User talk:Butko/Архив (ноябрь 2010)

Изменение изображений

Просьба (если можно). кота в программе изменения изображений добавить на глаз контрастность этому коту до понедельника, если возможно. Сейчас нет ни одной программы на компьютере по работе с изображениями... Только по их открытию. Только через три дня смогу сам. Обсуждение тут. Извиняюсь за беспокойство. --Vizu (talk) 17:16, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Если изменил слишком много/мало - пиши, сделаю по-другому --Butko (talk) 18:05, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Большое спасибо! Не мало - это точно). Кот пепельного цвета по жизни, он неброский. Может, вполовину? --Vizu (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Загрузил новую версию с меньшей контрастностью --Butko (talk) 18:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Нельзя ли повернуть вертикально на пару градусов влево и перегрузить? --Vizu (talk) 18:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

• Спасибо! И ещё вопрос: с помощью какой программы можно исправить перспективу фотографии (загиб к центру по краям)? вообще такая есть? --Vizu (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Я такое делать не пробовал, но говорят, что перспективу можно в фотошопе исправлять --Butko (talk) 19:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Удалённые иллюстрации Воронежа

Здравствуйте, Андрей. Можно Вас попросить выслать мне на электронную почту (evgeniy[собака]lazarev.com) файлы и их текст описаний, удалённые из-за отсутствия свободы панормамы в РФ. Файлы за авторством Insider, 22 july, Fazil Gadalov, Фазиль Гадалов можно проигнорировать.

• File:Rot1.jpg
• File:Rotonda Voronezh.JPG
• File:Rotonda2007.jpg
• File:RotondaVoronezh.jpg
• File:Памятник в Н.Усмани.jpg
• File:Памятник ВОВ.jpg
• File:Памятник на площади Победы.JPG
• File:Monument (Ostuzheva street).JPG
• File:Чижовский плацдарм.Памятник.jpeg
• File:Чижовский.Воронеж.jpg

--Insider (talk) 12:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Отправил утром --Butko (talk) 10:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Я там ответ послал. Вы текст описаний забыли, без него загрузить в РВ никак нельзя. --Insider (talk) 12:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Отправил описания --Butko (talk) 12:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Огромное спасибо! --Insider (talk) 13:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anadara kagoshimensis shell.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 16:51, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hylotelephium spectabile in Donetsk 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, though the bottom crop is a bit tight. --Cayambe 20:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dokuchaevsk 016.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not far from QI, but see annotations, please.--Jebulon 01:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC) I removed object from foreground and make overexposed part more dark. Ok now. Thank you--Jebulon 14:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Добрый!

Нельзя ли посмотреть претензии к фото Генкина озера Немрут? Я не учил английский) А Генкин, скорее всего, вообще не появится в ближайшие месяцы. Спасибо! --Vizu (talk) 16:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Jagro пишет, что, может быть, стоит сделать немного темнее, а Quartl пишет, что в левой части неба проблемы с экспозицией на голубом и зелёном каналах, он пишет "blown" - дословно это переводится как "взорваный", наверное, имеется в виду пересвет --Butko (talk) 17:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

А можно сделать действительно еле-еле темнее? (просто понимаю, что Генкину фото до лампочки в данный момент, а у меня кроме пейнт браша нет на этом компе ни одной программы(). Фото классное, жаль терять, никто больше его никогда не выставит. (Впрочем, фотоаппаратом такого класса можно вытворять много чего, но никто из википедистов к этому вулкану не заедет в ближайшие лет надцать, туда нет экскурсий). --Vizu (talk) 17:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Если получится - сделаю --Butko (talk) 07:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Нет. Не возьмусь. Я не понимаю, что и как нужно исправлять. Нужен более опытный фотограф. --Butko (talk) 11:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

• И ещё вопрос: а если про фото никто так и не высказался, оно (рамка) осталось синим и перешло в архив без итога, то это баг или такое возможно? --Vizu (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Это нормально. Через время можно будет выставить снова --Butko (talk) 17:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Спасибо! --Vizu (talk) 17:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• Добрый вечер. А ценная иллюстрация может быть только одна в данной категории? --Vizu (talk) 17:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

В основном, да. Но может быть и несколько, например, растение целиком и отдельно цветок, плод, корень, лист. Животное целиком и его скелет, череп. Здание и его интерьер. Ещё есть наборы ценных изображений, например, Valued image set: Baron Münchhausen --Butko (talk) 12:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Спасибо! Извиняюсь, не мог бы обрезать слева этот шедевр (и всё)? + (удалить все ненужные изображения между первым и этим). А как исправить можно Пушкина? --Vizu (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Обрезал и немного повернул Папу и Пушкина. Но Пушкина могут отклонить из-за бликов от вспышки. Не совсем разобрался с удалением версий - сейчас у Папы три версии - ты так хотел? Или среднюю версию тоже нужно удалить? --Butko (talk) 07:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Огромное спасибо! Фото Евгения можно просто увеличить в размере (и всё), выше 850 кб? Хотел ещё спросить - а можно де-отцветить фотографию? Есть вот такая, достаточно уникальная, фотография Дмитрия Следюка. Он её решил сделать "покрасивее", и получилось неестественно. Можно ли её как-то обесцветить? --Vizu (talk) 15:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

• Спасибо за фото с воздушного шара! Теперь оно нормально выглядит) --Vizu (talk) 15:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Орден

		Орден «100 качественных изображений»
		За взятый рубеж в 100 качественных изображений на Викискладе. Отличная работа, поздравляю! -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:08, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Спасибо --Butko (talk) 04:46, 6 October 2010 (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:
Xyleutes d'urvillei.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:09, 5 October 2010 (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:
Mydas coerulescens.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:36, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:10, 5 October 2010 (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:
Brachycerus apterus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met, best in scope --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:41, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment scope should be in italics. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 16:26, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Now  Support Per George. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:11, 5 October 2010 (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:
Eupholus azureus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:12, 5 October 2010 (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:
Pepsis vitripennis.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:13, 5 October 2010 (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:
Pepsis gigantea.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:17, 5 October 2010 (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:
Cerastoderma glaucum (Lagoon cockle), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in scope --The High Fin Sperm Whale 16:38, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
•  request Please always provide an English name when available. Lycaon (talk) 20:34, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know English names. English is not my native language. My biological vocabulary is very poor. --Butko (talk) 08:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

That's not a real excuse with Internet at your fingertips. English is not my native language neither. Lycaon (talk) 11:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:14, 5 October 2010 (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:
Gafrarium tumidum, shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met for a studio photo --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Genus name of the file is wrong. Please have it renamed. Lycaon (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you --Butko (talk) 08:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I rename file --Butko (talk) 09:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:15, 5 October 2010 (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:
Mytilus galloprovincialis (Mediterranean mussel), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met for a studio photo. Best in scope, used in articles --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:48, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:18, 5 October 2010 (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:
Nerita exuvia (Snake-skin nerite), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met for a studio photo. It is tiny shell (~5mm) --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:50, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:19, 5 October 2010 (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:
Scapharca inaequivalvis (Unequal arc), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met for a studio photo --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:20, 5 October 2010 (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:
Paralithodes platypus (Blue king crab).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Single image in this scope.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:42, 6 October 2010 (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:
Macraspis cincta (Shining leaf chafer beetle).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:43, 6 October 2010 (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:
Eurycantha rosenbergii, female.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:34, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:18, 6 October 2010 (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:
Lopholithodes mandtii (Puget Sound King Crab).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support single image in this scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:17, 6 October 2010 (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:
Tanea lineata (Lined moon snail), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:21, 6 October 2010 (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:
Murex trapa (Rare-spined murex), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:16, 6 October 2010 (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:
Babylonia spirata (Spiral babylon), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:13, 6 October 2010 (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:
Cyclope pellucida (Cyclops nassa), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:12, 6 October 2010 (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:
Tectus fenestratus, shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:11, 6 October 2010 (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:
Eobania vermiculata (Chocolate-band snail), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:09, 6 October 2010 (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:
Odontolabis delesserti.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  oppose until fixed De name is incorrect. It should be Odontolabis delesserti (Guérin, 1839). Lycaon (talk) 13:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC) Thank you. Lycaon (talk) 14:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Fixed --Butko (talk) 14:18, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:00, 8 October 2010 (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:
Archimandrita marmorata.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:05, 8 October 2010 (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:
Acanthinodera cumingi.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 15:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:06, 8 October 2010 (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:
Linuparus trigonus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:14, 9 October 2010 (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:
Nicrophorus americanus (American Burying Beetle).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support The image could do with more brightness and better contrast, though. --Quartl (talk) 16:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:24, 9 October 2010 (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:
Ischiopsopha jamesi.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:36, 9 October 2010 (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:
Donax trunculus (Truncate donax), shell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in scope --The High Fin Sperm Whale 16:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose The characterizing side for this species of the shell is just hidden in the sand. Please shoot again. Lycaon (talk) 21:49, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
•  No better ones available. Pitke (talk) 07:02, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 08:08, 10 October 2010 (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:
Soviet photocamera FED 5V.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Mile (talk) 21:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:34, 11 October 2010 (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:
RD-170 rocket engine.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met. I should note that I think it's a pity that many nominations of this type went undecided, as the uploader clearly did a lot of work for them. --MichaelBueker (talk) 22:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment They can be renominated (with argumentation). I left one as sign that nobody was reacting within 8 days. Lycaon (talk) 08:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 06:02, 14 October 2010 (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:
Shakhtar Stadium, Donetsk.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment To be clear, you mean the old stadium that was used by FC Shakhtar because now the club has a new home named Donbas Arena.--MrPanyGoff (talk) 10:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes I mean old stadium. New stadium situated in another place and have another name. --Butko (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

See en:Shakhtar Stadium --Butko (talk) 11:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Comment - It seems to be the only photo in Commons of the subject. I'm going to look if there is another one. Maybe the camera location should be corrected a little. The actual position is outside the stadium.--MrPanyGoff (talk) 13:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Camera location is true. I shot outside the stadium from top of spoil tip --Butko (talk) 13:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Support The criteria are my in my opinion. --MichaelBueker (talk) 22:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 05:57, 14 October 2010 (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:
Enver Izmaylov.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria are met. --MichaelBueker (talk) 22:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 06:00, 14 October 2010 (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:
Enoplocerus armillatus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:17, 15 October 2010 (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:
Lethocerus grandis.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:VICpromoted глючит

• не отображает scope
• нельзя посмотреть историю обсуждения, как это было раньше.

с уважением, --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:27, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Починил scope, по-идее, должны и другие параметры починиться, если что-то не работает дайте, пожалуйста, ссылку на пример--Butko (talk) 14:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Запит на марку

кахля

Андрію, скажи, а марки з кахлями uk:Бахматюк Олекса, існують?--Albedo-ukr (talk) 15:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Знаю цю, але Бахматюк це чи ні я не знаю --Butko (talk) 15:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Просьба 2 и 3

Удалить два ненужных промежуточных изображения и три самых первых. Спасибо! --Vizu (talk) 17:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

• Добрый день, Андрей! Нельзя ли сказать номер ОТРС, посланного вчера мной Главкому НН и сюда : 16 Окт 2010 20:49:45. Спасибо! --Vizu (talk) 08:18, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Номер такой: 2010101610006702 --Butko (talk) 13:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

• Спасибо! Нельзя ли удалить [1] - полная копия и [2] - тоже копия, и [3] все файлы кроме Спейдовского - только он 1997 года выпуска 2001 года, остальные 2004. Также просьба удалить категорию, поскольку никаких денег Советская Россия в 1917 году не выпускала вообще. --Vizu (talk) 18:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Являются ли свободными фотографии старых книг?

Собственно вопрос в названии темы. Конкретно - можно ли свободно размещать на складе вот эти изображения одной и той же серии книг: [4], [5]. Сами книги были изданы ещё в XIX-м веке, однако фотографии сделаны несколько лет назад. --Kaidor (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Тут вопрос в том, считать ли такие фотографии творческой работой, если да, то нельзя размещать чужие фото. Можно посоветоваться об этом на ru:Википедия:Форум/Авторское право. Полной уверенности у меня нет, но я склоняюсь к тому, что их скорее всего удалят --Butko (talk) 04:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Переименование

Приветствую вас! Пишу вам по совету User:Dnikitin (здесь). По вопросу: усилиями бота изображения памятных российских монет ушли на склад, потом моими - категоризованы. Там же заключили, что вем файлам лучше иметь имена с каталожным номером. Есть устоявшаяся система → RR/кат.№/R→если реверс, аверс без буквы. Я хочу, чтобы все jubcoin, с украинскими названиями или какими-то ещё от балды были переименованы.

Таких изображений не мало, лить каждое будет труднее.

Как это осуществить? Именно массово. Все запросы следует отправлять вам или кому-нибудь ещё из админов? Или может я могу получить флаг переимнователя? Тут с этим как-то неясно, не как в рувики - по заявкам...Serjio-pt (talk) 17:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Я выставил Вам права переименовывающего --Butko (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Благодарю!

Помощь

Не подскажите, почему у меня на страницах некоторых файлов в инструментах отсутствует пункт "номинировать на удаление"?--Agent001 (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Дайте пример страницы, хотя вряд ли смогу что-то подсказать --Butko (talk) 10:28, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Напр. File:Vladimir Vysotsky in Germany. 1948.jpg, File:Vysotsky with grandfather in 1951.jpg. А вот здесь есть -- File:Володя Высоцкий с отцом Семёном Владимировичем 1948.jpg.--Agent001 (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

У меня на всех трёх есть --Butko (talk) 11:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

А у меня нет.--Agent001 (talk) 11:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Можно попробовать посмотреть в другом браузере, или почистить кеш+куки в текущем браузере --Butko (talk) 11:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

{{VICpromoted}}

Hi. I'm afraid that your edits on this template have broken a number of things. Among possible other issues, it is not autotranslated anymore, and the "role" parameter doesn't work anymore. Would you be kind enough to restore this template and its subpages to a safe and stable state? Thanks in advance, --Eusebius (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I revert changes --Butko (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! --Eusebius (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Renames by Serjio-pt

Hi, I noticed you granted file renaming rights to the above user. Would take time to explain him the related policy, e.g.

• 17:46, 2010 October 20 Serjio-pt (talk | contribs) moved File:XX Olympics coin revers.gif to File:RR5111-0149R.gif ‎ (ед.имя) (revert)

seems to be the wrong way round.  Docu  at 04:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I temporally disable renaming for this user. And start discussion with them about naming policy --Butko (talk) 06:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Приветствую вас! Если на то пошло, то лучше уж делать File:RR5111-0149R_XX Olympics coin revers.gif и перенаправление на него File:RR5111-0149R.gif. И обращу ваше внимание, что часто употребляемые файлы я старался избегать пока, но если иностранный участник считает, что так он его не найдёт, более полезным действием с его стороны было бы присвоить категорию файлу. Но это изображение всё-равно оставалось бесхозным. Основная цель - обессиротить все монеты, вписать их в ru:Каталог памятных монет России и если у каждого будет "своё имя" - то едвали это можно будет осуществить. Только если будет внятный каталог, можно будет понять что о чём. Serjio-pt (talk) 13:50, 21 October 2010 (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:
Zenon tower, Chersonesos Taurica, Crimea.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria met. --MichaelBueker (talk) 16:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Question What is the notability of this place? The category has just been created, and I didn't find an article in WP about these precise ruins. --Myrabella (talk) 21:16, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Until notability is established. Lycaon (talk) 23:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC) I can live with this. Lycaon (talk) 19:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

 InfoPlease don't close woting. I want to write article in Wikipedia about this tower. Today or tomorow --Butko (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

• I write article ru:Башня Зенона. See automatic translate to English. Article not full, I found more sources, for example [6] (on Russian)). --Butko (talk) 15:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2010 (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:
Basilica in basilica, Chersonesos Taurica, Crimea.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support The criteria are met. --MichaelBueker (talk) 16:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
• I would suggest to add a mention of the location in the scope, the only WP article related to this place being in Russian. Something like "Basilica in basilica, Chersonesos, Crimea". Chersonesos seems to be the usual translation in English, and the region is worth to be precised as there were several "Chersonesos". --Myrabella (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Scope is confusing. Lycaon (talk) 23:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I clarified scope to «Basilica in basilica, Chersonesos Taurica, Crimea» --Butko (talk) 08:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

 Acknowledged. Lycaon (talk) 08:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 05:58, 19 October 2010 (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:
RD-0110 rocket engine.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

The criteria are met. --MichaelBueker (talk) 00:38, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose =>
undecided. Lycaon (talk) 21:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Not reviewed in previous nomination. MichaelBueker was support my nomination of another rocket engine and said "I should note that I think it's a pity that many nominations of this type went undecided, as the uploader clearly did a lot of work for them." --Butko (talk) 10:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:39, 24 October 2010 (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:
Fulgora maculata.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Poor quality, but all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:40, 24 October 2010 (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:
Coprophanaeus ensifer.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --The High Fin Sperm Whale 18:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:43, 24 October 2010 (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:
RD-119 rocket engine.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Not reviewed in previous nomination --Butko (talk) 07:15, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria satisfied, but would have preferred an unobstructed viewpoint. Walter Siegmund (talk) 03:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:18, 1 November 2010 (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:
RD-214 rocket engine.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Not reviewed in previous nomination --Butko (talk) 07:15, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria satisfied, but would have preferred softer lighting. Walter Siegmund (talk) 03:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Просьба переименовать

Андрей, если не трудно, переименуй два файла и File:Vipera renardi and Bufo viridis; Baikonur 01.jpg и File:Vipera renardi and Bufo viridis; Baikonur 02.jpg в соответствии с новым описанием. А то я накосячил с определением. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 05:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

ОТРС

Добрый вечер! Андрей, нельзя ли сказать номер ОТРС, посланного Главкомом НН мне сегодня 02 Ноя 2010 20:30:28 мск? Спасибо! --Vizu (talk) 18:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Я не нашел такого письма. Кстати, тикета 2010101610006702 тоже не существует, нужно проверить номер --Butko (talk) 08:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Странно, этот номер я нашел, когда искал в прошлый раз, а сейчас его нет --Butko (talk) 08:29, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[

Андрей, кто-то его стёр. 2 письма были (одно послал я, второе - Главком). Как оформить ОТРС друг другу, если кто-то стирает)? Тексты писем http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Vizu/Permissions#Glavkom_NN тут]. Я подтверждаю ОТРС, Главком подтверждает ОТРС. --Vizu (talk) 17:51, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Чтобы не зависеть от OTRS вы можете оба создать страницы у себя наподобие User:Glavkom_NN/Permission for Vizu и User:Vizu/Permission for Glavkom_NN, а потом вставлять на них либо ссылку в описании изображения, либо вставлять весь текст как шаблон {{Glavkom NN/Permission for Vizu}}. --Butko (talk) 08:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

• + удалить неиспользуемый файл с неправильным описанием. --Vizu (talk) 21:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Я переименовал этот файл и убрал неправильное описание --Butko (talk) 08:24, 3 November 2010 (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:
Electric multiple units EPL2T.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Not reviewed in previous nomination. --Butko (talk) 11:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Support personally would prefer a bit more of the side in view, but still better than File:EPL2T-031 Lviv 2.jpg based on technical merits and angle of picture. Jolly Janner (talk) 20:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Thomisus onustus with Apis mellifera.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Thomisus onustus with Apis mellifera.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:04, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Category:School medals

Здравствуйте, я хотел пристроить эти 2 изображения File:Silver medal schools Azerbaijan SSR1.jpg, File:Silver medal schools Azerbaijan SSR2.jpg, но тут выяснилось, что категория школьных медалий узурпирована Россией =), а также под категории Category:Gold School Medal, Category:Silver Medal. Вероятно стоит по странам разбить, вам наверно виднее как правильнее систематизировать. Заранее спасибо. --фрашкард (talk) 07:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done --Butko (talk) 07:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

OTRS

Здравствуйте. В начале августа я получил разрешение на использование изображений и текстов с сайта khachkar.ru/. К сожалению, первое письмо я либо удалил, либо не знаю куда оно делось, где прямое подтверждение. Есть второе, которое было получено через 2 недели, в котором администратор сайта просит посмотреть рамещение материалов в Википедии. Как можно оформить разрешение на использование материалов в Википроектах, можете помочь?--Pandukht (talk) 15:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Пример оформления разрешения описан на странице Commons:OTRS/ru#Шаблонное разрешение. Вы можете попросить авторов сайта отправить этот текст на адрес permissions-commons@wikimedia.org --Butko (talk) 15:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeees! Я нашёл письмо с подтверждением. Сейчас отправлю его на указанный адрес. Всё правильно?--Pandukht (talk) 18:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Письмо пришло, его тикет 2010110810009428, только нужно, чтобы правообладатель указал лицензию явно, сейчас этого нет --Butko (talk) 12:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Симферополь_007.jpg

File:Симферополь_007.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Симферополь_008.jpg

File:Симферополь_008.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Vanjagenije (talk) 18:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

это они об этом. Нашли одну его работу сорок второго года, и все, счастья полные штаны, под поправку не попадают. Хочу как раз спросить, как долго удаленные картинки остаются на сервере? Через какой промежуток времени админ не сможет их восстановить? Если, например, через 2 года, когда срок кончится, воскресить это? потому что я, честно говоря, запарилась эти картинки по всему инету искать. Shakko (talk) 18:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

2 года, по-идее, картинки должны храниться. Я восстанавливал изображения, которые были удалены и более продолжительный срок. Можно подстраховаться и сделать копии ещё где-нибудь, благо хостингов/файлообменников/торрентов хватает. Завтра ботом сделаю список файлов и поставлю в календарь напоминалку, чтобы восстановить через 2 года --Butko (talk) 20:08, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

таки-да, я правильно посчитала, что срок истекает в 2012? кстати, можно заняться в свободное время: перегрузить сюда тех, кто перешел в общественное достояние в этом году. Shakko (talk) 20:19, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

По-моему, в 2013. 1942+70=2012 и нужно ждать 1 января следующего года, т.е. 2013. Каждый год кто-то переходит в ОД и не загружены авторы не только этого года, но и предыдущих - работы много ;) и недолго до следующего года осталось --Butko (talk) 20:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Computerra-cover-706.jpg

Я прошу вас уточнить, действительно ли по OTRS было получено разрешение от правообладателя на использование этого файла по свободной лицензии? Дело в том, что по ссылке на источник указанна атрибуция "(с)All Rights Reserved", противоречие выходит.--Agent001 (talk) 23:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Разрешение пришло с электронной почты на домене computerra.ru, имя автора письма совпадает с указанным в описании изображения --Butko (talk) 12:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Авторство

Здравствуйте, ситуация такая: имеются два изображения File:Skandal v nauke 2.JPG и File:Skandal v nauke 1.JPG где в источнике указано "собственная работа", а время создания 2009 год. Всё это под лицензией {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Сегодня нашёл на одном форуме оригиналы [7], [8]. При этом пост в котором они выложены датирован аж "Posted 04 December 2008 - 21:03" [9] (скрин peeep.us). Я склонен полагать, что загрузивший изображения не является их автором, скорее всего под авторством он имел ввиду то, что получилось в результате обработки фотошопом (я про жёлтый маркер), но ведь для этого сам оригинал должен распространятся под свободной лицензией, для чего опять же нужно знать источник. Я сам не могу вынести данные изображения на обсуждение или удаление, даже если имеются основание, так как подобные действия могут дать повод для моей длительной (бессрочной) блокировки в ruwiki.--фрашкард (talk) 10:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ливадийский дворец 011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 top and the base are cut. Even so nice. --Bartiebert 17:19, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ливадийский дворец 029.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice for me.--Gaeser 17:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ливадийский дворец 010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --George Chernilevsky 09:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Betula pendula in Sedovo 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Jebulon 16:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lavandula angustifolia in Sedovo 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 to me--Jebulon 16:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Magnolia grandiflora flower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good !--Jebulon 16:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Polyporus squamosus in Donetsk 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 16:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)