User talk:C-M

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to the Commons, C-M!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | تۆرکجه | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | भोजपुरी | Bahasa Banjar | বাংলা | català | нохчийн | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | euskara | estremeñu | فارسی | suomi | français | Frysk | galego | עברית | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk | occitan | Ирон | polski | português | português do Brasil | rumantsch | română | русский | sicilianu | Scots | سنڌي | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | українська | اردو | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 粵語 | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−
Crystal Clear app korganizer.png First steps tutorial

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

Icon apps query.svg Getting help

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

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


Image:Logo CP 2.svg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Logo CP 2.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zzyzx11 04:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Images of Constitucion, Chile[edit]

Good morning (sorry if you don't understand, I don't speak well english): You has consigned that the images Constitución ciudad Chile.JPG and Conti_Playa_y_Piedra.jpg are for deletion of this site, because there are doubts of the origin and use of them. I want say that those images have been placed with authorization of its creator, mr. Victor Moya Villablanca, whose mail is victor.tomas.moy@gmail.com. Those images are in their blog fotosdeconti.blogspot.com (it is indicated in the information of the photos), and their license is: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/cl/ .

Without another individual it salutes kindly

Sergio Arenas B. User:Xarucoponce.

Hy Sergio - I've nominated your images 'couse they are cc-nc-only - have a look on Commons:Licensing where you will find "The Wikimedia Commons accepts only free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. The details are explained below. The Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use justifications; see below for the reasons. Commons also does not accept noncommercial-only content." greetings, --C-M 20:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Flickr reviewing[edit]

Hi. Per your Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers request (now archived), I've added you to the reviewers list. Feel free to ask me if you need help. Cheers, giggy (:O) 10:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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


Hello, C-M!
Tip: Add categories to your images

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

Here's how:

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

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

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

BotMultichillT 05:40, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Software used?[edit]

Do you know which software was used to create File:Spherical triangle 3d opti.png? Please reply to my talk page, thanks. SharkD (talk) 04:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Achtung_koffeinjunkies.svg[edit]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Yikrazuul (talk) 16:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Wikicon logo C-M 2.svg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 21:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Agrobacterium tumefaciens Forsythie.jpg[edit]

hi, please check File talk:Agrobacterium tumefaciens Forsythie.jpg. thanks − MIRROR (talk) 15:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Quellen täglicher Energiezufuhr in % 2001-2003 (FAO)-2.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Quellen täglicher Energiezufuhr in % 2001-2003 (FAO)-2.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Ices2Csharp (talk) 13:22, 25 March 2012 (UTC)



Afrikaans | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | עברית | हिन्दी | italiano | Lëtzebuergesch | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk | norsk nynorsk | polski | română | русский | српски (ћирилица)‎ | srpski (latinica)‎ | slovenčina | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | Tagalog | українська | +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Dear C-M,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world!

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
Wiki Loves Monuments logo
Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 00:21, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

About Gull pictures[edit]

Hi, is this and this bird a chick of Silbermöwe (Larus argentatus)? It need to be categorized. –Makele-90 (talk) 01:24, 20 December 2012 (UTC)



català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | עברית | svenska | +/−

Wiki Loves Public Art about to take off!

Dear C-M,
During May we are running Wiki Loves Public Art, a photo contest focused on getting photographs of artworks and sculptures uploaded to Wikimedia Commons.

Have a look at the lists of objects included, and of participating GLAMs in your country, and upload as many images as you can.

Kind regards,

the organizers of Wiki Loves Public Art
Wiki Loves Public Art logo
Message delivered by odderBot on 13:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Ven st ibbs ka 7.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Ven st ibbs ka 7.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.
Ven st ibbs ka 5.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Ven st ibbs ka 5.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.

Inactive Image-reviewers[edit]

Hello C-M, there is a discussion about a request regarding your image-reviewer user right, which have never been used or not used recently. You can participate discussion in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Inactive_Image-reviewers. This is just a notification of discussion you may be involved. Best regards, --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Baumwollspinnerei (Leipzig)[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
Baumwollspinnerei (Leipzig) 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 gallery, 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Canon55D (talk) 15:56, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Benennungen[edit]

Hi, Benennungen wie "Friedrich-Ebert-Straße 77" sind problematisch. Es gibt diese Adresse allein in Deutschland nämlich x-mal. Bitte immer auch den Ort nennen, damit das sinnvoll nutzbar ist. Marcus Cyron (talk) 17:34, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Alts at FPC[edit]

Hi! While "Alt" versions are allowed at FPC, we try to minimize the use of it as much as possible since things can quicky get out of hand with multiple alts on too many nominations. (We've been there...) Please, just keep that in mind for future nominations. You can get some comments on which version to nominate at Commons:Photography critiques. Cheers! --cart-Talk 09:56, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Hej cart! The alts have not been intended initially but appeared as the discussion ran into valid points which I was able to fix this way... I will have a look on Commons:Photography critiques for future nominations, didn't know about that page. Tack så mycket, --C-M (talk) 11:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I know they were a result of discussions, just giving you a heads up since it's easy to get carried away once the alts start. :) All the best! --cart-Talk 11:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Capture One[edit]

Several people with Sony cameras use Capture One as a free alternative to Lightroom. I reckon most sw will move to a subscription model (and some aspects will move to the cloud both for data and for processing). It has been financially a very successful move for Adobe. I don't much understand the logic of non-subscription for a product that (a) is being improved on with new versions and (b) where you need a new version if you buy a new camera (or even perhaps a new lens). Phase One offer their product subscription too, and I'm sure they'll drop the other option eventually. 299 Euro + 99 Euro each upgrade is pretty expensive compared to £120 (about £135 Euro) each year to rent both Lightroom Classic, Lightroom CC and Photoshop. Since I use Photoshop for helping with stitched photos and the occasional more advance adjustments, it's a no brainer for me.

I keep meaning to try out Capture One (as I have a Sony) to see if there is anything it does better. Have you found anything? -- Colin (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Colin, I do not mind the money, I am happy to spend the same amount of money every year just to get the upgrades. Still, there is a difference: with a rental model and software as a service the motivation for adobe to improve their software is reduced as their customers pay for just continuing to use the program. In the long term this will reduce development efforts and result in a lower product quality. The second, and more important point for me: my DAM is my photo database which I think of as a photo album: a longterm tool which I want to be able to use in 5, 10, 20 years, even if I get bored of photography in between for a while. With a rental model I loose this database whenever I decide not to continue the monthly payment, with a paid license I can still use it whenever I like. Rental in this context feels like a mafia suggestion: "nice collection of pictures you have there, too bad if something would happen to it". In that context there is no guarantee that Adobe keeps the prices at the current level in the long term. If Adobe would have sold me a standalone license for LR 7 + a 10€ monthly fee for using their cloud service I actually would have directly jumped on as I definitely would pay the 10€ for a well integrated cloud backup and synchronisation solution.
Regarding Capture One: I only use it shortly now, so I am not 100% proficient in its use, however I have seen it performing visibly better at highlight recovery, extracting more details out of my raw files. Also, my contact with the Capture One support regarding a question on keywords has been more pleasing than the one case where my Lightroom had problems activating. --C-M (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I don't make a whole lot of use of the DAM features in Lightroom. So I don't really regard it as a photo album, because there are simply way too many photos in there that I have no interest in processing, or were frames out of a multi-frame or multi-exposure shot, etc. The only photos that count are those I've exported to Flickr or Commons, etc. When the subscription expires, you lose the develop module and map module but can still access the rest, including exporting images. The "motivation to improve the software" argument is speculation really, and most developers are motivated by improving what they work on -- nobody wants to just maintain a product. And since the subscription has been hugely successful for Adobe, more money => more development is I think a stronger argument than speculating that they might just sit on their laurels. Plus competition will motivate them to continue to keep up/ahead. The latest release of Lightroom has seen a huge increase in speed, which I'm happy about.
A workflow that works for me is to use Lightroom to export 16-bit tiff frames, then PtGui to create high-dynamic-range TIFF files (either single or stitched photos) and then use Lightroom to tonemap the results back to 8-bit JPG. I can also use Photoshop on the TIFF to make adjustments or patches. It would be important to me that any alternative is as good as that. However, I think that Lightroom/Photoshop's own HDR-generation, image stacking and photo stitching features are very weak and rarely produce FP level images.
To be honest, I think there is a fair chance you may not be using a desktop PC in 5 years and I'm pretty confident not in 10 years. In 20 years, this will seem as quaint as worrying about what sort of cabinet to keep your video cassettes in. The Cloud version of Lightroom is a signal of where things are going (though it doesn't interest me at present). -- Colin (talk) 17:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I do not agree on the investment argument as the development effort is highly depending on the developers assigned to Lightroom by management. If you can earn the same money with less cost management has little motivation to keep the current pace (which is already rather slow, considering how long it took to bring the new major version). In particular the development effort over the last years has gone to a large share into the mobile market which for the moment is not much more than a gimmick.
I am aware that I am still able to export and to open the database without having a subscription, but I do not have any trust into Adobe to keep it this way in the long term. Their empty promise "Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely." has just been broken. This was one of the reasons for me to go for Lightroom when Apple discontinued Aperture. I am sincerely pissed by the whole situation. --C-M (talk) 17:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
There are many reasons why a product may be developed and competition is probably the strongest. A subscription model is more likely to result in churn as it then becomes relatively painless to switch to a competitor. Whereas with the old model of a large fee upfront and an upgrade discount (sometimes miserly) that only applies to perhaps the previous version or two, there is incentive to keep with the product you have invested in and incentive to keep paying for the upgrade in order to still qualify for an upgrade discount should you need the new features. And Adobe's market share means that no matter what model you consider, they will have hugely more money to spend developing Lightroom than any competitor could dream of. Even the suits want to be managing a product that improves and excels.
If I compare with PtGui, which has an upfront fee but I suspect a relatively small user base, the product has not seen a huge amount of active development for several years. They are stuck with the problem that the current product does most things fairly well, and so what can they add that would encourage people to pay for an upgrade? I can think of a few things that would make it better, but none of them are "must have" features for me. So the developer is stuck with a trickle of new panorama photographers buying it, but zero sales to their existing user base. If they had a subscription model, then they'd have an income which could pay a developer's salary to improve the product. Microsoft Office is another product where really we were all happy with the version from years ago (and I use Libre Office at home) so no incentive for anyone to buy or upgrade. Hence the move to subscription. Those developers have mortgages to pay.
For me, of course, getting Photoshop included is an absolute bargain, as it was horrendously expensive before and there simply weren't any competing products -- GIMP couldn't handle 16 bit never mind 32 bit HDR. Anyway, the internet is divided on this, so there is no reason why we should agree either. I think with the cloud version, Adobe sees where the technology is moving and wisely invests in that area even if the results and features are not on par with the desktop (provided one has a powerful PC). I suspect you will be disappointed when Capture One goes subscription only too. Btw, "indefinitely" does not mean "for ever". It simply means they had not specified when they will stop selling the perpetual licence version. We should count our blessings, though, as actually taking and viewing photos has never been cheaper -- essentially free -- which is wonderful. -- Colin (talk)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Yosemite Tunnel View Fall Wide.jpg[edit]

Hello, I reverted your edits in FPC, that was too much. You cannot just flip alts on the fly during a nomination, please, keep them all up to the end. --Poco2 22:36, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Why? This was my picture and no vote was left at the original as everyone preferred the alt, why am I not allowed to withdraw the original to remove the clutter? I moved the included page to the alt name to keep the history + made clear everywhere where comments referred to the original pictures. No votes have been altered in the process as you can see. At least also move the page back from Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Yosemite Tunnel View Fall Wide.jpg to Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Yosemite Tunnel View Fall.jpg --C-M (talk) 22:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Please, don't understand it as an offense or something like that. I assume good faith and you did it because you thought there's nothing wrong about that. A nomination does end after there is a resolution for it (a speedy one or a regular one). You cannot just change your original nomination during it is active. You can include an alternative if you like, or even two, but you must keep the former ones. Isn't that logic and at the same time fair/transparent to everybody? I've been around for a while and haven't seen something like that ever. I also moved that page back, it should be now as it was originally. If you feel that what you are doing should be tolerated, please, start a discussion in the talk page of FPC. I see no chances to succeed, though. --Poco2 23:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) We simply want to keep the confusion to a minimum on FPC. Your noms already go way beyond what is usually allowed since the photos you offered as Alts were not derivate of the original nom but completely different photos. Normally this would cause some grumbling and call to order but this time people let it slide since you are not so used to the page. Changing the original nomination was however one step too far. What you call "clutter" we call "page history" or "records" and we don't mind it at all. Every nomination page is linked to a number of functions and translation pages in many languages, so moving an original page really messes up all these interlanguage links and whatnots. Hopefully Poco can sort it all out with his Admin tools. --cart-Talk 23:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
No worries poco & cart, I just tried to minimize the impact of the alts... . I do not insist on withdrawing the original, I probably shouldn't have done that even so I thought I knew what I was doing. Just seems like the wikipedia ecosystem hasn't changed too much in the last five years or so when I dropped my admin rights at de.wikipedia.org and lost my motivation because there was to too much bureaucracy combined with a seriously bad mood due to improper communication... --C-M (talk) 23:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Yosemite night elcapitan climbers.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Yosemite night elcapitan climbers.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Elcapitanclimbers.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

White tailed eagle raftsund square crop.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:White tailed eagle raftsund square crop.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:White tailed eagle raftsund.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)