User talk:Mattbuck/Archive8

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents



File:Mr_Pilkington.JPG

I confirm that it is a copyviol from http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickwalker/3035766702/ (sorry, I didn't realize it when I uploaded derivative version). Thought I'd upload this version, which has a free license. It should be ok, isn't it? --RanZag (talk) 13:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

That one would be fine. Thanks for your help, I've now deleted the copyvio. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Anyway I asked him if he agrees to a license change of the photo (because IMHO this one looks less appropriate for encyclopedia articles). I'll let you know the answer. --RanZag (talk) 14:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
He just answered and changed license. Sorry you had to do an unnecessary work! Greetings. --RanZag (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Math Matt?

Matt - Have you ever considered using some of your knowledge of mathematics to do image processing that is not handled by the standard suite of programs that are available? I would like to find a buddy here with similar interests. If not you, then who? Also, do you see Mathematica around your department or an equivalent PD program (? SAGE ?)? Doug youvan (talk) 15:05, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I can't say I have thought about that, I honestly have no knowledge of image processing, nor mathematica. I'm a pure mathematician, if you need more than a pen and paper to do it it isn't right. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
I appreciate that style of math: It means you can work anywhere, anytime, and it is a talent that can be practiced outside of any administrative entity. Doug youvan (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Your assessment

Hello, I have proposed a lot of pictures for QI, some better, some worse, some have been promoted, some have not, but I have to say that it is the first time that somebody judges a photograph in the terms that you do here with the picture of the USS Missouri. I recommend you to read again the section "Above all, be polite" here. Thank you. Poco a poco (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I think you're misinterpreting my comment: by "shame" I meant "it is a shame" (because I like the view), not "shame on the uploader". But "first time somebody judges a photograph" as I do? What is so non-standard about commenting on grain, overexposure and chromatic aberration? -mattbuck (Talk) 21:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I see, then it was a misunderstanding, sorry for that. I had the impression that you were being too tough, CA, grain, tilt, color balance, exposure, etc. comments are more than welcome! Poco a poco (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Barbican tube station MMB 05.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Barbican tube station MMB 05.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Willesden Junction station MMB 28 378228.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Willesden Junction MMB 04 378228.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nailsea and Backwell railway station MMB 22 43169 150243.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 30 Adam Rickitt.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 30 Adam Rickitt.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Dawlish Warren MMB 02.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dawlish Warren MMB 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

A barnstar for you!

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for being consistently fair at deletion requests. Handcuffed (talk) 02:07, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Oh, cool, thanks. Didn't realise I was :) -mattbuck (Talk) 05:29, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

St Pancras railway station MMB 56 395001.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB 09 395001.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Euston station MMB 16 390004.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Euston railway station MMB 41 390004.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Watford Junction railway station MMB 29 378210.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Watford Junction railway station MMB 29 378210.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 04 91109.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 04 91109.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Birmingham New Street railway station MMB 13 170101.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Birmingham New Street railway station MMB 13 170101.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Hornsey railway station MMB 16 313035 313063.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hornsey railway station MMB 16 313035 313063.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 23 Ruby White.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 23 Ruby White.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

About the page you delete

Hello mattbuck, I'm writing on regard the page you delete couple of week ago, I wonder if you can restore that page, Entronque de Herradura. You delete that page because you said, that I was violating the copyright, and that you found copies of those photo on panoramio. On the following link I have proof that those picture are my. http://www.facebook.com/?m2w&refid=7&pos=1 This link is my page on facebook. http://www.youtube.com/?nomobile=1 this is link to youtube, were I upload 16 video from my hometown. And the follow link is my page on panoramio http://www.panoramio.com/user/3568715. You can see on those link, that those picture were taken by my, on one of my trip to my hometown Entronque de Herradura. Thank you --Portales (talk) 17:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

The images I found on Panoramio were not licensed freely, so were deleted as copyvios. We have no way of knowing you are the person who uploaded those, so I deleted them under the precautionary principle. If you want to reupload, the easiest way is to licence them under CC-BY-SA or similar at Panoramio. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks mattbuck, I'm new on wikimedia, and I didn't which license to use.--Portales (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Willesden Junction station MMB 30 378227.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Willesden Junction railway station MMB 21 378227.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 04 Carousel Cartel.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 04 Carousel Cartel.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Cardiff Queen Street railway station MMB 10 Holiday Inn.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardiff Holiday Inn MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Newport railway station MMB 30 43187.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Newport railway station MMB 30 43187.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Pieter Kuiper edit restrictions

As you were involved in the original discussion at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_23#Pieter_Kuiper_.28yes_again.2C_what_a_surprise.29, I'm notifying you of the current discussion of the edit restriction Pieter Kuiper agreed to. See Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Clarify_edit_restriction. Rd232 (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Pwllheli bay MMB 01.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pwllheli bay MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 10 313027 313031.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 10 313027 313031.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Newport railway station MMB 46.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Newport railway station MMB 46.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bedford railway station MMB 03 222022.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 03 222022.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bridgnorth MMB 05 River Severn anatidae.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! River Severn Bridgnorth MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:Having_Sex_Doggy_with_vagina_juice.jpg

Did you keep this image for real? It is clearly out of scope and should be deleted as garbage. Artem Karimov (talk) 07:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Our scope is images which are potentially educational and are freely licensed, plus a few exceptions for WMF images. Sex is within scope, humans having sex is in scope. It's decent quality (not good, but not awful), and it's freely licensed. Please explain why you feel this is outside our scope. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Mattbuck, would you be against a name change for this file? I'm not sure that this is an obvious example of 'doggy-style' or that 'vagina juice' is meaningful either. With a more accurate file name it might seem a teensy bit less inflammatory. -- (talk) 10:07, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Go ahead. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
How about Vaginal intercourse, lubricated? I'm not used to thinking about how to express such things in plain English. -- (talk) 10:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Something like that yes. The term lubricated is a bit of a misnomer here, because from the current image name I think the implication is that any lubricant is simply vaginal juices, but it will suffice. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bishops Lydeard railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bishops Lydeard railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Leytonstone High Road railway station MMB 01 150129.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Leytonstone High Road railway station MMB 01 150129.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Severn Beach railway station MMB 17.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Severn Beach railway station MMB 17.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:Teen boy's Nipple.jpg

Hi, you recently closed this DR as kept (which is fine), but you didn't delete the second revision of the image, which has no source. Also, the DR has be reopened for the exact same reason a week later; I think it could be speedy closed. Prof. Professorson (talk) 13:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 35 G2L.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 35 G2L.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB C6 Melton Hall.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB C6 Melton Hall.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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


File:Oxford 2003 central special.png

A Thames Trains DMU at Banbury Station in mid 2000.
Nuneaton station in mid 2001.

"How did you manage to clean this up? You weren't the original uploaded, yet you produced a much better quality image which actually was a wider angle... -mattbuck (Talk) 16:37, 16 January 2012 (UTC)"

Because I was both the owner of the original and also the original uploaded under a different name since I thought someone had hacked my Wikipedia account and had got my password (I have had no security trouble since renaming). I have the picture on a CD and as a photo. Truprint produced such photo-CDs in the early 2000s. I have several more from London, Oxfordshire, Birmingham and Berkshire if you want them.Wipsenade (talk) 05:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Righto. You might want to post a message at Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard asking for an usurpation of the old account or having it blocked or something. -mattbuck (Talk) 05:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

O.K., I will to be on the safe side in the future.Wipsenade (talk) 06:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Upload changes I’ve noticed since 2009

It's less complex and my firewall did not say I was being given a cookey or cut me off. It is more strait forward, so I don't need to upload on Wikipedia any more.Wipsenade (talk) 05:22, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

St Pancras railway station MMB 38 395017.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB 03 395017.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Banbury railway station MMB 05 165012 168005 165003.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Banbury railway station MMB 05 165012 168005 165003.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Radcliffe railway station MMB 03 158774.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Radcliffe railway station MMB 03 158774.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Talsarnau railway station MMB 01.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Talsarnau railway station MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Langstone Rock MMB 04 220019.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Langstone Rock MMB 04 220019.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bristol MMB «10 Millennium Square.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol MMB «10 Millennium Square.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Dunster railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dunster railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Birmingham International railway station MMB 02 390035.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Birmingham International railway station MMB 02 390035.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Severn Beach railway station MMB 10 143621.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Severn Beach railway station MMB 10 143621.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Hopton Heath railway station MMB 05.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hopton Heath railway station MMB 05.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Redcar East railway station MMB 03 142066.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Redcar East railway station MMB 03 142066.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Minehead railway station MMB 07.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Minehead railway station MMB 07.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Katia Elizarova image deletion - revived topic

Not sure of the best way to revive a topic - so here goes. Have copied the thread from your archive below for your review: Essentially, when you go to the Facebook page of the subject, you can now see in the comments a release to use for Wiki as you noted would allow the image to be made available in commons.

Here's the Facebook page for your reference - see comments for the release : https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.127047367362550.22906.126994697367817&type=3#!/photo.php?fbid=205279846205968&set=a.127047367362550.22906.126994697367817&type=3&theater

This is the image as uploaded to commons to be released : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Katia_Elizarova_opens_Swarovski_Runway_Rocks_in_London.jpg

Thanks - Is that all you need?

--Carpefemme (talk) 00:43, 03 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. As I explained earlier, what we need is an explicit statement of licence. Saying "yes you can upload it to Wikipedia" is not good enough. All images on Commons must be freely licensed - this means anyone can use them for any purpose, including commercial applications and creating derivative works. What is needed is an explicit statement of this, and understanding that such a release is irrevocable, and the easiest way to do this is with stating "I release this under the Creative Commons Atrribution ShareAlike License version 3.0" or something. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll try and get an answer like that - carpefemme (Talk) 08:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Finally - there is an explicit statement - added here in the comments where the original image is downloadable from https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=205279846205968&set=a.127047367362550.22906.126994697367817&type=3&theater

Is it possible to release this now for use as prescribed? carpefemme (Talk) 17:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Just wondering whether you were able to action the above? carpefemme (Talk) 19:09, 29 February 2012 (UTC)



Hi There,

You closed the conversation on the undeletion request for an image a little too quick for me to respond to I wanted to let you know here that I have found the link you requested - A copy of the conversation with th eappended link is below. Can you now make the image available once more in Commons?

Thanks for your help.


This undeletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] File:Katia Elizarova opens Swarovski Runway Rocks in London.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Katia_Elizarova_opens_Swarovski_Runway_Rocks_in_London.jpg

Image is shared for public use by the model on her owned Facebook page and has been distributed for rights free promo use in 2009 following the event itself.

--Carpefemme (talk) 15:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Please provide a link to the Facebook page where permission for this photo is recorded, so we can verify that. Powers (talk) 18:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC) 

Not done -mattbuck (Talk) 05:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Here's the link to where the image is on Facebook - Image use is not restricted and available for download also: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.127047367362550.22906.126994697367817&type=3#!/photo.php?fbid=205279846205968&set=a.127047367362550.22906.126994697367817&type=3&theater

--Carpefemme (talk) 13:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I did give it over a week... As for the page you linked, simply being available is not evidence of permission. I can put up a picture on my website without necessarily releasing it under a Commons-compatible licence. No licence is listed at the page you linked, therefore we do not have permission. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


So if there were a note on that image that explicitly said it could be considered License free, or permissible for upload to commons that would satisfy? --Carpefemme (talk) 09:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes. An explicit statement of licence would work. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Avonmouth railway station MMB 13 143620.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Avonmouth railway station MMB 13 143620.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 20 Ruby White.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 20 Ruby White.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Gospel Oak railway station MMB 05 378004.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gospel Oak railway station MMB 05 378004.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Guildford railway station MMB 14 455863.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Guildford railway station MMB 14 455863.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Rename needed

Hi. Can you rename/move this: File:Lonsomehurst1911.png? I left out an 'e' between the n and s. thanks. I'm just trying to close a loop, not cause any trouble. PumpkinSky talk 15:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Grantham railway station MMB 35.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grantham railway station MMB 35.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Nottingham Pride MMB 99 Peter Tatchell.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham Pride MMB 99 Peter Tatchell.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bingham railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bingham railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Talsarnau railway station MMB 03 97303.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Talsarnau railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Nottingham Pride MMB 04 Lisa Scott-Lee.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham Pride MMB 04 Lisa Scott-Lee.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Radcliffe railway station MMB 19.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Radcliffe railway station MMB 19.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bedford railway station MMB 07 222022.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 07 222022.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Longbeck railway station MMB 02 142021.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Longbeck railway station MMB 02 142021.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bingham railway station MMB 06 158774.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bingham railway station MMB 06 158774.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Willesden Junction station MMB 04 508303.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Willesden Junction railway station MMB 04 508303.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Yatton MMB 16 Bristol to Exeter Line 150121.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Yatton MMB 16 Bristol to Exeter Line 150121.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Kentish Town station MMB 08.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kentish Town railway station MMB 07.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

m:Meetup/Coventry/1

Hi Matt. You wanted a reminder for the Cov meetup next Sunday, so here it is! Hope to see you there. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks mate, no idea if I'll be coming or not. I have a busy day Saturday, but will see how I feel. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Redcar East railway station MMB 02 142066.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Redcar East railway station MMB 02 142066.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Missing deletion reason

Hallo Mattbuck, ... at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Caucasian penis size.jpg. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 16:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --Saibo (Δ) 18:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Thumb does not update

Good morning Mattbuck, could you kindly check what is wrong with this file File:Statue 1 GM Morlaiter Chiesa dei Gesuati Venice.jpg. It does not use the thumb format of the last uploaded image... Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

No idea, try at COM:HELP. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Hornsey TMD MMB 06 313122.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hornsey TMD MMB 06 313122.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Newport railway station MMB 37 66161.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Newport railway station MMB 37 66161.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:H-ugp-6360.jpg

As soon as I have to improve the photo, I need to understand you words precisely. You say, «Too bright, perspective curve distracting». What do the words «perspective curve» mean? What place is too bright?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Generally the image is too bright - the curve is too far to the high levels, bring it down a bit to make it more pleasing to the eye.
As for perspective curve, I meant the standard perspective distortion where the middle of a building looks bigger than the edges, making the horizontal lines seem curved. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:20, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
You mean, I have to make it less pale, to add contrast? Do I understand you in a right way? But the details in shadows will become less visible then. This was a bright sunny day.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Also, I will check the perspective; the lens usually don't make this distortion, and I stood quite far from the building.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, make it darker generally. I understand it was a sunny day, but this sort of thing is why we wear sunglasses. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:45, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Gospel Oak railway station MMB 08 172005.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gospel Oak railway station MMB 08 172005.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Abererch railway station MMB 01.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Abererch railway station MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Upminster station MMB 15 357046.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Upminster station MMB 15 357046.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Washford railway station MMB 04 60163.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 60163 Tornado on the West Somerset Railway near Washford station 2 June 2009 pic 2.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 11 365502 313027.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 11 365502 313027.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB 78 Melton Hall.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 78 Melton Hall.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Leytonstone High Road railway station MMB 08.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Leytonstone High Road railway station MMB 08.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Guildford railway station MMB 16 455863.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Guildford railway station MMB 11 455863.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Abererch railway station MMB 02.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Abererch railway station MMB 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:Bingham railway station MMB 01.jpg

Hey, I downloaded the image from your website, but the image seemed to have perspective distortion (maybe overcorrected, It was leaning the wrong way). I uploaded a new version, but I had to crop the image. Best regards, --ArildV (talk) 21:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Llangynwyd railway station MMB 02.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Llangynwyd railway station MMB 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Dawlish Warren railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dawlish Warren railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Severn Tunnel Junction railway station MMB 05 150249.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Severn Tunnel Junction railway station MMB 05 150249.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Euston station MMB 18 221117 390043.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Euston railway station MMB 43 221117 390043.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Shop and cafe

I would like to discuss your review for this photo. By "bright" you obviously mean the wall with invisible bricks. I see the purpling on wires and will remvoe it. But where are the "mild haloes"? And, by the way, how must I prepare the photo to express the bright summer say? Thank you for the explaining.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

By bright, I meant more that the sky is cyan rather than blue, indicating overexposure in one or more channels - the building itself seems about right to me. There are mild haloes around the sky/roof boundary. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, will check.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Nsfw deletion notice

Why are templates below the images? Why not above? Second of all, we could use some means of allowing parents to block images that they don't want their children to see. Rickyrab (talk) 20:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Because that's the way templates work. As to your "allowing parents..." argument, I suggest content filtering software. To paraphrase our disclaimer: we host stuff people find offensive, deal with it. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 17 221137.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 17 221137.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Weston-super-Mare MMB 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bedford railway station MMB 04 222022.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 04 222022.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Grantham railway station MMB 26 158774.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grantham railway station MMB 26 158774.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

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

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Sreejithk2000

You spoke positively about this possibility on my talk page a month ago, so I thought you might like to see that it has begun.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

File:D-kupanskoe-pzd-7436.jpg

Why do you think this is overexposed? IMHO the gondolas are not so bright...--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Because to my eye, the sky looks like it's at #FFFFFF. I like the composition though. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:54, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
All the sky, or some part of it? I need to know where to adjust. Also, maybe your monitor is too contrast...--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Just part of it - around the right hand tower, and a bit above the central platform gantry. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Checked again. I'm afraid this cannot be saved. That was my fault in 2007, five years ago I couldn't shoot better...--PereslavlFoto (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB 73 Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 73 Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bingham railway station MMB 01.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bingham railway station MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bingham railway station MMB 02.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bingham railway station MMB 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Curious Eyes

It's just Heterochromia iridum. Not so seldom in manga and anime as in real life. ;-) [2] -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 14:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Other categorization methods

I've taken your advice on board, and categorized by other metrics aside from just year. Please see

  1. Category:Videos of ejaculation by format
  2. Category:Black and white videos of ejaculation

These are definitely more useful categorization methods. Thanks for the suggestion, -- Cirt (talk) 18:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Update: ✓ Done, now you don't have to go moving anything, I've changed it from "year" to "decade" categorization, which is definitely useful, as technology most certainly changes enough from decade to decade to significantly impact quality. :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting ejaculation by decade either, though I'm happy with the colour/bw. I honestly don't see a need for date-categorisation of something which really does not change over time. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:35, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments about the colour/bw categorization! As far as decades, actually, the quality of the files does change by decade, if not by year. -- Cirt (talk) 19:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Stogumber railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stogumber railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB H0 Melton Hall and Business School North.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB H0 Melton Hall and Business School North.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Kentish Town station MMB 03 319364.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kentish Town railway station MMB 02 319364.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:BenPhelps.JPG

Please read before slapping on deletion templates. The source site clearly says "You may use any of our material free of charge for any reason.". Also see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Guanaco. // Liftarn (talk) 10:24, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Commons talk:Licensing

Re Commons talk:Licensing - those questions should go to COM:VPC. See the note at the top of the page. Rd232 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Apologies. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
No problem. Rd232 (talk) 14:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bedford railway station MMB 20 319365.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 20 319365.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Dawlish railway station MMB 04 43303.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dawlish railway station MMB 04 43303.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Category for districts of Lancashire

I started to create a new category for this, but I see that you deleted such a category in April last year. What was the issue with Category:Districts in Lancashire? It seems messy to me to have the districts scattered through the list of entries in Category:Lancashire, plus one can't tell what the significance of them is. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Special Barnstar

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
I, Cirt, hereby award The Special Barnstar to Mattbuck. With recognition for your stand against censorship and in support of freedom of expression and freedom of speech. Thank you! :) -- Cirt (talk) 06:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Maesteg (Ewenny Road) railway station MMB 02.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Maesteg (Ewenny Road) railway station MMB 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Langstone Rock MMB 07 143612.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Langstone Rock MMB 07 143612.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Qi review decline

Reviewed your train images in QIC for 26 and 27 FEB. Most of them have chromatic aberrations. Please see the notes that I added to the declined files. Most of the CAs are to vertical poles though a few horizontal are also there. Please place {{tb}} on my talk page after commenting here.--Gauravjuvekar (talk) 12:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


Okay--Gauravjuvekar (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


I uploaded the versions for you.--Gauravjuvekar (talk) 16:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


Could you increase the line spacing of the attention at the top of your user page, the two lines(wrapped) intersect and given the text size, the layout appears bad.--Gauravjuvekar (talk) 16:57, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bishops Lydeard railway station MMB 14 4160.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bishops Lydeard railway station MMB 14 4160.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Willesden Junction station MMB 31 378227.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Willesden Junction railway station MMB 22 378227.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Paddington station MMB 54.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paddington railway station MMB 07.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Politely bringing this to your attention

Hi, you've commented on my block which has since been removed. I think that although you have not understood what was happening originally, you tried to be impartial, and thus i would like your input. Here is another attempt to block me. Please comment if you find it worth your time. Thanks in advance. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 09:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Nottingham Pride MMB 84 Kenelis.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham Pride MMB 84 Kenelis.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Gospel Oak railway station MMB 04 172005.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gospel Oak railway station MMB 04 172005.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

User:Mbz1 block

Hey Matt, I reinstated the 3 week block on User:Mbz1 (I hope I got the custom expiry time syntax correct...). Mila assured me via email, that she would only use an unblock for incidental corrections of her image attributions (there may still be some cases left which we haven't found die to the lag in search index updates). I'll leave it up to you to make the decision about an unblock. Sorry again for not notifying you earlier. --Dschwen (talk)

Quality Image Promotion

Montpelier railway station MMB 15 143621.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Montpelier railway station MMB 15 143621.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:Birmingham_New_Street_railway_station_MMB_16_221133.jpg

Sorry, maybe I was rushing with the final decision. I was just following CR rule: after a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision - Promoted or Not promoted - will be registered at the end of the text. I think it will be ok, if you nominate that image again. --Iifar (talk) 15:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bridgnorth railway station MMB 06 D1062.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bridgnorth railway station MMB 06 D1062.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Grantham railway station MMB 24 158774.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grantham railway station MMB 24 158774.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB K8 Business School North, The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB K8 Business School North, The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Deganwy railway station MMB 03.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Deganwy railway station MMB 03.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Humour Hires.png The Barnstar of Good Humor
For "Quoth the server, 404." :) Handcuffed (talk) 23:00, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB L0 The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB L0 The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB G8 Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB G8 Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB 44 The Atrium.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 44 The Atrium.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Filton Abbey Wood railway station MMB 26 158766.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Ebbsfleet International railway station MMB 07 395004.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ebbsfleet International railway station MMB 07 395004.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB 46 Melton Hall.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 46 Melton Hall.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Baker Street tube station MMB 17.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Baker Street tube station MMB 17.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Banbury railway station MMB 08 168005.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Banbury railway station MMB 08 168005.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 16 150266 150265 150246.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 16 150266 150265 150246.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Telepizza karachi

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=upload&user=Telepizza_Karachi – Shouldn't you delete the other images as well? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Done. I do love Special:Nuke. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Baker Street tube station MMB 11.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Baker Street tube station MMB 11.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Keynsham railway station MMB 04.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Keynsham railway station MMB 04.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol MMB «48 Feeder Canal.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol MMB «48 Feeder Canal.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Longbeck railway station MMB 04.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Longbeck railway station MMB 04.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Thanks

--Mbz1 (talk) 02:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocked

For this blatant trolling on a sensitive topic, I've blocked you for 24 hours. Nobody is exempt from the requirement not to disrupt Commons. Rd232 (talk) 09:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Calling other pedophiles or enablers (supporters of pedophiles), which is a legal threat and accuse without evidence, seams to be no issue. Thank you! -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 10:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Those comments are part of a serious discussion, and there is sufficient evidence available that blocking for it is not warranted. Nor is it a legal threat (and if it were, we don't have a policy against them... COM:NLT is a redlink). Rd232 (talk) 10:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Ridiculous block. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:07, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Blocking Mattbuck on this seems weak and a serious mistake in comparison to some of the unacceptable behaviour and dramah we have seen on-wiki from an apparent traveling circus which has not (yet) resulted in blocks all round. -- (talk) 10:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
See my comment above. Now does anyone want to actually defend Matt's post, or claim it wasn't trolling, or argue that it wouldn't cause disruptive drama? Rd232 (talk) 10:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
That post expressed Mattbuck's opinion. Few people would have commented on it, I think. There would be less drama if you were not trying to "manage" so much. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
"Few people would have commented" - ROTFLMAO. Rd232 (talk) 10:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
If i consider the current drama caused by WR, and the people involved with it, that accuse users to be pedophiles or their supporters out of own conviction, then i think we should consider it as an serious attempt. -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 10:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
No amount of words will turn this into anything other than trolling. If you want to propose something serious in relation to WR or to offwiki activities generally, feel free. (Same to Mattbuck or anyone else, obviously). Rd232 (talk) 10:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Please try to justify that you don't block users for legal threats (calling other pedophiles and enablers) but for "satire". -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 10:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
For the 3rd (?) time: those are not threats, and in any case we don't have a policy against legal threats. (If we did, and they were, somebody would have blocked those users already.) Rd232 (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
You need a policy for this? -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 10:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes. In fact, I recall one was briefly discussed a while ago, and rejected, because so much of Commons' work involves legal issues, and we wouldn't want to end up rigidly blocking rights holders who make threats or statements construable as threats. Rd232 (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
What about violations of human rights? -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 10:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Those are bad. (I'm a member of Amnesty.) What does that have to do with anything? Rd232 (talk) 11:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
You did not hear about a Right to a fair trial or Presumption of innocence? Calling someone a pedophile or enabler before providing any evidence is a violation of this rights. -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 11:08, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Human rights apply to states, not to speech by private citizens. (There may be an issue of libel, but that's almost always a civil matter.) We should have principles of due process on Wikimedia, and mostly we do; it's just very difficult to apply in such cases. In this particular case, the evidence to support the claim has been growing, and and it's there to be found in the lengthy discussion if you want to look for it. Rd232 (talk) 11:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
My comment was an observation. I would have more to say about this block if Mattbuck were to take the initiative to request an unblock and put forward their case, if they are not bothered then theorizing here just creates more material for WR fueled drama and personal attacks that we are all sick of by now. -- (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "You know I've never had to fill out this template before, this is a learning experience! I'll state first off that I am not in any way sorry for what I posted, and I do frankly resent Rd232's removal of it from VP, but I wouldn't try and put it back. I stand by everything I said, the way Commons has acted this past week has been a complete disgrace. We have hounded off someone who was a decent contributor because we let a few people who are not good contributors here slander him repeatedly. That my "proposal", albeit completely sarcastic, would actually make Commons a much better place should shame us all.

So, why should I be unblocked? Well, I could go with how other people have spent this past week trolling and slandering with nothing at all done about it, but instead I'll say this, how does my being blocked help Commons? My being blocked is not going to get us more useful contributions, or in any way significantly reduce the amount of trolling going on. I'm a sarcastic asshole, and stuff like this is how I vent. I am frankly stunned there has not been a similar reaction from every other admin to the way we have all been trolled this past week. While everyone else was doing nothing but answering those trolls, I was uploading pictures and categorising things, and generally trying to avoid being emotional about the Beta M issue. I blew my top because the shit forced away someone who has done nothing wrong here. You should all be feeling the same. To summarise, no point keeping me blocked, I'm not going to try and put it back and the issue's dead anyway since Beta M has quit.

One final thought. Rd232, a week ago you were cool. What happened? -mattbuck (Talk) 13:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)"
Unblock reason: "Unblocked per agreement not to reinsert, though I'm not happy about the "this is how I vent" remark. This sort of posting is disruptive, and should not be done. Rd232 (talk) 13:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)"

This template should be archived normally.

(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | हिन्दी | magyar | македонски | Plattdüütsch | português | русский | +/−

  • I support a prompt unblock as requested. Mattbuck has made a commitment to not post the proposal back that Rd232 found disruptive. If Mattbuck stays blocked then we probably all agree there is a list of at least ten other accounts that should be immediately blocked on the basis of deliberately disrupting Commons consensus processes with much more inflammatory material, some of it reposting or linking to dubious material and far more inflammatory canvassing discussions off-wiki. BTW Rd232, honestly, please take a chill pill and take Commons:Staying mellow to heart. -- (talk) 13:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
  • I also approve of the unblock - I not merely approve of the sarcastic proposal, but have actually thought very much the same thing. In this case, I decided that on consideration WR had a point after all, but that doesn't change the fact that their familiar tactics of confusing and confounding, trying to cobble together a case out of scanty evidence mixed with a lot of anti-porn attitude, made things so hard to see that in the end the evidence that convinced me was more stuff I'd found from scratch on web searching, plus some stuff that Michaeldsuarez brought up very late, than the stuff from the original complaint. So whichever side I end up on WR is still exasperating and I sympathize greatly with Mattbuck. Wnt (talk) 16:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
    • Frustrations about WR are really quite irrelevant to the validity of the VP post. I dare say if Matt made the point in a related discussion, or even in a userspace essay of some kind, plenty of people would approve of it. Rd232 (talk) 17:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
      • Dude, you are standing pretty alone. I'd take the hint and at the least drop it, better yet apologize. --Dschwen (talk) 19:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Tomahawk interface0.4.0.jpg

Hi,

I added a link to the license : https://github.com/tomahawk-player/tomahawk/blob/master/LICENSE.txt Is this enough that this picture would not deleted? Or is there anything else to do?

--Biha (talk) 19:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you need to crop out the windows elements (title bar), but otherwise OK. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Levisham railway station MMB 04 101680.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Levisham railway station MMB 04 101680.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Avonmouth railway station MMB 08.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Avonmouth railway station MMB 08.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 28 43093.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 28 43093.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Baker Street tube station MMB 06.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Baker Street tube station MMB 06.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Minehead MMB 01.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Minehead MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol MMB «08 Millennium Square.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Millennium Square MMB 1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Re:Blocked user

Hate to do it, but OK... Commons is not yer amateur pornsite and it is rather hard fo r me to see the scope of the project reflected in the files. Hard to extract meaningful purpose. Wpedzich (talk) 16:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Class 67

Sorry my mistake - didn't know it had been repainted - I only created the "67029" cat because I assumed it was unique - feel free to nuke the category if it offends. (But please keep Category:EWS Company train - hoping for more images fo that)>Oranjblud (talk) 23:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries, I'm not going to nuke the company train. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I should also point out that this is part of a category tree standard to all British trains (or at least modern ones). All trains are categorised in class by operator, livery and line, even when there is only one operator and livery, as with 171s, 378s, etc. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Pz-elections-2012-pu6-6916.jpg

What do you mean by perspective correction? What place you feel to be a trouble? And where do you see the blur? Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 23:38, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I say perspective correction on the basis that the wall isn't vertical but the image itself clearly is. On reflection I think the blur is just the woman moving her head. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
This means the blur was unavoidable and has little sense. What wall do you mean? Maybe I will fix the part of that image to make a good impression.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 07:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
The line of the corner of the wall should, in principle, be vertical. It isn't. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll mind this advice. And what do you mean by bad crop? What kind of crop will improve the photo? The idea was to show that people vote for Putin's Olympics idea.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
I just don't like the crop on the right, how it cuts off mid-way through a table and basketball hoop. I accept it makes the main subject central, but it feels a bit messy. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
That's the price I paid to keep the boxes in center. I may clear the basketball hoop; will it be better then?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't know. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:33, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
I am checking the verticality and perspective thoroughly, and I see the ballot boxes are vertical, and the chair to the left is vertical, and the table to the right is vertical. This makes me think it's a crooked wall in the left corner. Maybe you'll give me some practical advice on improving the image? Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 09:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure it can be improved, I simply don't believe it's suitable for QI. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Because of motion blur of the woman behind the table?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
It's one of those times when something just feels wrong. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Nottingham Pride MMB 67 Kenelis.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham Pride MMB 67 Kenelis.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bedford railway station MMB 06 222022.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 06 222022.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 45 220003.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 45 220003.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol MMB «D6 Bristol to Exeter Line 43191.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol MMB «D6 Bristol to Exeter Line 43191.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB K7 Business School North, The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB K7 Business School North, The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Euston station MMB 60 390017.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Euston railway station MMB 18 390017.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Severn Tunnel Junction railway station MMB 24.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Severn Tunnel Junction railway station MMB 24.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Much Dewchurch field MMB 01.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Much Dewchurch field MMB 01.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Euston station MMB 40 390048 390009.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Euston railway station MMB 06 390048 390009.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Reading railway station MMB 55 43193.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Reading railway station MMB 55 43193.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Swat Valley

Hello. You said about this picture (Swatvalley x 104.JPG) that it was to "exposed". I'm not sure to understand, you mean there is too light ? I trie to promote an image of the Pakistani Swat Valley at the moment. What do you thing of these others images ? Could they be promote ? (sorry for my poor english). Guillaume70 (talk) 13:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Lake Swatvalley x100.JPG Lake Swatvalley x102.JPG Lake Swatvalley x103.JPG Swat River Pakistan.JPG

The second, third, and fourth there have a chance, the first one doesn't. Overexposed means that there are areas of the image which are completely white - this usually affects the sky. Underexposure is the opposite - areas which are completely black. Unfortunately neither of those is fixable - it's a problem with the photo, no matter what you do to it. With the camera you have, it will be very difficult to get images promoted, as it lacks the options of a DSLR. Generally images for QI will need to be post-processed using Photoshop or something similar, to correct tilt, adjust contrast and colour balance, and things like that. File:Lake Swatvalley x103.JPG for instance needs the contrast to be increased, but without changing the white point, and needs to be rotated a few degrees clockwise. File:Swat River Pakistan.JPG needs tilt correction, and also a crop at the bottom to remove the bridge section at the bottom right.
Hope this helps. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 44 220003.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 44 220003.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Reading railway station MMB 41 165132 43028 43187 458004 458020.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Reading railway station MMB 41 165132 43028 43187 458004 458020.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

did russavia again asked for your opinion via email?

D= Don't you understand that I was defamed, that I lost my real name to wikipedia? I just want to leave this sick place, and to erase as much as possible of my presence here.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


Hi Matt, is there any serious reason not to speedy User talk:Mbz1/archive1 per her wish? I mean, with other users we do this every day without much hesitation. --Túrelio (talk) 07:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

No further need for discussion here, as there is already User talk:Russavia#you are involved. --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Avonmouth railway station MMB 10.jpg

Underexposed. Strong CA on chimneys. Dark corners.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Newport MMB 12 South Wales Main Line (B4591 Chepstow Road) 43175.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Newport MMB 02 43175.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Weston-super-Mare MMB 05.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Rugby railway station MMB 01 321430.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rugby railway station MMB 01 321430.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Bedford railway station MMB 19 319365.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 19 319365.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 79 43015.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 79 43015.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB 76 Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 76 Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Nottingham Pride MMB 69 Kenelis.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham Pride MMB 69 Kenelis.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 80 43015.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 80 43015.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 37 57303.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 37 57303.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB C3 Auditorium.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB C3 Auditorium.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Jubilee Campus MMB L4 The Exchange.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB L4 The Exchange.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 71 221130.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 71 221130.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB B0.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB B0.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Nottingham Pride MMB 70.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham Pride MMB 70.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Nottingham railway station MMB 25.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham railway station MMB 25.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Request reason for your deletion of file image

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Kinohimitsu_Drinks_Series.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Dear Mattbuck, the image is not violation. It is a published image on magazines. It has water marked Kinohimitsu at the background. Is there any way to do it properly? I am new to wiki

Positive69 (talk) 10:20, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

That the image has been published in magazines does not mean it is free (as in the definition of free media - that anyone can use it for any purpose, including commercial or derivative uses, without asking first). Unless you yourself created the image, or the source has an explicit statement of a free licence (eg this is published under the GFDL), it is a copyright violation to post it here. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:35, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear Mattbuck: Can this picture be accepted if the creator or owner of the picture agrees for posting up in wikipedia? Do you need a company letter head , for example KINO BIOTECH and they agreeing to post it. Or do you accept an email from the Brand owner concerned? Who shall it attention to? I understand this is taking much of your precious time. Truly appreciate your effort. I am very new in wiki. My apology. Hope you can mentor me on this so that i will learn to do it properly in all near future contributions. Thanks Positive69 (talk) 05:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I expect the marketing department or something would be acceptable. You'd need to get them to email our OTRS team, with an explicit statement of licence. Please be aware that this means that anyone will be able to use the image, for any purpose, including using it for commercial purposes or making derivative works. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:34, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear Mattbuck: i have uploaded a public photograph shot at a pharmacy store . It is a window display . And i have placed the {{Positive69}} on other information field in the upload wizard. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Window_Display_at_Retail_Pharmacy,_Malaysia_(2011).jpg

Is this ok for use? Thanks Positive69 (talk) 07:02, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

If you yourself took the photo, probably, under freedom of panorama laws in Malaysia. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Nottingham railway station MMB 13.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nottingham railway station MMB 13.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB A7 Melton Hall and Business School North.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB A7 Melton Hall and Business School North.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Putin on the Ritz.jpg

"Puttin' on the Ritz" and "Ritz Crackers". :) — SMUconlaw (talk) 09:25, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

And to show you with music -- http://putintheritzon. ytmnd. com ;) russavia (talk) 11:32, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, dearie me. — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Jubilee Campus MMB K6 The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB K6 The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

RCM_Official_photo_2009_HBS.jpg

Why have you deleted this file? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rorycsullivan (talk • contribs)

Because to me it looked like a copyright violation - you did not specify a licence, source and description was listed as the subject of the image. You can only upload images that you either took yourself, or for which we have an explicit statement of licence. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 50.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 50.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Fred the Oyster

I don't believe that Fred intends to use sockpupptets. I believe that he's simply quoting User:Abd: en:wikiversity:User_talk:Abd/Wikipedia/List_of_self-reverted_edits. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fred_the_Oyster&diff=69076289&oldid=69075072Special:Contributions/Fred_The_Oyster – Oops, Fred The Oyster is an impostor, not a sock. I've asked Russavia to modify the block. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Newport railway station MMB 22 158837 DR77327.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Newport railway station MMB 22 158837 DR77327.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

St Pancras railway station MMB 69 406-585.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB 18 406-585.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Santorum cocktails

WP:BITE rephrases to "you can be an asshole, or you can help a person out." Drmies (talk) 01:32, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

And m:Meta:DICK rephrases to "don't be an asshole when someone asks a legitimate question". If you want to nominate something for deletion, tell people what you want deleted so that they have the complete list. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:55, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Linking to the category would also have worked. But a deletion request where you link to NOTHING? That's just stupid. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, admin. You're a real model to emulate. I took objection to your phrasing "what you're on about", which is a phrasing that you used on purpose to insult me probably because you're pissed that yet someone else from another project is coming to mess with your delicious frothy ass pictures. Sorry, I'm from the simple pedia, where such things are Twinkled. I only managed to nominate these fucking things in the first place by copying someone else's actions one step at a time, apparently skipping one of the steps. Now, if someone appears to be a dumbass on the simple pedia, and I happen upon it, I don't go and put them in their place: I trace their steps to see if I can help them. But please don't put yourself out. Drmies (talk) 21:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
No, I honestly have better things to do than invent cryptic ways to insult you. The phrasing "image(s) you're on about" is simply the way I speak. As for nominating things for deletion, there's a link in the toolbox on every single file/category page. I'm sorry you didn't find this, but if it is problematic, the deletion requests page explains step-by-step how to do it. I know nothing of Twinkle, I assume that's some script you have to enable. Now, please calm down. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Avonmouth railway station MMB 10.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Avonmouth railway station MMB 10.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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