User:Martinvl/Promotions 2016

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:06, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment, I guess the geocoding has an error as it resolves to a field about 220 km south of the Musée d'Orsay. Also, I think there is more than one resaurant there, does this one have a specific name that can be added to the image description? DeFacto (talk). 09:48, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

* Oppose for now. The subject is good and useful, but I think the scope is not well formulated. You have to provide only one link, and only in "Commons", not to a wikipedia (confusing). I suggest the following scope :Restaurant of Musée d'Orsay interior. This will have my support. (There are other "eating points" in the museum, but only one "restaurant à la française", and the name is "Restaurant du Musée d'Orsay", nothing more specific). BtW, it is worth a visit ! (source)--Jebulon (talk) 10:09, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment I agree, scope can be improved.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment@Archaeodontosaurus: , @Jebulon: I have changed the scope as requested. My reading of Commons:Valued image scope suggests that this request is mispalced, but since this apopears to be the only way forward, I will do it.

I have have also corrected the geocoding. (The error was that I entered "46 degrees ...", not "48 degrees ...". Martinvl (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Restaurants in Paris - Musée d'Orsay to Restaurant du Musée d'Orsay (Interior) --Martinvl (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

•  Support I think it works now, thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 21:13, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 11:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:08, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reconciliation by Vasconcellos, Coventry.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! VOC flag (Amsterdam).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The blurred object middle right side is disturbing. Perhaps you can rotate the image to get the mast vertical. A huge part of the object will then disappear. --Cccefalon 05:42, 5 February 2016 (UTC)  Done Done -- Martinvl 21:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC) Well done! --Cccefalon 08:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! AU NavalEnsignHalfMast.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support: Good quality image and the best within its scope. --DAJF (talk) 23:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:50, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
South African Class NG G11 (2-6-0+0-6-2) garrat-type steam locomotive.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful -- Pierre André (talk) 15:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
NZASM 46 tonner locomotive..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support: Good angle showing the locomotive clearly. Best in scope. --DAJF (talk) 07:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 07:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 00:45, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Awesome quality. Very valuable indeed. --Caballero//Historiador ^☊ 22:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
British steam locomotive: LNER Class A3, Number 4472 - Flying Scotsman..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment, I would prefer to see a different category linked to the scope, one that reflects the rich collection of images of this train in Commons, and preferably one with this image under it. This one: Category:LNER Class A3 4472 Flying Scotsman, perhaps? DeFacto (talk). 07:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment Scope changed in line with comment. Martinvl (talk) 18:07, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Support, I agree it's the best image in the well populated scope. DeFacto (talk). 22:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support, usefull.--Pierre André (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road up the Sani Pass, South Africa heading towards the Lesotho border..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Best in scope --Caballero//Historiador ^☊ 17:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Perfect now--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:09, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:48, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

  @Archaeodontosaurus: Scope changed as requested. Martinvl (talk) 18:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:19, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

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

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: Scope changed as requested. Martinvl (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment This picture file:Typical dorze huts.JPG looks better. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:41, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: I considered that image for a long time, but in my view it is spoilt by the horizontal piece of bamboo across teh top of the picture. I debated cropping that bamboo out, but that would have cut off the top of teh roof of the larger of teh two huts.
 Support By the arguments of Martinv --Llez (talk) 06:20, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:32, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment, I think the image categorization needs a bit of attention. "Category:Stagecoaches" is a bit too general, and there are other Rhodesia-related stage coach images on commons which could probably be related to this one. Also the selected scope category ideally needs to relate in some fairly direct way to the nomination scope, Category:Southern Rhodesia (1909) does not relate to stage coaches - something like Category:Stagecoaches in Rhodesia or Category:Stagecoaches in southern Africa would. DeFacto (talk). 20:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@DeFacto: I have changed the underlying link to Category:Transport in Rhodesia.

That's good, but we could do even better still by creating Category:Stagecoaching in Rhodesia under that and including this and other related images such as File:Zeederberg01.jpg, File:Zeederberg03.jpg, File:Zeederberg02.jpg and File:The National Archives UK - CO 1069-214-147.jpg in it - and linking the scope to that. DeFacto (talk). 06:19, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Category should be created: Zambesia Mail, with scope Zambesia Mail, stagecoach. Charles (talk) 09:21, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

@Charlesjsharp: No - if you do a Google Search on "Zambesia Mail", the only hits that you will get are referedcnes to this single photograph. From what I can see, this stage-coach service was an interim service until it was surplanted by the railway line. I have however added it to Category:Transport in Rhodesia. Martinvl (talk) 13:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

 Support I think it is a VI even though I'm not sure about the scope. Charles (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment it would be useful that this image is used. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: Please see here. Martinvl (talk) 16:54, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment it would be useful that this image is used. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: See here and here. Martinvl (talk) 16:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Yes it's better and relevant. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:59, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Useful. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 17:49, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henry VII arms sculpture.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Peulle 18:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 06:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

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

review

 Comment Tilted little bit CCW. --Halavar (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

OK New version submitted with all vertical image lines and photo edit tool vertical lines aligned with each other. Martinvl (talk) 19:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support Thanks. Good now. VI for me --Halavar (talk) 21:28, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Krupp 75 mm BL Type L/27 field gun.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: The word "Krupp" now links to Category:Krupp artillery instead of Category:Krupp. Martinvl (talk) 07:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Ok for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:54, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Useful --Pierre André (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Oppose a bit too dark for me and I prefer the angle of the first candidate. --El Grafo (talk) 11:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

•  Info Perspective solved, it looks better now. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 12:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Support I like this shot, better seen as above. --Mile (talk) 17:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:36, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Molly Malone 073007.JPG: -1
2. Molly Malone Statue, Dublin.jpg: -2
3. In Dublins fair city 02.JPG: +1
=>
File:Molly Malone 073007.JPG: Declined.
File:Molly Malone Statue, Dublin.jpg: Declined.
File:In Dublins fair city 02.JPG: Promoted.

-- ~ Moheen ^(talk) 19:50, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FleetPond ReedBed 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 21:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FourMetricInstruments.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 07:07, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful - Too bad the picture is not used.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment It would be good to put the view orientation. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 19:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Done - scope changed. Martinvl (talk) 21:55, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment Perspective needs to be corrected. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 06:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Done --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 06:38, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:52, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:36, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cecil John Rhodes (1853-1902).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment@Martinvl: You wrote: This is one of the finest nineteenth century photographic portraits that I have seen. You say that in general, or for this man ? It is a very dirty portrait, due to its age, and it deserves a very strong restoration IMO. There are here in"Commons" far much better, cleaner (and older) 19th c. photographic portraits IMO...--Jebulon (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Info@Jebulon: I was looking for images of various notable South Africans from that era when I came across this image. Ideally I would have liked to post an image of a similar quality of Paul Kruger, Rhodes' adversary, but I could not find any suitable images. (PS, I trust that you do not mind me having slightly reformatted your posting). Martinvl (talk) 17:30, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Scope: Niels Bohr Commemoration Meeting, 1963.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support A good image, showing both the sphere and some precision machine, proving it's not just any sphere. Otherwise, to me it looks like a pétanque ball... ;-) (It's not geo localized, though.) --Mathieu MD (talk) 18:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

 Comment Geolocation added. (to nearest 100 metres!) Martinvl (talk) 21:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

 Question Who is the man in the picture. What is its role in the project. If this is the project leader image would have much more interest. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

 Info. @Archaeodontosaurus: He is the master optician. I have added that information to the image description. Martinvl (talk) 07:02, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:13, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Silicon sphere for Avogadro project.jpg: 0
2. PrecisionOptics Achim2.jpg: +2 <--
3. SiliconSphere-Closeup.png: +1
=>
File:Silicon sphere for Avogadro project.jpg: Declined.
File:PrecisionOptics Achim2.jpg: Promoted. <--
File:SiliconSphere-Closeup.png: Declined.

--Mathieu MD (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GrootConstantiaHomestead.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 10:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Best in category. High quality. INeverCry 23:10, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 Comment, can we have view direction added to the scope to allow for VIs of views from other directions please. DeFacto (talk). 06:02, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose, pending response to request for direction to be added to scope. DeFacto (talk). 08:07, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
•  Info @DeFacto: : The opening sentence of Commons:Valued image scope#How to choose your scope states "Think of scope as being akin to a Commons Category, or to the generic title of a Gallery page". Since there are no significant differences in the rock formation when viewed from different direction, stating the direction is, in my view, an invitation to "scope spamming". That is why I declined to add the direction. Martinvl (talk) 13:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment, @Martinvl: visually you see different features from different angles, albeit on the same rock formation. For instance this view shows how asymetrical the overhang is and how precarious the balance is - something not visible in the nominated view. That is why I asked for the direction to be added to the scope, to allow for different view scopes that show these different features. DeFacto (talk). 15:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose An asymmetrical object necessarily has different views, it is clear that both sides are different. DeFacto is right. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Cheesewring rock formation, Cornwall to Cheesewring rock formation from the west. --Martinvl (talk) 17:04, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

@Archaeodontosaurus, Archaeodontosaurus, and INeverCry: Scope changed Martinvl (talk) 17:04, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Ok for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
•  Support, thanks - ok for me now - best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:03, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
•  Support INeverCry 19:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CheesewringMinions.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks OK to me. --Peulle 19:43, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cape Fur Seal (Arctocephalus pusillus), Hout Bay.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:36, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Castle of Good Hope key ceremony.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Castle of Good Hope Entrance (1682).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 18:14, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment Very beautiful image, very emblematic that, for now, is useless. You must have replaced this image CapeTownCityHall.jpg, which is mediocre, by yours for a few days. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:39, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
•  Info @Archaeodontosaurus: . I don't understand the problem. There are still two files in Commons: the old one (CapeTownCityHall.jpg) and the new one (CapeTown_CityHall.jpg). Notice that there is an underscore/space in the filename associated with the new file. Also, if you check the history of the two files, you will find no overlap. Martinvl (talk) 07:37, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
• Indeed I did not explain myself well. What is our job here? To highlight images that we think are of value value. We have to prove this by placing these images in the encyclopedies before the concourse. If they are not remove it is what will be recognized by all as of high value. If we give labels to images that are not used we lose our time and we devalorise the label. In your case you should replace the mediocre image which is very used by yours, which is exellent, in any case where it bad image is used. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:47, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
  • My reading of the offical Commons policy here says that I should not over-write the existing file. There is of course no reason why I should not replace links to the existing file with links to the new file (which is what I intend to do). Martinvl (talk) 08:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

 Comment, @Martinvl: to me it's clear that Archaeodontosaurus is not suggesting that you should overwrite any existing file. He is suggesting that to demonstrate the value of your image you should replace uses of any other images with uses of your image - the test being to see if it is generally accepted or reverted. DeFacto (talk). 09:52, 20 November 2016 (UTC).

Yes DeFacto understood. It is an additional degree of democracy. Replacing the images is a normal act. If you try to place a bad image, it will not stay up more than a few minutes on most encyclopedias. Yours will be very welcome where you place it. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Archaeodontosaurus for incouraging to replace images on the WPs because I often feel embarassed to replace other's work --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done I have made 30 replacements in 28 different Wikipedias and had one reversion - that reversion was because I replaced an archive image (See here. I am however a little uneasy about doing bulk replacements before my image is reviewed. Martinvl (talk) 15:19, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope and good work --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment See my response to a similar objection on the pied wagtail VI nomination below. Charles (talk) 11:54, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment it would be useful that this image is used. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:59, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Martinvl (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment, can this building be seen from other directions? If it can, please qualify the scope with view direction or other description such as "facade". As there are several images of this building in this large general category, it would probably be better to create a sub-category for just this building and move all the related images to it. DeFacto (talk). 19:03, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Martinvl (talk) 20:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

•  Support, good for me now, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:15, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vergelegen Homestead, North wing.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support I've looked through the images of the category and I think this photo shows well the geyser and, as you say, the surroundings. Furthermore the presence of people gives an idea of the height of the water column. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:50, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. lNeverCry 06:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Best in scope. --Basotxerri (talk) 21:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Best in scope. lNeverCry 21:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Best in scope. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:58, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Pierre André (talk) 16:03, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Useful and best in scope. --Basotxerri (talk) 10:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Best in scope. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment, I think the scope category needs tidying first. There are similar images in the main category Category:Peace Palace (where this image is) and then many more in the sub-category Category:Exterior of the Peace Palace. DeFacto (talk). 21:32, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

   Info Since the image in question is in both scopes (parent and daughter), I have removed the parent scope from the image, retaining the daughter scope. The visible text of the new scope is unchanged. See below. Martinvl (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Peace Palace (front view), The Hague to Peace Palace (front view), The Hague. Note the underlying category has been changed, not the visible text. --Martinvl (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

•  Support, better now - useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 23:27, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 21:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Swiss "Crocodile" locomotive (Ce 6-8 Mark II).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. Yann (talk) 15:38, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
•  Support The clour of the engine is better in this image --Berthold Werner (talk) 14:20, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. SBB Ce 6-8 II (2).jpg: +1
2. SBB Ce 6-8 II Krokodil (2).jpg: +2 <--
=>
File:SBB Ce 6-8 II (2).jpg: Declined.
File:SBB Ce 6-8 II Krokodil (2).jpg: Promoted. <--

--DeFacto (talk). 20:35, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 09:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. lNeverCry 00:58, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment - I'd like to support, but I'm not sure how to search for all the other pictures in this scope, if in fact there are any others on Commons. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Info The word "Gandhi" links to "Category:Mohandas K. Gandhi in South Africa. Look at that category and its daughter categories and take it from there. Also, press the "Good Pictures" button on that category page. Then use your judgement as to whether or not this is too sepcific a scope bearing in mind that there is a Wikipedia artcile Indian Ambulance Corps. (PS - I am the nominator). Martinvl (talk) 15:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - Thank you. Let's have a discussion. I think File:Gandhi Johannesburg 1900.jpg is a clearer picture of Gandhi, and it was taken during the Second Anglo-Boer War, but it's in his role as Barrister. However, I think this detail - File:Gandhi Boer war.jpg - makes it a lot easier to see Gandhi. I think the photo that you are nominating should be a VI, but perhaps the scope should be changed to "Gandhi with the stretcher-bearers of the Indian Ambulance Corps during the Second Anglo-Boer War". I would certainly support this photo if nominated in that scope, but I hesitate to support it in the current scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - Thank you for your support. I find the suggested scope rather a mouthful, but may I suggest the much shorter Scope "Natal Indian Ambulance Corps" with a link to the English Wikipedia article en:Indian Ambulance Corps. (See Commons:Valued image scope#Links in the scope). If it is classified as a VI, then any searches for "Good Pictures" from Category:Mohandas K. Gandhi will pick it up. Martinvl (talk) 08:19, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - I'm in agreement with this. Please go ahead and change the scope this way, and then I'll vote to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:31, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - @Ikan Kekek: Done -- Martinvl (talk) 10:37, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Category:Mohandas K. Gandhi in South Africa to Natal Indian Ambulance Corps --Martinvl (talk) 10:37, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

 Support Very nice historical document, with high value. Scope is fine now, IMHO. Joalpe (talk) 10:52, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Support per Joalpe's remarks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:14, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose, this image does not satisfy VI criterion #6. It is not well categorised and none of its categories relate in any way to the claimed scope. DeFacto (talk). 17:20, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Info @DeFacto: The image has now been linked to Category:Second Boer War Medical Services. Martinvl (talk) 18:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Info @DeFacto: is right : the scope has not been changed. The bot only takes into account the "| scope =" field. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:44, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

• Why is the more general scope Category:Second Boer War Medical Services better than Natal Indian Ambulance Corps? Because it's a Commons category rather than a Wikipedia article, right? I will temporarily strike my support vote so that this issue can be worked out without the file being promoted prematurely. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

• @Ikan Kekek: my original "oppose" was because the image file was not well categorised, so did not satisfy VI criterion #6. Martinvl then created Category:Second Boer War Medical Services (although it is not clear why he named it that rather than "Indian Ambulance Corps") and added the image to that category. However, as Archaeodontosaurus has now pointed out, the link in the candidate scope text should now also be changed to link to the better category as per the normal, expected and mostly followed VI convention (and described in Commons:Valued image scope#Links in the scope - bullet point 2). In addition to those basic expectations, appropriate Wikipedia articles can be linked-to within the image file description - which will also make the image more useful. I hope that all helps you follow my reasoning and is clear. DeFacto (talk). 09:39, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Natal Indian Ambulance Corps to Natal Indian Ambulance Corps -- Martinvl (talk) 10:30, 29 December 2016 (UTC) {{{3}}}

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

 Info @DeFacto, Archaeodontosaurus, Ikan Kekek, and Joalpe: Scope has now been linked to Category:Second Boer War Medical Services.

•  Comment Well for this point. But it must be remembered that all positive votes are canceled and that only votes negative for the moment. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:39, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

• OK, I will again  Support, although I'm not sure why we're using this more general scope. However, as there is no other picture currently in that scope, from what I saw...And thanks for talking me through all that, DeFacto. I may quiz you on that at a future date. :-) -- 13:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Info, thanks Martinvl, the category linked in the scope is good for me now and the new links in the image file description further add value, so I've struck my oppose. @Ikan Kekek: the scope hasn't changed that is what is described by the text - what has changed is that the scope now links to a related Commons category, which is preferred to a Wikipedia article. And please feel free to quiz me any time. . DeFacto (talk). 16:30, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:09, 31 December 2016 (UTC)