User talk:Beyond silence

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to the Commons, Beyond silence!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−
Crystal Clear app korganizer.png First steps tutorial

Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy.

Icon apps query.svg Getting help

More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.

Transmission icon.png Goodies, tips and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities.
  • All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~
  • Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!)
  • To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg
  • If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper
Nuvola filesystems trashcan full.png Made a mistake?
  • Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}}
  • For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 19:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


Please reply to interactive messages at the location of the original topic to not scatter talk all around. I do have that page on my Watchlist. If I missed a comment of yours, please drop me a short reminder with a link.


Contents

Image:Schneeberg_5419.jpg[edit]

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 13:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Thank you for attention! I only upload a bit lot of picture, and I didn't finish the description of last pictures, because of categozing the firsts:). --Beyond silence 13:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Category[edit]

Sorry if my enthusiasm was in the wron category, shall I change things or will you. I use a program called TypeItIn.com or .org and I place templates filled out, in the program and it appears automatically if that helps creat photo information or galleries or categories. WayneRay 14:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)WayneRay

Please, If you can delete the Hoher Schneeberg categories. Thanks --Beyond silence 14:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Quality Images[edit]

i apreciate that you are so interested in helping us with the quality images project. but there is something you have understood wrong. when quality images was created there was a huge disscusion on wich kind of images are usefull for commons. the wiki projects have extended greatly and commons was originaly thought as an image repository. it means that is storage images that are not only for wikipedia, or wikibooks. but also thinking in any future project that it may be added later. this means in the interest of quality images to really promotr quality cooperation for ALL projects it is not posible to reject an image only becouse it is not usefull for wikipedia. in fact this thema has gone so far that we do not longer say weather a image is usefull or not as long as it covers tecnicall standards. if you want to express your opinion about it for the quality images comunity i encorage you to leave a mesage at Commons talk:Quality images candidates.-LadyofHats 10:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Ok, I understand and rethink. I am think this picture unnecessary so far, and the guidelines can be support its, but can be possible it's good for something, and it has technical quality so I cancel my decile. Thanks for discuss. --Beyond silence 10:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

picture improvement[edit]

thanks for your support on Commons:Quality images candidates about Image:Sighisoara ortodox trinity church tower.jpg, but I have noticed that you have modified it and uploaded again. Can I know exactly which improvement you have made? to tell the truth, I don't see any difference (even if I don't have a copy of the previous version, so it's hard to compare...). Moreover, it's not polite to overwrite other people's pictures without permission: if you think you can improve a picture, do it and upload it using a different name, then if it is better than the original the author can decide to overwrite his one or to request deletion of the old one. This way it's easier to compare them and it is possible to ask for suggestions from other users. In this case it doesn't matter: I'm happy with the result and it's going to be a QI, but please tell me what you did exactly. Alessio Damato 06:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I only thought it was better so it didn't need another version of it. I only improved on shadow, I made that more bright. Best wishes --Beyond silence 08:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
which shadow are you talking about?! Alessio Damato 15:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
All shadows.--Beyond silence 02:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Consensual review[edit]

i do not understand what do you mean by the mesage you left me in my talk page. what is it that you want?-LadyofHats 10:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

QI[edit]

Hi. Can you see the talk and help me putting the image there, please? Greetings, -- Mateus Hidalgo 12:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Peafowl feather[edit]

You obviously disagree with my opinion, and the photograph is already in review. Thus, if I am the only one with too high a standard, you need not be concerned. Thegreenj 19:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

  • The new picture is an obvious improvement, but I'll let someone else review it to keep the opinions diverse. I'm neutral in opinion on it. My major concerns are clipped channels and bad corners. I would suggest stopping your aperture down to f/4 or so (that should help the edges) and underexposing the picture, then using the GIMP or Photoshop or whatever you use to adjust the curves and bring the image up to where it should be. Alternately, I sometimes take two+ exposures and manually combine them HDRI-style, although it's not really HDR. Good luck with the pic! Thegreenj 14:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank for advises! I hope it can be enough better. --Beyond silence 14:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Basilica of Tongeren, detail.JPG[edit]

I saw you note on consensual review. However, I prefer the original to the edit, which intoduces sharpening artifacts and brings out jpeg aritifacts. If you don't mind, please upload you edit (avaliable by clicking "14:19, 6 August 2007" under file history) under a different name, say Image:Basilica of Tongeren, detail edit.JPG. Thegreenj 16:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

  • What, do you think the original is better? How? And please don't change without ask the author. I did it and he agree on there is not need an other file. --Beyond silence 17:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

convert[edit]

Circulation in macroeconomics.svg

here it is. changed the place of some labels to save space, let me know what you think-LadyofHats 22:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Hard to tell my thanks... It's wonderful! You have my gratulation! Strange but my picture-view program the ACDSee can't see it. But in Illustrator it can be fantastic enlaring. There is the only one bad thing, in web browser the png version can be watch better in full version, or not?

Thanks for one more time! --Beyond silence 22:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Thymelicus_01.JPG[edit]

After your and Digons comments on my picture i added a brighter and noise reduces version. Would you be so kind and take another look on it? --Simonizer 22:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course, thanks for listening ;). It's much better, I think you may change to it at the QI nom. too! --Beyond silence 22:31, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Done! --Simonizer 22:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Size requirement[edit]

There is indeed a guideline for image size, but it is not a 'requirement' - that is: images are not declined just because they are slightly smaller than the guideline. So it is a guide for submissions so people will offer their best resolution images. If they are very much smaller than the guideline then they need to have a very good reason, eg a macro shot of a very small insect where its not possible to get closer without very specialist equipment. Some people keep trying to insist on larger resolution (and want 3MP or more), I tend not to see resolution as a quality issue, you can have very good quality images that are not large (some people disagree ;-). I keep reminding people it is only a guideline so that we do not squeeze out submissions from good photographers who do not happen to be able to afford a new camera. Sorry for the long reply :-) --Tony Wills 02:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I think your reading may false from the text. So the Guidelines may need to be rules, or this has not meaningful. I think if 2 megapixel isn't requirement then the guideline must be corrected! What do you think? --Beyond silence 13:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
There are not rules that determine whether a picture is a FeaturedPicture or a QualityImage, instead the community decides by voting. There are guidelines so that people do not waste time submitting images that are not likely to succeed. So my point is that there is not some hard and fast rule that images below a certain size will not be promoted. There is nothing to stop the community deciding that some small picture should be promoted (it might be exceptional, or un-repeatable for instance) --Tony Wills 06:52, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

votes on FP[edit]

Nope, not a good idea, better leave that for QI. Lycaon 22:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Antique dolls[edit]

I answered your question (at least I tried) on my talk page.Yours sincerely. Vassil 00:38, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I saw it, thanks. Sorry, I am not sure it can be a QI. --Beyond silence 00:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pyrite Fools Gold Macro 3.JPG[edit]

  • It is actually a small piece of Pyrite. Any closer and my camera wouldn't be able to focus on it. --Digon3 talk 13:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Ahhm, ok! --Beyond silence 15:02, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mittlist Gfaell 02.JPG[edit]

There is no more brightness possible without creating overexposed clouds. The only thing is to make a HDR image out of the original RAW file. I will try that. But i like the picture like is is now. It emphazises the mood and the sunrays, wich are breaking through the clouds. --Simonizer 07:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

With Photoshop you can make more bright the shadowy parts without the bright parts... --Beyond silence 12:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I know that and I have allready done that with my Raw converter programm, because at the original picture (out of the camera) the dark parts have been much more darker then this picture. But i'll try --Simonizer 14:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop to be rude[edit]

Please stop being rude with other users whenever they don't agree with your judgements. The fact that you don't always understand what they are saying is not an excuse for your improper behaviour. Alvesgaspar 21:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I must agree with Alvesgaspar . In your own interest, if you wish to change peoples mind, being rude and demanding they change their mind obviously won't work. If your purpose is just to vent your frustration then don't do it - go take some more photos and come back the next day and compose a better message :-) --Tony Wills 13:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nunâ Upernavik district 2007-08-09 1 cropped smart sharpened.jpg[edit]

Thank you for your message on my talk page concerning help with overexposure in Image:Nunâ Upernavik district 2007-08-09 1 cropped smart sharpened.jpg. Are you referring to the sky area to the lower left just above the sea level or is it the white area on the cliff itself? Anyway you are welcome to try and improve it, but please leave the original image and upload a new one. Thank you. -- Slaunger 12:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Mostly on the rock. So you can help on it? --Beyond silence 13:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I am a little bit confused here - probably just a language thing.. Would you like to try and edit the overexposed area or are you asking me to improve my own image? Anyway, you are welcome to try and edit the apparent overexposure on the rocks, but please upload it as a new image. I have used several hours on stiching and editing the original image and would like to keep that as reference. -- Slaunger 14:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I am asking you to improve your own image. --Beyond silence 14:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, OK, now I understand. I do not know how to do it - but of course I could find out. However, right now I'm in a major rearrangement process of my own galleries and adding locations to existing photos. Maybe later this evening. -- Slaunger 16:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
  • have you got Photoshop? --Beyond silence 16:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
No. I have GIMP. I'm pretty sure it can be done there too, I just havn't figured out how - yet. -- Slaunger 16:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok, then I tried imrove it myself. --Beyond silence 16:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome, but please keep the original as reference. -- Slaunger 16:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I roger that! --Beyond silence 17:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your work on my image. I think you did a very nice job there. Unfortunately, I have just withdrawn my nomination a few minutes ago because I noticed a really bad stitch close to the dark patch Ikiwander mentioned, and I was just on my way to telling you not to bother editing that image. I have redone the stitching, decided for a slightly different crop this time, and also I decided not to go for the smart sharpening i did the last time I think I have sufficient sharpness already. That implies the previous file name is bad, so I've uploaded a new file here. I have tried to compensate for the over-exposure on the rocks by some colour curve corrections, but I think the type of editing you have done works better. Would you care for another try on that one? (And sorry I wasted your time with the bad-stitch edit). You can have a go with the same filename if you want. -- Slaunger 00:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know is there any need for my edition. Now it's so look so well, you made this with overexpose from the original? That white parts can not be more improved I think. That may the natural color of this geographic thing, so don't need repairing on it. I didn't find problem with the smart sharpening. But cropd can be better, at the previos you cut on left & right?

So summa summarum this version is a quality picture I think, if you nominate I promote it. Best wishes --Beyond silence 01:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. The white patches are bright white in real life (bird droppings). I the first edition I cropped more on the right side and three pixels to little on the left. I have nominated the new image for QI. But maybe someone else should review it, you've been pretty much involved in the process perhaps making it hard to stay objective :-) I have dropped a note on Ikiwanders talk page about the new nomination. Anyway, thanks for taking your time to assist me. -- Slaunger 02:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
My pleasure! --Beyond silence 02:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

IMO - explanation[edit]

Hi Beyondsilence. Thank you for you question on my talk page. Sorry for my laziness in using abbreviations instead of writing it all out.

  • IMO = 'In My Opinion'.

I often write that to emphasize that it is my personal (subjective) opinion. Others may have other opinions, which are just as valid based on their values, knowledge, skills, background and focus areas. Hope that explains it :-) -- Slaunger 16:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok thank you very much! I was thinking about it may a photgraphic abbreviation (as DOF)... :D --Beyond silence 23:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

QI CR closing[edit]

Hi, as per rules consensual reviews can be closed after a period of 48 hours during which there have been no further votes or comments where there is a clear result (majority of one), or after 15 days if no decision has been made.

Quality Images was set up to be a fast process to promote images that are clearly quality so that we can process lots of nominations without wasting a lot of time - that is why images are promoted/declined on a single review. If people disagree with the review they take images to consensual review, but if no one has added further votes after 48hours it is clear that no one (apart from the nominator perhaps :-) strongly disagrees with the review, so it can be closed as per that review. Often because of time constraints I'm not able to close CR after 48hours, anyone can close reviews as per the rules if they think I'm too slow :-). Sometimes I try to clear out a backlog and close everything that can be technically closed as soon as possible. If you really want to stop something being closed, just keep adding comments every couple of days! But! that will probably annoy people, so they won't support it anyway :-).
The consensual review process is really a sort of quality control of the voting process, to ensure that reviews are not out of touch with what most other people think. --Tony Wills 20:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I think there is strong need to change. 48 hours is realy to short, you can see when you don't close the voting as soon the picture get some votes after 48 hour too! But I think with only one vote the voting may can't be closed, need to use 5 day rule I think. I post it to the QI talke page. --Beyond silence 21:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Beach in Baška Voda QIC[edit]

Thank you for uploading a new version, tilt corrected. The image is much improved. However, my decline did not only include tilt as a reason; I also listed composition. Please do not delete nominations from QIC - it makes finding old information much harder. If you must delete a nomination, please at least move the information over to the new nomination to help keep stuff together, though I'd prefer either keeping the old nom and making a new one or moving it to consensual review, with a note or an "edited" version, as with your railroad picture. Thegreenj 03:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for feed back! I know it, I only delete for that reason because I overwrite the original file. I think there isn't need for an other file... so I wrote a note to the nomination. Is it ok, isn't it? Best wishes --Beyond silence 04:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

CA[edit]

CA is chromatic aberration, like purple and green fringing. Lycaon 18:31, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Ston-Fort-04.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ston-Fort-04.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Baska Voda-mountain.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Baska Voda-mountain.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Image:Mapa Saraqusta.svg English description[edit]

Done Image:Mapa Saraqusta.svg. Regards --Willtron 23:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Sponza palace[edit]

So, Sponza was a surname. The palace got the name after him. Also, he was a rector (a title in their government), so also rector Sponza's palace. --Orlovic (talk) 10:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

but it's better known as Sponza palace. Cheers, --Orlovic (talk) 10:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I will named those like it. Thanks--Beyond silence 10:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

CA & CW[edit]

CA I explained a couple of messages above and CW is clockwise as opposed to CCW (counter clockwise). Lycaon 11:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ceiling painting with trompe-l'oeuil[edit]

Thanks for fixing that. Thegreenj 03:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. Next time please take an Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose or Symbol support vote.svg Support to the previous vote. Thanks --Beyond silence 03:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

QI 48hrs[edit]

Have a good look at all the votes on the page, in case of the Butterfly on Lantana, I still had a vote two days ago (Lycaon 13:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC) ). Don't be too hasty, it will work out eventually. Regards. Lycaon 08:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You will find it here. It is specific to consensual review. Lycaon 09:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

View old city of Dubrovnik-5.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View old city of Dubrovnik-5.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

View old city of Dubrovnik-6.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View old city of Dubrovnik-6.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Mittlist Gfaell 02.JPG[edit]

Hi Beyond silence, you voted for this picture. I would like to inform you that i have added a new edit. What do you think? --Simonizer 20:02, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know it enough to an FP, yet. --Beyond silence 00:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion[edit]

Hi Beyond. I like of your opinion about this image. Do think you that will it can be a FP? Thanks! -- Mateus Hidalgo 05:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi! My pleasure! :) I think the subject and the composition isn't looks very nice. If you want you can nominate, but I don't think too many of others will support it because of low wow factor. Best wishes --Beyond silence 05:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think that I still can't reach this wow factor im my photos...no problem =P. Cheers, -- Mateus Hidalgo 11:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

hmmmmmm, and this? =) -- Mateus Hidalgo 22:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Maybe. You can try! :) --Beyond silence 01:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Walls of Dubrovnik.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walls of Dubrovnik.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Walls of Dubrovnik-7.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walls of Dubrovnik-7.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Tiled roof in Dubrovnik.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tiled roof in Dubrovnik.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Walls of Dubrovnik-3.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walls of Dubrovnik-3.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

View old city of Dubrovnik-7.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View old city of Dubrovnik-7.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

View Dubrovnik-6.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View Dubrovnik-6.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Your camera[edit]

The "sharpness problem" people talk about in some of your pictures is because of a mediocre sensor and/or poor jpg compression in your camera. You'll notice it's much more pronounced at further distances. I used to have the same problem with my first two cameras, I figured it was normal for digital cameras. Then I bought my first digital SLR, the Canon Digital Rebel XT, and the difference is night and day. The picture is as sharp as it gets and the viewfinder looks out the actual lens like a regular camera. If you're serious about photography I can't recommend this enough. Only disadvantages are the prices, those lenses can be expensive, and if you take crappy pictures you can't blame it on the camera. I recommend the Rebel XT or XTi and the Nikon D40 or D50. --Calibas 02:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your advises! I know my camera isn't so perfect - I like to buy a better one too, but now I have some other more important expenditures (as change my crt monitor to LCD). --Beyond silence 08:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Bekes-Eloviz-csatorna-4.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bekes-Eloviz-csatorna-4.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Bekes-Eloviz-csatorna-3.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bekes-Eloviz-csatorna-3.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

A new version is available[edit]

Dear Beyond silence, Iam very disapointed about the polling-progress on this Image. So i uploaded a new improved version and would ask if you can drop an eye on it, that would be very kind. Regards Richie --Richard Bartz 20:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Observations regarding your use of Consensual review of self-nominated quality image candidates[edit]

Hi Beyond silence. I have noticed that you often move an selfnominated QI candidate image to CR if it is declined by the first reviewer. This is acceptable if you really don't agree with the reviewers comments and you cannot identify the flaws mentioned in the image at all. If CR is used this way one will occasionally experience that other reviewers disagree with the original reviewer which may flip the vote count in the CR to the promoting side. The system can also be abused by consistently moving images to CR if they are originally declined hoping that other reviewers (who perhaps do not bother to carefully study the image) will promote it there. And there are other ways to use CR in between these extremes...

Anyway to substantiate what I am talking about, I have quickly looked through the current QI candidates as well as the archives for September and August with the following result

  • Currently, you have moved three self-nominated photos, which has been initially declined to CR for a second-opinion. In the on-going CR process the vote count for all three images indicates that they will not be promoted.
  • In the September archives, you moved three self-nominated photos to CR, which was originally declined. In all three cases the CR agreed with the original review. All were declined in the end.
  • In the August archives, you moved 12 self-nominated photos to CR, which was originally declined. Ten out of twelve CRs reached the same conclusion. Two out of twelve photos were promoted in the end, but only after editing the photo in accordance with the initial reviewers comments.

In my opinion this quick survey is good news for the process (but bad news for these photos of yours, I know) because it demonstrates that the fast-treck review process works as all these CRs has come to the same conclusions as the initial reviewer. I also conclude that the reviewers have spend many resources on doing CR on photos without changing the final result. I think these resources could be used better as there are quite a few unassessed quality images candidates, which are never reviewed. I therefore urge you to take an objective (yes that is hard) look at declined photos before moving it to CR. Does the initial reviewer actually have a point?

It is not an exact science, but it is my experience that very good images are always promoted, bad images are always declined and for those in between the vote depends a little on the reviewers acceptance level and preferences. I think that is an acceptable compromise for having a fast-track process where a lot of images are reviewed.

And let's not forget all the images you have had QI promoted! Twelve now, quite impressive! I especially like your photos from Croatia! -- Slaunger 07:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind letter! Yes I am moving so several nomination to CR. It's can be a subjective opinion, because I can love very much a better shot that I made myself! :) But I know the technicaly detail of my picture have some weakness, but I preferd much more the composition and athmosphere at reviewing. (As my last RAM photos, where there is a bit low DOF, but I concentrate to the focus and I like very much the sharpness on it :). ) But my philosophy at QI reviewing is more forgiving as Lycaon or some of others. I think the objective of QI is make a chance to encourage those whoes haven't technical possibilities to make FPs. So I promote much picture that have some technical mistake, but there is strong cause to encourage them. I used similar thinking when somebody decline my picture that has enough to promote by myself.

I hope my English is understandable :).

I glad for your kind words, and if you like my photos from Croatia! :D Keep up good work! Best wishes --Beyond silence 12:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I fully understand you and I agree QIC is to encourage people who do their best. -- Slaunger 12:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes the whole idea of QIC is you evaluate your own images and nominate ones that you consider QI and ask for others to confirm your evaluation - so of course all submissions to QIC should be images that you would promote. If many of your images are being declined it must mean that others are demanding higher standards and sending lots to CR will be counter-productive as people will tire of re-reviewing images. QI doesn't demand perfect images and a small deficiency in one area is often acceptable, but reviewers can be quite tough if they think it is an easily fixable fault. I find I often over-look faults with my own pictures, I am usually concentrating on getting something like DOF right and over-look something else like noise - it is hard for those of us without expensive cameras! :-) --Tony Wills 22:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Mite[edit]

Please reconsider your vote on this nomination as to avoid compromising our guidelines. Regards. Lycaon 15:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Ok. --Beyond silence 06:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

My Erigeron compositus image QIC[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your note on my talk page concerning this QIC. I have tried to increase the brightness, but I feel that trying to give it a "sunny day" look does not represent the way the flower really is (it looks overprocessed) or the conditions on which the image was taken (see original). It was an overcast day with a little rain. I therefore suggest you decline it. I am perfectly fine with your judgment that it is does not qualify for QI. I have looked at it many times now and I also persoanlly think it is not quite sharp enough. -- Slaunger 15:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

It s better, ok. --Beyond silence 09:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:MontBlanc2c.jpg[edit]

Oops, yes I did, sorry. I cut and paste to my support instead of copy and paste. Sorry. Lycaon 10:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Walls of Dubrovnik-10.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walls of Dubrovnik-10.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

answer[edit]

Try here: http://www.railfaneurope.net/ric/picture_galleries.htm Upload some photos of MAV, I would like it! --Orlovic (talk) 00:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks --Beyond silence 06:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Main street-Dubrovnik-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Main street-Dubrovnik-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Walls of Dubrovnik-11.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walls of Dubrovnik-11.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

QIC: When objecting the first assessment, please move to CR[edit]

Dear Beyong silence,
when you object a first assessment of a QIC (like you did here and here), please do not leave the image in the regular gallery and just add the {{Discuss}}-template. This is very confusing and, according to my reading of the policy, against it. Instead, take the image to CR, please.
Thank you, Florian Prischl 23:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wölfelsdorf.JPG and Image:Glatz - herb.JPG[edit]

My English is very poor. I use in description Polish and German (photos from Silesia - this in Poland, was in Germany), sometimes English (for example in Quality images). i'm sorry :( Pudelek 23:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Good Job[edit]

  • Just wanted to let you know I like how you politely nudge the nominators who nominate poor quality pictures in the FPC toward quality images! --Digon3 talk 01:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your acknowledgement! I think the kind speaking is very important to beginner users to not kill theirs cooperative behaviour for Commons. --Beyond silence 08:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Mosteiro dos Jerónimos - Belém[edit]

Dear Beyond Silence,

I don't really understand why and how do you wish my photo to be rotated. There is no tilt in it. It is not perfectly symmetrical, but this is because of the architecture of the courtyard. I would be grateful for your more concrete proposals.--Szilas 06:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I see tilted your photo. --Beyond silence 22.5px 06:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Schneeberg[edit]

Hi László, I checked your gallery before hiking. I then decided to come back with some panoramas ;-) Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 11:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC).
Still in the learning process but here are the panoramas Road to the Schneeberg (Alps, Austria).jpg Panoramic view of Schneeberg (Alps, Austria).jpg We'll see if they are QI or not... Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 13:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Your panoramas are a bit too dark! :( --Beyond silence 22.5px 14:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
You're right had to deal with strong sunlight on snow while taking the pictures. Next time I do such a thing, I will take several batches of pictures and decided at home which one is best. Continuous improvement...
What I miss in your Schneeberg pictures IMHO? No geotag is available. I always enjoy getting wikipedia pictures while browsing with Google Earth.
Cheers- Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 08:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Walnut[edit]

Sorry, I don't speak english.--Thesupermat 11:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

oh, ok. --Beyond silence 22.5px 13:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:AiguilleDuMidiTM.jpg[edit]

Your photo Image:AiguilleDuMidiTM.jpg's category Creatde with Hugin is red. Can you fix it? Thanks --Beyond silence 22.5px 08:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

  • I made a bad mistake... it's corrected. Thanks Sanchezn 17:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

QI[edit]

Hehe, you've really gone on a frenzy in there :) Can you please move the nominations you've disagreed with the consensual review section? Thanks, Dori - Talk 13:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I have assumed your /discuss edits have been done in good faith, and I have moved them to CR. You are welcome to move them directly to CR yourself, let me know if you need help. --Tony Wills 21:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Consensual review is becoming a bit over loaded with submissions, I hope all of these new ones are necessary! After changing to /discuss it helps to put a {{support}} or {{oppose}} in front of the initial reviewers entry as by the time it reaches CR it is sometimes not clear what the initial review was. I have tidied up the new CR entries, too much work, not enough time :-) --Tony Wills 22:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

YOU DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT[edit]

YOU DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT to undo my dicuss edits. You can't fail the my right to make to discuss any promotion. --Beyond silence 22.5px 14:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Please behave and stop acting like a spoiled child, who only cares about his own umbilicus. According to the Rules, which you should read carefully, images should be moved to CR whenever a promotion or decline vote is contested. I know it takes some work to do that but other users are not your servants !! - Alvesgaspar 16:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I think everyone here knows what it's like to have a picture they think is perfectly good refused QI status. Please don't take our criticism too personally, nobody here is trying to insult you. I can personally say that my photographic skills have greatly increased by listening to the critiques of the editors here. Calibas 19:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Exactly the same with me. I learned more about digital photography in the last year than in all the years before. 85.139.196.156 20:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Assebroek_De_Lelie.jpg[edit]

Thank you for your remark about my QIC Image:Assebroek_De_Lelie.jpg and the category Assbroek being red. But the correct name of the category is Assebroek (with "e" between ss and b), and that category is blue. Kind regards, MJJR 19:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


Image:Hungarian railway system.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--MJSmit 16:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I suggest you state what document the image comes from and add {{PD-HU-exempt}} to the image if it is from a Hungarian government source, hopefully that will be sufficient :-) --Tony Wills 10:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

one of your images has been defiled and another has been stolen![edit]

I have defiled a photograph of yours. I did this with an image that I found from your web site and I don't understand Hungarian enough (at all even) to be able to know if I have stolen this or not. Now, I think it is mildly cool, yet I have no idea about where I can safely put it to show to you. I don't even know if that was Hungarian on that web site, to be honest. What should I do? -- carol 04:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Which photo do you talking about, and what purpose do you want to use it? Thanks for informing --Beyond silence 22.5px 06:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
http:carol.gimp.org/GIMP/2007/Oct/Walls_of_Dubrovnik-fejem-medium.jpg (~400 x 300 pixels) it looks much better at the full resolution. That image in the FPCandidates is very disturbing to me. I am glad that it looks like it is going to fail there -- that has nothing to do with it being a memorable photo. I was actually looking for an image of your face to make like it was pushing out from the great expance of bricks in that structure -- you are not the first photographer to not have much in the line of self portraiture on your web site.
At the higher resolutions, it looks like graffiti. I mostly wanted to do something to make that photograph stop being as disturbing as it is to me and I needed a break from trying to do everything very correctly. Maybe I should just put the higher resolution there as well.... carol 06:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I don't know why it is needed, but I haven't got problem if you playing with my pictures. --Beyond silence 22.5px 08:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I can only guess at the reasons I find that particular image so disturbing. There is such a history of needing to keep watch and protect ourselves (the history of human beings). And it is for several centuries now to keep watch and protect ourselves from ourselves -- like that big wall was not made for beauty, nor was it made to keep the fish from jumping onshore. When I was in Norway, I was somewhat surprised by the additions to the mostly navigational structures that had been added in 1910. The media and even our textbooks make the Vikings seem like eh, horrible rampaging meat-eaters but the shore side development had not too much to do with protecting themselves, more for keeping boats from the rocks and pointing direction.
Whoever built that wall in that image was 1)not liking what had been entering their home from the ocean and 2)not wanting their home to change or be compromised. It is a very sad image to me.
Meanwhile, here in 2007, I think that I have been spot cloning small mars on scans of old photographs for a few minutes too long. Thanks for your time. I put the highres version online http:carol.gimp.org/GIMP/2007/Oct/Walls_of_Dubrovnik-fejem.jpg . I looked to find a translator to see if I had named it terribly and I couldn't find one. Did I name it terribly? -- carol 08:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

In future, don't pull these antics[edit]

Why on earth did you do that? There was a contrary view expressed, and reinstating an FPX template when it has already been removed by a support !vote, is not ok. --Benchat 10:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Anyway it's too small. --Beyond silence 22.5px 12:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Bouncing ball FP candidate[edit]

There is a new extremely professional re-edit from my original RAW file by Richard Bartz, and I'd urge you to vote for this instead of my own imperfect Photoshop efforts. Thanks very much to Richard for the work he's put in. Please consider voting or amending your vote at: Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Bouncing ball - strobe.jpg. --MichaelMaggs 16:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Geotagging + Commons = Geocommons[edit]

Please check my answer here: User_talk:Afernand74#Schneeberg_geotag Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 12:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Bekes-dam duzzaszto.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bekes-dam duzzaszto.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Image:Vanellus armatus 2.jpg at QI[edit]

Thank you for the suggestion of resizing this picture, which I would never have thought of. I'll look into doing this, but not right away, unfortunately. Do you think the whole image of the bird needs to be as sharp as the head for it to be a QI? A lot of it's never going to be that sharp, I think, but even if it can't be a QI, I'm still grateful for a method that might improve the image.

Feel free to respond here or at my commons talk page. —JerryFriedman 01:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposal regarding Commons Photographers categories[edit]

Hi, You are currently using a Commons Photographer user template on your user page. It has been proposed to redefine the templates and a vote is currently on-going. If interested, I encourage you to participate in the voting process. -- Slaunger 13:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality image[edit]

Hi I nominated my pic for FP, and you advised me to try quality images. I have nominated the same picture of the flower, since October 14 but have not yet received any review. Could you please review it.

You said my picture had a overexposed background. Can you please explain what this means, and whether it ca be fixed with photoshop. Thanks Muhammad Mahdi Karim 16:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank for the reply. Yes, I do live in Tanzania. I have photoshop but am not an experienced user. Will see what I can do. thanks for the help. Muhammad Mahdi Karim 11:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Resizing Vanellus armatus[edit]

Hi again. At your suggestion, I tried resizing this image—I made it half its previous size—and I couldn't see any difference until I magnified the images so much that the resized one was more pixelated. How does resizing make it look sharper? Is the purpose to have the picture come up smaller on the user's screen, so the lack of sharpness is less obvious? Thanks for your help on this. —JerryFriedman 04:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer, and I apologize for taking so long with mine. I now understand what you're saying, but I've decided to leave the picture the way it is. —JerryFriedman 04:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, no problem. --Beyond silence 22.5px 08:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

A suggestion from a fan[edit]

Judge people and images the way that you want to have yourself and your photographs judged -- not the way you and them have been.

Also, take that little image off from your signature. The nick "Beyond silence" is already thought provoking enough. -- carol 06:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Why problem is that? --Beyond silence 22.5px 09:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to have the words to explain this, but I don't. There are as many opinions about things like this as there are people in the world -- and maybe even a few more opinions than people. Either this advice makes sense to you and you take it/follow it or it doesn't make sense to you and your ideas and what you want and you file it under 'fan mail' or something like this.
For me, when it first appeared, my feelings were of sympathy. I am not sure if this is what it was to inspire. Even if you are an 67 year old woman, it made me feel motherly or fatherly towards you. I would like to feel like you are a photographer now. That is why. Thanks for asking. -- carol 12:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why I should remove it from my signature.--Beyond silence 22.5px 13:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Good enough then. Sorry to take your time with this! -- carol 13:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


Commodus[edit]

Thanks for your interest in my photo, and of course for the promotion.--Szilas 20:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks for thanks.--Beyond silence 22.5px 12:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Makrogazdasagi korforgas hu.svg[edit]

here you have it. i hope it is writen the right way :P -LadyofHats 21:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Gabor Talmacsi-Aprilla-1.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image Image:Gabor Talmacsi-Aprilla-1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Gabor Talmacsi-Aprilla-1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

Benh 22:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Angel[edit]

Thank You for supporting my image on QI!!! :-))) --Lestat 20:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure;) --Beyond silence 22.5px 12:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Native[edit]

Is there some kind of war between QI and FP?

The sad thing for me is how my images did not do very well in either and how no matter what I accomplished in the 'for hire' life or what I accomplished in the 'for free' life; I am now getting broken hand-me-downs (my new-to-me camera) from a person who is much less qualified at almost everything than me. The contests here might have gotten some of my decades and decades of frustration as well as reflecting some of my issues with such a world.

I had another thought about unseen things that might be occuring via wiki stuffs. My commons skin is 'Classic', I have to change skins to enable me to do image searches. While I was attempting to author plant species pages on English Wikipedia, it occured to me that perhaps you are (with your signature image) racing Fir2000 and his astra-stub image in the linked to list. Is it like that here?

There was a user with a name very similar to the one that is on your user page here who was submitting photographs of paintings to QI. When I first started thinking about the importance of professional colors for print software, I took a look to see how paintings looked in books where they were being professionally printed in. The paintings looked different from book to book so I consider that print requirement to be bogus from that. Six years later, I respectfully know that I cannot judge a photograph of a painting and never did. Was that you?

He quit with the mention of the word 'vendetta'. Because of the recent movies, I am uncomfortable with that word. If I had to pick an image from the movies that would be an exaggeration of what I consider to be the life I was better at living, it would have to be Halle Barry in X-men movies. I do not think that I create weather, but the movies had images of her standing outside in somewhat dangerous weather conditions. One of my joys of being in charge at the last place I was employed was that when the weather was bad, I could justify standing outside so I could judge it for its danger and threat to the other employees and the shoppers who I was responsible for. In the big picture, given a choice between a life with only media images and a life without any -- I really loved the second and that was the life I had when I became involved. Neither life offered me enough income to live on and somewhat enjoy life with though. And to continue, even if I do not like the using of fictional characters to communicate with -- I continue to do so....

There is an animation that I really really love lately, Lucy Daughter of the Devil. I was at a restaurant recently and I was using my kitchen staff mouth while communicating with the valet -- all I had to do was to go around to the other corner door (I think) and it would have been a better audience (the cooks and the dishwashers) for all of the words and frustrations that are bottled up within me. One of the episodes of the animation is about Vampire Alterboys -- and it starts out great with a very good example of how to not become victimized. Then, they use the same anti-victim methods to stop any and all critisism. The good things gone wrong storyline will probably never find an end, that is a pretty good morphing of it though and if you are not offended by funny versions of old religon applied for comedy and in the modern days, I highly recommend the series. One of them compared the traditional temptations with the new regular stuff -- that was really very funny and interestingly enough, thought-provoking as well. But I stray....

Sorry to do this all at once here -- I have been thinking about the questions I had about the image in your signature though, for all of this while since I first asked you about it. It is also interesting how simply using one or two words which are not supposed to be used seems to release more frustration, anger and other things than it should. Which is probably the reason that words exist like that. -- carol 15:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Denoised FPC[edit]

Hello, Beyond silence :) In the meanwhile, after your vote on Image:Skogskyrkogarden-night-2007-11-03.JPG, User:Lycaon was very kind to provide a denoised version of the photo and add to the voting page a link to it. In case you have no more objections about this image, bar its original noise, I suppose you may decide to revise your vote now? I am not very sure if this request of mine is allowed, if not - accept my sincere apologies :) All the best, --Spiritia 20:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't think it's an FP yet.--Beyond silence 22.5px 14:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


Butterfly Reset[edit]

Dear BEyond_silence, there where some concerns by Dori that i did mayor changes while fixing the posterization spoken by Laitche and Alvesgaspar. I did small changes in the lower right corner which is a tad lighter now. To make shure everything is going correctly i kindly asking you if you can vote again and would be very thankful. Best regards --Richard Bartz 13:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course. --Beyond silence 22.5px 17:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much --85.181.34.2 21:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Category:Architecture of Croatia[edit]

I replaces "Category:Architecture of Croatia" with a SUBcategory of this very category. This is a normal process whose aim is to aviod clutting the categories. Ask anyone here.

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.

Regards, --Ante Perkovic

"What part of Architecture isn't about buildings??" you asked.
Well, take a look at the en:Category:Architecture. I hope that explains everything. --Ante Perkovic 10:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

FPC and two stories from my life[edit]

Before I look at your edit of the sausage photograph, there are two things that are really on my mind about how groups of people work.

When I was in college, I did not go to very many fraternity parties -- just enough so that I knew that it wasn't really my kind of scene/activity. One of them was with a fraternity that had a lot of its members working where I worked so it was a little different than the others. I have this one story that illustrates what I don't like about drunken groups of people hanging out together:

At that one, one of the boys there that I knew from work was half drunkenly bragging about how he could open beer bottles with his teeth. This is nothing to brag about -- this is a terrible skill that should be used on the rare occasion that there is a bottle that needs to be opened with no opener. I lined people up with bottles of beer to be opened until he stopped bragging about this and showing off.

That is my 'what is it you are really doing' story. I think it is a good one for the participants in almost everything right now -- FPC, any countries election of government officials, edits on wikipedia, uploads to flickr, television shows where people dedicate a half hour to two hours of their life to watching.

That is also your sausage photograph and FPC for me. I really love that image. I will give the edit some more attention now that I am waking up more -- these things and others, they are so on my mind right now....

The other story is one I don't tell very often. I can honestly say that it was triggered by a wiki-nick here (Milks Favorite Cookie). I was working in the town I graduated from and one of the people working with me was a child who was having a few of lifes troubles that I had had when I was his age. Parents got divorced and he went with his mom to live in the same place that me and my mom went to live. I wrote about that place on my first web site and a conversation we had had while looking at it. It was an apartment complex -- I had written that it was a place that all of the bad children went to live. It was a simple sad thing that when you become a part of two halves of a family instead of a whole family -- everything in the world you live in changes. Where you live, how holidays are spent, financial strength -- it was a different thing; being a part of a divorce. As a child, experiences suggest that things are the same for everyone else as they are for you and then all of a sudden all of those things are different. Me and this child (high school aged) were looking at that set of apartments which really do get moved into by divorced moms with their children and I told him very seriously that it was not true what I had written and those feelings he (and I had) had when moving in there. Even though it is so life changing for the children, divorce and moving to that place do not make a child bad.

I really miss being at that location on the planet. I have no idea about the honesty between this place and that one, but the conversations were more realistic. People there were more willing to say that they were not experts in this or that and the people who did say they were expert at something or another really often did have opportunity to show it (the skill or the product).

I don't know what your situation is; try not to participate in something that is wrong and do not let anyone tell you that a change in a situation (like the one I told about here) has changed you. -- carol 20:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Huh, you have got long stories! :) Sorry, I can't understand it fully. I am interesting in what relation do you have with the sausage making? Or only with work? Anyway, take a look at Image:Sausage making-H-1.jpg, it has worse detail, but a better composition for Wikipedia. :) --Beyond silence 22.5px 23:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
My boyfriend in the 1990s was a butcher. When I thought that I was making a future with him, I learned about sausage making (those were my gardening years also) and other things for a more rural lifestyle. The stupidest thing I did was to follow a recipe to make Mexican sausage. Once it was done, I realized that I had never tasted this kind of sausage before so I had no way of knowing if it was good or not.
I learned this summer that I should not have been thinking about making a future with this man and that because I believed him about the together part and worked on that instead of simply looking after myself that apparently I deserve the fact that my 1990s experience only put me into more debt. I think I learned that I was supposed to look after his child only and not pay attention to the couple stuff. I know what I was doing; it is difficult to determine what others were doing by the way their story changes.
There is a more urban definition of sausage though -- a sausage party; a group of straight men that are too manly and abusive and can not attract women.
Sorry for the long stories. Everyday I am at least homesick and other days I am very very homesick. I might not know everything that was going on at my home, but I can draw a map of it. One of the stories was about looking at the place on that map where the kids of divorced families go to live and the way the caste system in high school works to define those kids. That area of United States is inhabited by mostly 3rd to 5th generation European immigrants. I have no idea how much that area resembles the areas they came from. Divorce is something that the people from my parents generation made a fine art of. Did that happen in Europe as well? -- carol 00:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

unfancy color manipulation[edit]

Since I do not know much, it is really easy for me to tell you everything I know about color manipulation, so I will.

We discussed room lighting which was also an introductory to monitor calibration. I tend to trust that my version of your sausage photograph was too bright because not only was the room here too bright and the day too young, but I still cannot see more than one shade of gray in that image. I still don't really mind because I can see a lot of other problems with images and think that the image that checks for grays is not enough to verify the things it is supposed to be verifying. I also tend to prefer less contrasty images, so -- whatever.

I was convinced that the 4 to 6 years that I spent listening to 'how important color management is' was 85% to 90% completely wrong back in 2002 and 2003 (at the onset of the 4 to 6 years) when I went to a bookstore and did this one simple exercise: find a few books that have images of paintings (Klimt is a really good one for this -- because of the fact that gold cannot be printed accurately without using actual gold...) and look at all of the extremely different ways that the professionals reproduced the colors of the paintings. I suspect that professional color management has a lot more to do with 'what the boss said' than it does with anything numerically reproducible or factual. I did use for a while a monitor that was way too orange, and I could see that it was going to cause me trouble -- so somewhere between the knowledge of your equipment, understanding what you like to see and what you can see and also a little bit of knowing what the world likes to see is honest color manipulation/management.

About software. There are two very powerful tools that GIMP, Photoshop and probably PaintShopPro have: Levels and Curves. I don't understand curves; but the Levels tool is almost the same for all of the applications.

GIMP-levels-tool.png

There is (I think) a semi-standard way to manipulate color levels without using the little color pickers that are included with the tools. The photoshop levels tool looks a lot like GIMPs -- only it probably has more "user friendly" options. I chose your image Image:In Postojnska Jama-1.jpg to get this screenshot with; for many reasons, it doesn't work with this set of instruction as much as the sausage making photo doesn't, however, dark images are very interesting to look at with extreme levels manipulation.

verbal algorithm that works often[edit]

It won't work with the image I chose today and it didn't work with your sausage making image, but it does actually improve about 70% of the images I have attempted it with. When you first engage the tool, the graph displayed is the histogram of the all color values (something like the grays) of the image. An interesting extra credit or additional reading about that is this and this extremely interesting example which I think should be in image textbooks.

The graph of the colors is supposed to fill the length of the display -- if you have an image that is too light, the graph will probably not completely fill the histogram to the left side. The histogram for Image:In Postojnska Jama-1.jpg is showing here and it should be obvious that the opposite exists for that -- where there are not enough light colors so the histogram doesn't draw to the right or light side of the graph.

The way to color correct most images is this: move the black triangle to where the histogram starts on the black side, then change the numeric position of the gray triangle: .10 X that addition. The black side is the easy side: if you move the black triangle from 0 to 12 then the adjustment for the gray triangle (the gamma) is from 1.00 to 1.12. The same thing for the white side. If the histogram falls short of the white side by 32 (or you have to move the triangle from 255 to 232) then the adjustment to the gamma is -.32 and in the example I am improvising the gamma which was set to 1.12 should be moved to 0.80.

The middle triangle moves 10% to make up for the movement of the outer triangles.

The same adjustment can be made to the Reds, Greens, Blues (and Transparency if you have it) via the Channel menu at the top. That rule seems to work better for adjustments to the Value (which is black, gray and white) than the others though. And the rule is especially good for scans of photographs where the electronic conversion adds a gray cast to the image that wasn't on the image that was scanned.

V,R,G,B[edit]

I found a great image to work with at the Library of Congress collection here. The original has color swatches printed on it. My goal was to make a color corrected version using only the free tools that I have, my knowledge and my believe in the numbers. That image is 5,000 × 4,006 pixels so I had an additional challenge of memory (even with my newish computer). I really really deeply wanted to adjust the image correctly. Time has disintegrated the photograph -- it is only fairly recently that we know that the acid in paper is degregates images which are printed on papers from a while ago. When I adjusted the colors for that image, it was the first time that I used the color pickers.

The levels tool has a drop menu at the top. If I am remembering correctly what happened when I used the levels tool to adjust the colors for this image -- it seems like using the lighter red swatch in that original to set the gray (gamma) triangle in the Red histogram did the most of the color adjustment I needed to make Image:Blind monks examining an elephant.jpg. I used the gray to pick that red swatch and the black (in the red part of the dialog) to pick a pixel that I knew I wanted to be black and the same thing with the white picker.

After hand picking colors and seeing how the image changes, it is a good exercise to try with the Auto button. I don't know what the other software has -- I suspect that the Auto buttons on the pay for this softwares are better and that is what they sell.

When I first started to use GIMP and linux and the stuff that was available then, I was also using an 8bpp monitor. If I put any color on my desktop, images lost color -- it was somewhat insane to work with, but in other ways, it was really great. I understood to trust the numbers and not what I could see. It was a weird time when I had ancient stuff to work with and could visit friends to see what my work looked like on modern equipment. I also have this idea now that a pretty desktop is not as important as the work that is accomplished on that desktop.

extreme values adjustments[edit]

Levels-extreme.png

I didn't find anything when I adjusted the levels to an extreme in your cave image. Once I did this with a photograph that I took while I was smoking in the back part of an enclosed truck and I found an almost perfect smoke ring :)

Another time I did this to an image of a beautiful water hole in Mexico and I found a guy standing in the middle of the water with his hands up in the air. That particular image has haunted me since then because I interpreted that photograph to be of people enjoying swimming at that time and since then I wonder if it was people being arrested or something like that. Images are weird that way -- almost everyone can see them, but it is a bundle of personal experiences that tell each individual what it is that they are seeing in them.

too many words and often not enough of the correct words[edit]

I like and use words. I am not even sorry about that. We have made words for the purpose of using to explain and help and to ask for help and to pass knowledge along. Ask questions or tell me to shove off. -- carol 09:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-075.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-075.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-077.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-077.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0733.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0733.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0732.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0732.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-073.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-073.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0723.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0723.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0726.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0726.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0728.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0728.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0713.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0713.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0711.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Tourists in Dubrovnik-0711.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Ante Perkovic 08:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Tourists[edit]

Please stop uploading photos of identifiable non-notable persons without reason and especially their consent. Thank you. --Polarlys 21:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

REASON: ILLUSTRATING TOURISM AND HUMAN. --Beyond silence 22.5px 22:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I see that you don't recognise valid argument when it hits you in te face. Despite the fact that admin deleted your images, you uploaded them again next day. Please, stop acting like a 10-years old and accept the judgement of an admin. Don't play tricks on us. --Ante Perkovic 17:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Block[edit]

I’ll block you for three days for intentional recreating previously deleted images. As I told you before (not just in the request for deletion but also here), it's not acceptable to upload photos of identifiable non-notable persons without their consent. The alleged reason (“illustrating tourism and human”) is no carte blanche for publishing people's faces on the internet. It’s possible to illustrate this subject without injuring someones personality rights. Regards, --Polarlys 18:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations[edit]

Congratulations for your first featured picture and welcome to the club! Now, you need to offer yourself a better camera. -- Alvesgaspar 19:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, yes I agree! :) --Beyond silence 22.5px 09:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Sausage making-H-5-edited2.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image Image:Sausage making-H-5-edited2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sausage making-H-5-edited2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg


Image:Bzmot 387-3.JPG[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Bzmot 387-3.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--89.164.26.21 16:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Coold you please stop and think before uploading an image. Do you really think that the image above shows anything usefull???? Please, do not upload garbage. --89.164.26.21 16:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you are right. It shows the Bzmot train's inside. --Beyond silence 22.5px 17:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sausage making-H-5-edited.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

very large thumbnails[edit]

I don't know what is going on, but the thumbnail in your signature is displaying at perhaps full-size right at FPC right now -- maybe you should fix it; I don't know how that kind of thing happens.... -- carol 11:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Better yet remove the image from your signature. Embedded images in signatures are generally discouraged. -- Slaunger 12:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry but I had to scale down the image. It was in too many pages to be fixed manually. Hope you don't mind. --Dori - Talk 21:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think ...[edit]

about this ? --Richard Bartz 19:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

May it's a good thing. --Beyond silence Finger reflections.jpg 07:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

hu talk[edit]

Nem kellene a userlapod vagy a vitalapod tetejére egy link a hu userlapra/vitalapra? Méginkább nyevközi hivatkozásként (bár nem is tudom, hogy a commonsról lehet-e wikipédiára hivtakozni nyelvköziként...). Üdv! --grin 09:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Nem egészen értem... írhatsz ide is magyarul. --Beyond silence Finger reflections.jpg 11:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Eucalyptus-12.jpg[edit]

This image is kind of funny -- I might do something like that given the opportunity and the mood. Do you have one of just the tree that is not rotated? Heh. -- carol (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't help you. --Beyond silence Finger reflections.jpg 20:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Do you mind if I rotate it so that the trees are straight and the non-tree is leaning (as the stance clearly shows)? -- carol (talk) 20:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't know.... :) --Beyond silence Finger reflections.jpg 20:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
If you really "can't help" me, you are doing an excellent job at this. There is perhaps the same kind of thing which prevents me from saying "keep up the good work" or even "keep up the work", so I won't. I am not going to rotate the photograph either -- if that happens, this child will look as silly in the photograph as he must have in real life while posing for the photograph. I will also rank this as one of the few entertaining images I have encountered while going through these ohso boring pictures of plants and trees and make a note to myself that if I ever do this, to get a real photograph of the tree at the same time... :) -- carol (talk) 20:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Beyond silence!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT (talk) 05:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Your signature[edit]

Could you please remove the image from your signature? It is becoming disruptive at this point, and you've been asked previously. Thanks  — Mike.lifeguard 15:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


File:Rijeka-Trsat-Church of Our Lady1.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Rijeka-Trsat-Church of Our Lady1.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


File tagging File:Gyurcsany Ferenc-mszp-2.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Gyurcsany Ferenc-mszp-2.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Stifle (talk) 12:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Beyond_silence-me.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

– Adrignola talk 01:32, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Rijeka-07.JPG[edit]

You've uploaded a derivative work We're sorry, but File:Rijeka-07.JPG has been marked as a copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a derivative of a non-free work, please explain why on the file description page. In case the file has already been deleted, you may contact the administrator who deleted it or make an undeletion request.


Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Hrvatski | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | +/−

Yours sincerely Vera (talk) 10:29, 8 October 2012 (UTC)