User talk:Carschten/Archive/Promotions/2017

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 19–25, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 16:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 19, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Halavar 12:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 21, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --A.Savin 15:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 23, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. (BTW: It's leaning out a very little bit.) --XRay 10:19, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 42, 2016-03 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:54, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Underberg-Bad, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 14:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Stadtpark, 2016-03 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:16, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin, Zeughaus, 2012-07 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 15:57, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 21, 2016-03 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. --ArildV 08:09, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Tekkenhof, 2016-03 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 06:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 42, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:53, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Bahnhofstraße 42, 2016-03 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. But: Please review some images. --XRay 07:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Borth, Umspannstation, 2015-10 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aachen, Sparkasse, 2011-07 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:55, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Palazzo Dugnani, 2016-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:42, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
War memorial, Moers-Repelen (general view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Spanischer Vallan, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II, 2016-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Duomo, 2016-06 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II, 2016-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moers, Schachtanlage Pattberg, Maschinenhalle, 2016-08 CN-17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cvmontuy 00:57, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gelsenkirchen, Wohnhaus Josef Franke, 2016-07 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Electronic winding engine (1912) in the Pattberg winding engine hall, Moers.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Bahnhofstraße 42, Rheinberg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Duomo, 2016-06 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality seems acceptable to me, but please feel free to offer a second opinion. -- Ikan Kekek 15:36, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Borth, Solvay-Werkssiedlung, 2015-10 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:52, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Duomo, 2016-06 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Two light dust spots at the top, but otherwise good --A.Savin 10:55, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moers, Repelen, Evangelische Dorfkirche, 2016-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --C messier 11:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moers, Repelen, Kriegerehrenmal, 2016-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:42, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Palazzo Dugnani, Milan (east facade, general view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Most useful in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:47, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Bahnhofstraße 19, Rheinberg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Bahnhofstraße 21, Rheinberg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Gravestones of the Jewish Cemetery in Orsoy, Rheinberg (view from the southeast).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 19:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gelsenkirchen, Sozialamt, 2016-07 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Clear enough for QI, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek 10:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Borth, Solvay-Werkssiedlung, 2015-10 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Tekkenhof, 2016-03 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Protestant Rural Church of Repelen, Moers (west facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:37, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 17:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Bahnhofstraße 23, Rheinberg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 17:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Bahnhofstraße 25, Rheinberg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:40, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 17:15, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Palazzo Medolago, Bergamo (southwest main facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:44, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 17:15, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Bahnhofstraße 37, Rheinberg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful, but kaʁstn, I'd like to know why this house is a heritage building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:02, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Could be useful. -- Ikan Kekek (

talk) 10:57, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

•  Info need orientation Olivier LPB (talk) 14:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:03, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:03, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Palazzo Dugnani, 2016-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Rather unfavorable crop especially on the right side of the image given how much extra is on the left... why? EoRdE6 17:10, 2 March 2017 (UTC) You're not wrong, but on the left side there are more relevant information (e.g. the fountain) than on the right one (I believe to remember there are only more trees). I don't think the crop is a problem for QI. --Carschten 09:05, 6 March 2017 (UTC)Good quality. --Ermell 19:57, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Hermann Wenzel Power Station, Duisburg (general view from the west).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 17:03, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Building Fürst-Bismarck-Straße 44, Duisburg-Ruhrort (exterior, view from the southwest).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and only one in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:42, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tempietto di Santa Croce, Bergamo (exterior, view from the east).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:39, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:05, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Former Budberg station building, Rheinberg (exterior, view from the west).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Parkstraße 9, Duisburg-Duissern (street facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Is this a 'listed' building and on some official register of cultural buildings? Charles (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, as visible at the description on the file page (heritage template) and the global usage (German Wikipedia list). --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 16:59, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

 Support Thanks Charles (talk) 09:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Evangelische Kirche Hochheide, Duisburg (east facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:46, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Confessional (1704) by Andrea Fantoni in Santa Maria Maggiore, Bergamo.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 19:06, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 19:08, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Clearly the better and more useful of the 2 photos in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Best in scope, useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support - Useful and unique in scope, but not visible at the category you linked; in fact, none of the photos in Category:Interior of St. Peter (Rheinberg) are visible at Category:St. Peter (Rheinberg). Is that a scope problem? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:34, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

   Comment @Ikan Kekek: I see your point and understand it, but I don't think it's a major problem, because the image is in a subcategory of the linked category. But the topic may be discussed. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 08:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

•  Info I changed the linked category in the scope. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 08:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

• In case someone rules that the edit in the scope's link makes my previous vote invalid, I still support promoting this picture to VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Immunitätskreuz (1730) at Kamper Berg, Kamp-Lintfort.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. Do you know why the cross is so called? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:30, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

   Info (@Ikan Kekek: ) it's a (wayside) cross that marks the border of the immunity area of the Kamp Abbey, located a few hundred meters from the cross. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 08:18, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

• I see! I would have thought it was built to celebrate the survivors of a plague! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Großer Markt, Rheinberg (view from St. Peter).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question - Why isn't File:Rheinberg, Großer Markt, 2014-08 CN-02.jpg (if labels were added) a more useful image? Also, looking at both those photos makes me feel off balance. Would you consider applying some perspective correction? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:29, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment In an image of this type one should not completely correct the perspective. On the other hand the tilt is unpleasant and gives a bad impression of the whole. The vertical line through the center of the image should serve as a reference for alignment. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I think a perspective correction doesn't work because of the wide-angle and the high-positioned perspective. I rotated the image a bit. The left vertical line of old town hall in the center of the image should be straight now. I think this is the better image, because it shows more of the right side of the square including the Stadthalle (municipal hall, built by the famous German architect Gottfried Böhm). Thanks for your reviews! --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 08:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Herz-Jesu-Kirche, Duisburg-Serm (west facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Quite obviously best in scope. Nominate to QIC, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:35, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Oldest wing (1903) of Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesamtschule, Duisburg-Alt-Hamborn (view from the west).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope, useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa Parkstraße 18, Duisburg-Duissern (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Joseph, Duisburg-Wedau (exterior, view from the southeast).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Altmarkt 1, Moers (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

s best in scope --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:56, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:42, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 22:40, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:42, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 22:42, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:43, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Bahnhof Dickscheheide, 2014-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 11:56, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, TROX, 2014-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Diesterwegschule, 2014-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Diesterwegschule, 2014-09 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Maria Magdalena, Olsberg-Gevelinghausen (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. ~ Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 10:49, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Schulplatz 12, Neukirchen-Vluyn (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. feminist (talk) 15:58, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Main entrance of the house Schulplatz 12, Neukirchen-Vluyn.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Could be useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted.--ÂkBY$ 15:10, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Baroque portal (1720) by Josias Wolrat Brützel of Hartwigsches Haus, Korbach.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. feminist (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted--ÂkBY$ 06:02, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Main building (1928) of former Diesterwegschule, Neukirchen-Vluyn (east facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. feminist (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

•  Support - Best in scope and excellent, close to FP quality. Congratulations! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. feminist (talk) 09:08, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Vluyn, Postamt, 2014-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 19:16, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Vluyn, Postamt, 2014-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:47, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:08, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Station building of Dickscheheide Train Station, Neukirchen-Vluyn (north facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:37, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 17:58, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
König Brewery, production site, Duisburg-Beeck (exterior at Friedrich-Ebert-Straße).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:38, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 17:59, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Vluyn, Bahnhof, 2014-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Famberhorst 15:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Vluyn, Bahnhof, 2014-09 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 16:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Vluyn, Bahnhof, 2014-09 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for me. I'm not a fan of flying branches and twigs so I think that you could improve the image by cropping on the right, see note. --Basotxerri 17:17, 4 April 2017 (UTC) Ah, I've forgotten to say that's a nice perspective, I like it. --Basotxerri 17:25, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stadtwerketurm, Duisburg (with pipes, view from the northeast).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:52, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Marien, Duisburg-Rumeln (exterior, view from the northwest).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Duisburg, Altstadt, Liebfrauenkirche, 2014-09 CN-14.jpg

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Rheinberger Straße 58, Moers (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:36, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Niederrheinallee 251, 2014-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 22:04, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Niederrheinallee 251, 2014-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Halavar 21:22, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Sheraton, 2017-04 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --W.carter 23:19, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Aldenrade, Ev. Kirche, 2012-05 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support good quality --Christian Ferrer 13:56, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Meiderich, Alte Glocke, 2012-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 20:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Station building of Vluyn Train Station, Neukirchen-Vluyn (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Niederrheinallee 251, Neukirchen-Vluyn (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment coordinates are uploaded in the meta data and will be added to the file page automatically by Bot in the night. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 20:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Support The Bot always places the coordinates but it is sometimes a few days of waiting, no problem --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:49, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Looks like a panorama. If it is a panorama, please use {{Panorama}}. --XRay 04:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 13:43, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Aalto-Theater, 2017-04 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Aalto-Theater, 2017-04 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Aalto-Theater, 2017-04 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, RWE-Turm, 2017-04 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wind Lift I (ship, 2009).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:41, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pipe organ with gallery in St. Katharina, Olsberg-Assinghausen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Baptismal font (16th century) in St. Katharina, Olsberg-Assinghausen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful and used. ~ Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 05:17, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Walburga Benninghaus, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Walburga Benninghaus, 2013-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dietmar Bell, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 07:42, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Essen, Saalbau, 2017-04 CN-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:07, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Aldenrade, Ev. Gemeindehaus, 2012-05 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Excellent work --Daniel Case 19:07, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Frank Herrmann, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Peulle 12:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rainer Thiel, 2013-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Peulle 12:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rainer Thiel, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Peulle 12:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dietmar Bell, 2013-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Peulle 12:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wilhelm Droste, 2013-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments --Basotxerri 16:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pipe organ with gallery of St. Servatius, Olsberg-Brunskappel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support, useful and used. The best in the scope. Ivanhercaz (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and used. The best in the scope. Ivanhercaz (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 17:57, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Pius X, Krefeld-Gartenstadt (west facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and used. The best in the scope. Ivanhercaz (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 17:57, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:08, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 17:58, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Serm, Herz-Jesu-Kirche, 2012-07 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 15:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Serm, Herz-Jesu-Kirche, 2012-07 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Focus to main part of the photo good enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 13:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Claudia Middendorf, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 15:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Falk Heinrichs, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 15:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Olsberg, Assinghausen, St. Katharina, 2013-04 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 11:38, 15 April 2017 (UTC)  Comment. The church seems unnaturally distorted an the southern side is too bright. Look at the turret clock. -- Spurzem 18:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Claudia Middendorf, 2013-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 11:39, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wilhelm Droste, 2013-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 13:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 Comment It seems to be tilted ccw, though. --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:29, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

@Palauenc05: this is a out of camera version with perspective distortion, I'll rework und upload the RAW file soon. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 18:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I propose to go into discussion to give us some time. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@Palauenc05 and Archaeodontosaurus:  Done --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 12:45, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:10, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
• Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Olsberg, Brunskappel, St. Servatius, 2013-04 CN-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good focus to this part of the chapel --Michielverbeek 13:44, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Brine container of Saline Salzderhelden (view from the east).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Drilling rig II of Saline Salzderhelden (east facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Santamarcanda (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment Perspective problems. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective problems. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)--Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • @Jacek Halicki:  Done. No reproach, but the new version was uploaded five minutes before your oppose ;) --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 21:17, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
      •  Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Drilling rig II of Saline Salzderhelden (west facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Perspective problems. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done @Jacek Halicki: perspective distortion corrected and I understand it's useful, even though I don't think it's necessary for VI. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 20:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:57, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Hubertus, Krefeld-Kliedbruch (south view with bell tower).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Useful. Difficult light conditions, but a possible QI nominee, nevertheless. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 19:30, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Industry buildings of Weinbrennerei Dujardin, Krefeld-Uerdingen (view from the northeast).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:12, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 19:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neukirchen-Vluyn, Schachtanlage Niederberg 1-2, 2016-03 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 08:05, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Best in scope --Llez (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 08:17, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Nothern royal stables of Fürstbischöfliches Schloss Münster (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Llez (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 08:17, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:09, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 08:18, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa Villenstraße 9 in Beamtensiedlung Bliersheim, Duisburg-Friemersheim (south view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 08:16, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mäuseturm, Monheim am Rhein (south view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Laacher Hof, Monheim am Rhein (northeast view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Schloss Laach, Monheim am Rhein (north facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:58, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Unique in scope, useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:08, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support - @kaʁstn: This is by far the better of the two photos of this view, but should the scope be distinguished from that of File:Duisburg, Baerl, Feuerwache, 2013-03 CN-02.jpg? It looks to me like that's actually two buildings down from this one, so I'll declare this best in scope, but please confirm whether I'm right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:02, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: The scope of the other image would be Vehicle hall of Baerl fire station, Duisburg. This one is the main house of the fire station, so I decided to use the scope Firehouse (not Fire station). Would be Historic firehouse of Baerl, Duisburg a better scope for this image, or is it okay? --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 11:30, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
    • IMO, yes, it's OK. Thanks for confirming. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:33, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
      • Thanks for your review :) --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 15:35, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 15:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:54, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 15:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:48, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 15:52, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Zoppo59 (talk) 15:52, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milano, Duomo with Milan Cathedral and Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II, 2016.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:20, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Unter den Schwibbögen 2, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Halavar 21:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Niedermünster, 2017-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 08:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Niedermünster, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:25, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Karmelitenkirche St. Josef, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:25, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Hauptbahnhof, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality, may be a little bit tiltet to the left. --Zoppo59 06:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, D.-Martin-Luther-Straße 17, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality. --Zoppo59 06:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Landshuter Straße 4, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality. --Zoppo59 06:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Karmelitenkirche St. Joseph, Regensburg (west view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa D.-Martin-Luther-Straße 17, Regensburg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Dom, 2017-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 12:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Stiftskirche St. Johann, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Dom, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Bischofshof, 2017-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not an ideal crop on the right but OK for me. --Basotxerri 20:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Goliathhaus, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:30, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Haidplatz, 2017-06 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 19:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regensburg, Haidplatz, 2017-06 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 22:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)  Support Agreed.--Peulle (talk) 16:00, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:09, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful and used on de wiki. PumpkinSky talk 12:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Johannes Evangelist, Dieblich (west view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2017 (UTC)  Support Good contrast even in thumbnail mode.--Peulle (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Altar of Saint Joseph in the right aisle of St. Ludgerus, Billerbeck.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa Rheinallee 37, Bonn (southeast facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support useful Ezarateesteban 22:32, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

•  Support Agreed. Best thumbnail portrait in the category.--Peulle (talk) 18:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Expo-Brücke, Duisburg-Neudorf (north view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:29, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Rheinallee 35b, Bonn (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:24, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Rheinallee 52, Bonn (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:24, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Good and useful image.--Peulle (talk) 17:14, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 22:08, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 22:08, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 18:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Building Haidplatz 3-4, Regensburg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 18:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Renaissance arcades of the house Unter den Schwibbögen 2, Regensburg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 18:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:01, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
West facade with church tower of St. Maria Magdalena, Goch.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:55, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:29, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Best in scope.--Peulle (talk) 13:53, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Farmhouse Mittelorbroich 34, Krefeld-Orbroich (west view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:07, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa Maria-Sohmann-Straße 85, Krefeld-Traar.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 13:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 13:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Bahnhof Klotten: station building (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful and good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 13:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:59, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Memorial to World War I & II at Aldenrade Cemetery, Duisburg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:14, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:18, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:15, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Crucifix (1911) at Aldenrade Cemetery, Duisburg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose The text in the description inadequate. Why is this crucifix was significant? I eventually found a description on the page de:Liste der Baudenkmäler in Duisburg-Walsum. I think that the text given on that page (or at least some of it) should be in the description as well. This opposition also applies to the other images of the same cemetery, but to reduce duplication of discussion, I will only note my opposition here. Martinvl (talk) 16:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Info @Martinvl: The crucifix is – just like the war memorial and the graves – a cultural heritage monument and for scientifical, esp. local historical reasons part of the municipal monument register. Therefore they're relevant for their own scope at VI. That they're cultural heritage monument is clearly visible on the file page. More precise information can be found in Wikipedia articles (if not, that's an article problem), this is not the purpose of the file pages. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 11:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Support I guess the "cultural heritage" status justifies having a VI of this. --El Grafo (talk) 11:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Info@Carschten: I am in full agreement that any image that has a "cultural heritage monument" status justifies consideration as a VI candidate provided that it meets the other criteria. In my view, the short description given alongside the image fails item 4.2 on the page Commons:Valued image criteria which states "There should be a full and informative description of what the image depicts, along with any relevant auxiliary information." If such relevant auxiliary information is not on the image page, then there should be a direct link to it. Martinvl (talk) 11:43, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

• @Martinvl and Carschten: Martin has a point there, the description could really be improved by including some of the information available at de:Liste der Baudenkmäler in Duisburg-Walsum. Most of the essential information is there, however, so I'll just move to  Neutral for now. --El Grafo (talk) 08:16, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

•  Support Fine 4 me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:41, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

•  Info @Martinvl and El Grafo: I added more detailed information to the file page, this might be really useful, there you're right. But I think that's really enough now for short description on a file page. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 15:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Same for the two other images, description was partially really rare. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 16:08, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Carschten: Thank you for the additional information. I would like you to confirm one additional bit of information - is this crucifix attached to the cemetery as a whole, to one section of the cemetery (the Roman Catholic section?) or to one particular grave? This could be indicated by adding a few words at the end of the description so that it reads "... on a monumental base at the entrance to the Catholic section of the cemetery". (The text in italics is my suggested text based on my guesswork - it should of course reflect reality, not my guesswork). Martinvl (talk) 18:00, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Evangelische Kirche Aldenrade, Duisburg (southwest view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Bertha-Krankenhaus, Duisburg-Friemersheim (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Altes Pastorat, Duisburg-Friemersheim (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 15:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 15:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Dahlingstraße 25, Duisburg-Friemersheim.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:41, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Heerstraße 262, Duisburg-Hochfeld.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:41, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bahnhofsgaststätte, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality Sixflashphoto 22:24, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 11:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 11:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 11:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 11:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 11:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Rathausstraße 2, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 16:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Rathaus, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --C messier 09:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Rathaus, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --C messier 09:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Rathaus, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 18:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Rathausstraße, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 18:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Rathausstraße 2, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:03, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Burgstraße 23, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI.--ArildV 08:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Burgstraße 23, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality--ArildV 08:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Lindenwirtin, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 01:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Brauerstraße 20, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 01:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Brauerstraße 22, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 01:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Brauerstraße 22, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 01:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Brauerstraße 24, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. PumpkinSky 01:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Zieglerstraße 8, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 20:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Zieglerstraße 8, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 20:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Villa Henle, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 18:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Wilhelmshöhe 6, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 20:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Burgstraße 23, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support--Jebulon 22:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Town hall of Alpen, old building (west view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 16:09, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:11, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:11, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Alpen Train Station, station building (west facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa Parkstraße 18, Duisburg-Duissern (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Would it not be repeatable without the trailer and less distorted? -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 15:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Danke für deinen Kommentar. Verzerrung ist bekanntermaßen Ansichtssache, ich halte ist bei solchen Fotos wie die meisten anderen, nämlich die Vertikalen gerade auszurichten, was man bei den Vertikeln des Gebäudes zweifellos gegeben ist. Der Anhänger ist natürlich unschön (gefällt mir auch nicht); sollte ich eine Gelegenheit haben, das Haus ohne diesen zu fotografieren, werde ich dies tun. Von den zwei Malen, die ich an diesem Gebäude war, ist das hier das beste Bild. Und ein Zuschnitt ist hier nicht sinnvoll, da ich die Grundstücksbegrenzungsmauer mit dem Eingangstor rechts nicht abschneiden möchte. Also: Besser ohne Anhänger (und ohne die Baustellenfolien hinter den Erdgeschossfenstern), es trübt das Bild, letztendlich sollte es die Kriterien eines VI aber noch ausreichend erfüllen. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 16:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted.Talk to Kong of Lasers 22:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Evangelische Pfarrkirche, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 21:59, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Evangelische Pfarrkirche, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 21:59, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Evangelische Pfarrkirche, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 21:50, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 21:44, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Bahnhof, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 21:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 22:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:31, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Brauerstraße 20, Duisburg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:31, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Brauerstraße 24, Duisburg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:31, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Brauerstraße 22, Duisburg (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Nice. --Talk to Kong of Lasers 23:27, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Alte Thyssen-Hauptverwaltung, 2017-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 18:37, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Alte Thyssen-Hauptverwaltung, 2017-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 18:37, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kamp-Lintfort, Friedrichstraße 2, 2017-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 17:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kamp-Lintfort, Friedrichstraße 2, 2017-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 17:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kamp-Lintfort, ABC-Gebäude, 2017-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 17:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Former ABC Building, Kamp-Lintfort (southeast view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:15, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:55, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Friedrichstraße 2, Kamp-Lintfort (north view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:15, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:55, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Kiosk in Alt-Siedlung Friedrich-Heinrich, Kamp-Lintfort (west view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:55, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Dickelsbachsiedlung, 2015-07 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:45, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 37, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 03:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 38, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 03:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 39, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 03:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 49, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 03:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 51, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 03:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Einschornsteinsiedlung, 2015-07 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 21:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Einschornsteinsiedlung, 2015-07 CN-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 21:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Dickelsbachsiedlung, 2015-07 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for me. --Basotxerri 18:20, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 57, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 11:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 55, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --XRay 11:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 55, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I didn't expect nice houses in Duisburg, good job Good quality. --Basotxerri 16:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Hohenstaufenstraße 52, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 16:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Marxloh, Roonstraße 90-94, 2017-09 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 11:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Marxloh, Roonstraße 90-94, 2017-09 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness decreases towards the sides but still o.k. --Ermell 12:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, St. Ulrich, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 15:26, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, St. Ulrich, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Kriegerdenkmal, 2017-08 CN-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 04:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Gaststätte Thiesen, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality -- Sixflashphoto 04:25, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Gaststätte Thiesen, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality -- Sixflashphoto 04:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, St. Ulrich, 2017-08 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:05, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, St. Ulrich, 2017-08 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 10:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, St. Ulrich, 2017-08 CN-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:11, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Evangelische Kirche, 2017-08 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 12:54, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Evangelische Kirche, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:00, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, St. Ulrich, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --King of Hearts 21:54, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa Heerstraße 259, Duisburg-Hochfeld (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Karl-Lehr-Realschule, Duisburg-Wanheimerort (north facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Administration building Moerser Straße 26, Duisburg-Hochemmerich (south facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Kriegerdenkmal, 2017-08 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Bönninghardt, Kriegerdenkmal, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alpen, Evangelische Kirche, 2017-08 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 17:52, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gelsenkirchen, Munckelstraße 20, 2016-07 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 17:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gelsenkirchen, Munckelstraße 20, 2016-07 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:33, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburg, Marxloh, Roonstraße 90-94, 2017-09 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The upper part could have sharpened something sharper. but good quality for me.--Famberhorst 16:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Cochem, Reichsburg, 2012-08 CN-01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cochem, Reichsburg, 2012-08 CN-01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support It is best in scope, useful and used. I agree with that, but It would be nice if it had more then one category though I don't think it's required per COM:VICR so I'm supporting. Sixflashphoto (talk) 00:29, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Same thing about wishing for more categories but hands down best in scope. Sixflashphoto (talk) 00:35, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Munckelstraße 20, Gelsenkirchen-Altstadt.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support It would be nice if the image had more then one category but I don't think it's strictly required per COM:VICR Sixflashphoto (talk) 00:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:30, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful and used. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 12:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:02, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Alte Thyssen-Hauptverwaltung, Duisburg-Marxloh (south view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Used and Best in Scope. Also good shot. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:04, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Used, everything is in order and Best in Scope -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 22:36, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:04, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Am Kaiserberg 4, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in Scope, Useful and Used. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 22:36, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 38, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 57, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:06, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Support Useful and used. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 11:17, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 55, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 52, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 37, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 39, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 49, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Hohenstaufenstraße 51, Duisburg-Duissern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and Used. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 21:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Kreuzeskirche, Duisburg-Marxloh (southeast view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Best picture of the interior of Kreuzeskirche --Capricorn4049 (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Capricorn4049 (talk) 21:16, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Historic organ case (1905) in the Kreuzeskirche, Duisburg-Marxloh.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please read Commons:Valued_image_scope#Buildings: When appropriate, the building scope can be divided in a "XXX (exterior)" scope and a "XXX (interior)" scope, thus leading to two independent VI nominations for two independent scopes. [...] Additional scopes can exceptionally be proposed if some part of the building is particularly worth of interest (for instance a remarkable crypt or sanctuary).

There is already a VI-nomination for the interior of Kreuzeskirche. Can you please explain what on this organ case is so special that it deserves an own scope? --Capricorn4049 (talk) 20:34, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

 Neutral Not 100% convinced, but I don't want to block the promotion --Capricorn4049 (talk) 21:08, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Support - In articles about church organs or a comprehensive article about this church, this picture absolutely has a useful scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support, useful and best in scope. Organs such as this one are works of art and of engineering genius in their own right, and this one deserves a picture independently of whether it is in a church or not. -- DeFacto (talk). 06:29, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Capricorn4049 (talk) 21:09, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Klops pipe organ (1998) with its gallery in the Kreuzeskirche, Duisburg-Marxloh.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please read Commons:Valued_image_scope#Buildings: When appropriate, the building scope can be divided in a "XXX (exterior)" scope and a "XXX (interior)" scope, thus leading to two independent VI nominations for two independent scopes. [...] Additional scopes can exceptionally be proposed if some part of the building is particularly worth of interest (for instance a remarkable crypt or sanctuary).

There is already a VI-nomination for the interior of Kreuzeskirche. Can you please explain what on this Klops pipe organ is so special that it deserves an own scope? --Capricorn4049 (talk) 20:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

 Neutral Not 100% convinced, but I don't want to block promotion. However, thank you for the discussion.

•  Support - In articles about church organs or a comprehensive article about this church, this picture absolutely has a useful scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support, useful and best in scope. This is an image of an organ, which in my opinion is a notable object in its own right. -- DeFacto (talk). 06:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support It is a rare image of bells in a belfry, useful and used. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 08:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please read Commons:Valued_image_scope#Buildings: When appropriate, the building scope can be divided in a "XXX (exterior)" scope and a "XXX (interior)" scope, thus leading to two independent VI nominations for two independent scopes. [...] Additional scopes can exceptionally be proposed if some part of the building is particularly worth of interest (for instance a remarkable crypt or sanctuary).

There is already a VI-nomination for the interior of Kreuzeskirche. Can you please explain what on this Belfry is so special that it deserves an own scope? --Capricorn4049 (talk) 20:37, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

 Support Sixflashphoto & DeFacto convinced me. Thank you for the disussion. --Capricorn4049 (talk) 21:20, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support, useful and best in scope. The bells and their installation are of interest independently of the interior of the church itself. -- DeFacto (talk). 06:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support While I admire Capricorn4049 and holding VI's to a high standard and they are a reward, I feel this part of the building has notability in and of itself. I can see someone looking for a picture of the bells themselves. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 15:50, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful and Used. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 00:54, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please read Commons:Valued_image_scope#Buildings: When appropriate, the building scope can be divided in a "XXX (exterior)" scope and a "XXX (interior)" scope, thus leading to two independent VI nominations for two independent scopes. [...] Additional scopes can exceptionally be proposed if some part of the building is particularly worth of interest (for instance a remarkable crypt or sanctuary).

There is already a VI-nomination for the interior of Kreuzeskirche. Can you please explain what on this roof truss is so special that it deserves an own scope? --Capricorn4049 (talk) 20:38, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

 Comment I don't want to block the promotion --Capricorn4049 (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support, useful and best in scope. Interesting architectural detail. -- DeFacto (talk). 06:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I am half in agreement with Defacto. What is missing is a description of the type of roof truss - see for example en:Timber roof truss or de:Dachbinder or other translations of that article. Martinvl (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 21:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, Tournasol7 00:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, Karl-Borromäus-Kirche, 2017-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Llez 22:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC))

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, Karl-Borromäus-Kirche, 2017-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Llez 22:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:55, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:58, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:58, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:58, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Aeou 10:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 16:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 18:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jkadavoor 16:43, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ggod quality --Llez 17:11, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wayside cross of the crucifixion group (1956), Duisburg-Huckingen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 06:16, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support … and best in scope; beautiful image. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 09:25, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Zentralfriedhof, 2017-11 CN-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Do you want to remove the stain?--Famberhorst 16:23, 6 November 2017 (UTC)  Done @Famberhorst: I think it was just a bird, but now it flew away. Thanks. --Carschten 21:51, 6 November 2017 (UTC)Thank you for removing the bird. Good quality for me.--Famberhorst 06:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Parallelkanal, Sportpark Wedau, Duisburg-Neudorf (south view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Used and useful, the only one in scope. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Haus Johannisberg, Kaiserswerther Diakonie, Düsseldorf-Kaiserswerth (west facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:45, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wegekreuz Zeppenheimer Weg / Alte Kalkumer Straße (1824), Düsseldorf-Kaiserswerth.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
House Urdenbacher Dorfstraße 46-48, Düsseldorf-Urdenbach.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support - Useful, and since there are 3 photos that are all about equally useful at the size shown on their file pages, it makes sense to select the one that's the largest file. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Ringturm, 2017-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --PumpkinSky 02:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wien, Leopoldstadt, Donaukanal, 2017-11 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --PumpkinSky 02:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Zum weißen Raben, 2017-12 CN-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, Tournasol7 00:07, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Zum weißen Raben, 2017-12 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --PumpkinSky 00:07, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinberg, Altes Rathaus, 2017-12 CN-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 00:14, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)