and have often supported your FPCs. Everything OK / fine now?

Also non-upset regards, --Tuxyso (talk) 21:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you felt treated that way, it was definitely not my intention! I have great respect for you, and for your contribution to Commons. Everything is fine for me now, and I hope its fine for you also.--ArildV (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

The same for me, everything is fine. Language (especially a foreign one) is often open for misunderstandings. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:49, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Grand_Canyon_Powell_Point_Evening_Light_02_2013

* Hi! In my opinion, these highlights are not critical, and the picture looks more interesting )). --Aleks G 01:02, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

• And what are we doing now? What do you think about my new version? Still too dark? --Tuxyso (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
• Idea: Let lifar decide between the version. He has a very good vision for light. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)