User talk:Donaldytong

Welcome to the Commons, Donaldytong!

First steps tutorial Copyright Hello Donaldytong, Thanks for uploading images to Commons! Can I ask you to have a look at the changes I made to the categorisation, so that you can better sort future uploads of yours? Also, I note that your image copyrights contradict each other! You release your images as public domain, then you release them as GFDL - on the same page! While GFDL can be multi-licensed, if you release them as public domain, that supersedes (and therefore totally obseletes) all other licenses. Please recheck all your images and delete the license you did NOT wish to apply. It would be great if you chose to release all as public domain (as I do for mine). Also, could we please ask that you provide more info about what is shown in each picture (add a little descriptive text, give date of when and from where it was taken etc...). Please fill that information into a preset table as shown on this upload form (further explanations at top right of that page). Okay, hope that wasn't too confusing. Any questions, just ask me on my user page. Cheers Ingolfson 12:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Image:Elwood Beach and Melbourne Skyline.jpg Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in 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 information may be missing. Thank you. This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 10:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Image:Melbourne skyline.jpg I have reuploaded your Image:Melbourne skyline.jpg image with some of the sky cropped out - hope you don't mind. The image happenes to be used in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne article as well now. Wongm 13:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Camera date/time Hi, I have been looking at some of the good images that you uploaded, but on all of them the EXIF information shows you have not set the date/time in your camera (you may have to reset it every time you change the batteries unless you swap over to new batteries very quickly). :-) --Tony Wills 10:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC) Marking images for deletion Hello. Please be sure to use the appropriate template when you nominate an image for speedy deletion. If they are your own images, please use {{badname}} or {{duplicate}} where appropriate, rather than the generic deletion template. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. --Tom (talk - email) 00:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC) Sorry, but your use of {{Badname}} and {{Duplicate}} is not correct. Please use {{badname|Name of the good named image}} or {{duplicate|Name of the other image}}. Example: If you wish to delete the bad named "Image:Mickey house.jpg", edit the description page and wrote {{badname|Image:Mickey Mouse.jpg}} - not {{badname|Image:Mickey house.jpg}} ! BTW: Similar images will not be deleted here (Image:Breizoz - A French Creperie Resturant at Nelson Place Williamstown.jpg and Image:Williamstown - French Creperie Restaurant.jpg). Feel free to leave me a note on my talk page if you need help. Have a good evening. --GeorgHH • talk   19:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Images Hi. I'm not an Admin so I can't delete the images but they should be deleted in the next few days since you have maked the images. Also just a tip, It's best to talk on my Discussion then adding it to my user page. Kepp up the good work! :) Bidgee 15:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC) Changes to this page Hi - yes I can explain it. An IP has been removing messages from your talk page (if you take a look at the history). I have reverted those removals - as such two edits will have occurred each time and (I guess) you will get two emails. I have no idea why an IP should remove messages from your talk page but it does happen from time to time & usually someone will revert it. Hope this helps & regards --Herby talk thyme 11:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC) I'm assuming the message on my talk page is from you so firstly please try and ensure that you login to Commons when you edit - much harder to keep track of things otherwise. If you have pictures that are duplicates please tag them as such with the {{Dupe}} tag. It will then be dealt with by anyone who has the time. In order to remove a picture from a category just edit the picture to remove the [[Category:Melbourne]] peice. I hope that is clear & helps - thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC) Duplicate images Hi - if you have duplicate images then please tag them with the {{Dupe}} tag. They will then be dealt with by an admin in due course. I hope this helps - thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC) Sorry Sorry to confuse you. I deleted the wrong file. This has now been undone. My deepest apologies. :/ Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Database issue Likely to be Commons or Foundation level rather than you. May be worth clearing your browser cache etc but see if the error is still there. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC) If the problem has not gone away I am surprised - usually those sort of issues are quickly resolved. In Firefox got to "Tools" -> "Options" -> "Privacy". In the "Private data" section at the bottom click on "clear now". For Opera got to "Tools" -> "Preferences" -> "Advanced". Then click on "history" and where it says "Disk cache" click on "Empty now". I'm afraid I will not use Internet Explorer but I imagine there will be a similar way. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 15:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC) There are times I hate computers in quite a profound way! Using Firefox now on that image I get no errors at all. So was it Commons (I know I've had some errors on Foundation sites in the past few hours) or something in your settings? Maybe try again and see what you get (it will not hurt to clear your cache in case that is also an issue). Regards --Herby talk thyme 12:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC) File:St Kilda Rd - Wesley College.jpg Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly: Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?) State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper. If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from. Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted. Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense. If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper. It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template. 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. Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk. Thank you. This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 13:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC) Tip: Categorizing images Hello, Donaldytong! Tip: Add categories to your files 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: 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 05:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Image:St. Stephens Green Park.jpg is uncategorized since 1 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC) File without a summary Hi Donaldytong, File:Melbourne Immigration Museum.jpg is currently without a summary ({{Information}}) and could be listed for deletion at anytime. I thought that I'll inform you of the issue rather then leaving as it was. I hope you have a safe and happy Christmas and New Year. Bidgee (talk) 11:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC) File:(SIP) Moon Harbour (Architecture Buildings) 01.jpg 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, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 11:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melbourne Yarra River.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... please geocode. --Cayambe 21:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Irish Nationalist Leader Daniel O'Connell Statue in St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne.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 and useful.--Jebulon 00:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Patrick's Cathedral (Gothic Revival Style).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. --Cayambe 19:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melbourne Grammar School (Chapel).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 details and colours but horizontal lines are tiltes / distorted on the right side --Mbdortmund 15:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)  Done Donaldytong 15:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Good for QI--Jebulon 16:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MGS - Memorial Hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment The image is slightly tilted CW. This should be easily corrected. --Murdockcrc 16:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC).  Done Donaldytong 08:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC) Good.--Jebulon 18:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! South Wharf Foot Bridge.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}}} Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Patrick's Cathedral-Gothic Revival Style (East Side).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 nice -Pudelek 12:33, 10 January 2011 (UTC) nice view --Taxiarchos228 12:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melbourne Old Post Office (Shopping Mall Interior).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}}} Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! South Melbourne Townhall.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}}} Please do not overwrite files I noticed that you uploaded a file using the name File:St Patricks Cathedral Entrance Interior.jpg. A file by this name already existed on Commons. Overwriting an existing file should not be done except when making minor, uncontroversial corrections, so the file has been restored to its previous version. If the file that you attempted to upload is within our project scope and is in the public domain or published under a free license, please upload it again under a different name. Thank you. For more information, please see Commons:Overwriting files. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alan Gilbert Building, University of Melbourne.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. Nice sky! --Gaendalf 04:33, 1 February 2011 (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: South Melbourne Town Hall. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review  Comment Could you choose one of the categories you listed above for the scope. I think the scope here is: South Melbourne Town Hall.--MrPanyGoff 15:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)  Done Donaldytong (talk) 22:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)  Support Best image of the building in Commons, imo.--MrPanyGoff 06:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. George Chernilevsky talk 20:59, 3 February 2011 (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 General Post Office Hall, Melbourne, Interior. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review  Comment The scope should link this category and maybe some rearrangement of the name is a good idea, imo. No matter that it is a former post hall, I think that The General Post Office Hall, Melbourne is better.--MrPanyGoff 08:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)  Done. Donaldytong (talk) 09:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)  Comment I'm not sure I agree. Maybe could we do as we do for churches : "The General Post Office, Melbourne", interior.--Jebulon (talk) 22:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC)  Done. How does it look now? Donaldytong (talk) 10:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC) Anyway, I  Support it as best in the scope in Commons so far.--MrPanyGoff 13:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)  Support agree. I just changed a little bit the link, because it is not related only to the interior.--Jebulon (talk) 16:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC) Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. George Chernilevsky talk 19:40, 12 February 2011 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! John Knox Church in Brighton.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 Well framed and lit. --IdLoveOne 06:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melbourne Luna Park at Dusk.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 maybe a bit dark, but otherwise very good --Carschten 18:15, 19 February 2011 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! South Wharf & Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:28, 14 March 2011 (UTC) Sculpture at Atlantis, the Palm I'm not sure if you or someone else put the lobby sculpture photo in this article (it was an unidentified IP), but I believe that it is a copyright violation. Sculptures are copyrighted, and UAE does not have Freedom of panorama. In other words, the photo, I'm sure, is yours, but you do not have the right to use it in Wikipedia. If you think I am mistaken, please include the appropriate reason template on the image page, and I will be happy to return the photo to the Wikipedia article. Donlammers (talk) 12:32, 15 October 2012 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! (UAE) The Dubai Fountain at Dusk 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI fr me. --JLPC 19:33, 14 October 2012 (UTC) File:Burj Khalifa.jpg   File:Burj Khalifa.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! Liliana-60 (talk) 13:19, 27 October 2012 (UTC) Buildings in the UAE Hi Donaldytong, just wanted to let you know that there is no freedom of panorama in the UAE, so photos of skyscrapers of Dubai, Abu Dhabi, etc. are not allowed on Commons, and your existing images will be nominated for deletion soon. However, you are welcome to upload those photos to the English Wikipedia, which does not care about any country's laws other than the US. In addition, I notice you've put GFDL with migrated CC-BY-SA-3.0 on your images, which doesn't make much sense because migration of the GFDL license happened back in 2009 and is no longer valid. It would be better to just dual-license and then put migration=redundant for the parameter. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:13, 27 October 2012 (UTC) Unfortunatly I must also point out that this applies to both images of interiors and exteriors. File:Burj Al Arab Hotel - Elevators.jpg for example, is almost certainly complex enough to be copyrighted. CT Cooper · talk 21:22, 8 November 2012 (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! Affected: File:Abu Dhabi Sheikh Zayed Mosque - Prayer Hall 01.jpg And also: File:Abu Dhabi Sheikh Zayed Mosque - Prayer Hall 02.jpg File:Abu Dhabi Sheikh Zayed Mosque.jpg File:Crystal Chandelier in the Entrance Hall of Sheikh Zayed Mosque.jpg File:Sheikh Zayed Mosque Courtyard Arcade 01.jpg File:Sheikh Zayed Mosque Courtyard Arcade 02.jpg File:Swarovski Crystal Chandelier in Abu Dhabi Sheikh Zayed Mosque 01.jpg File:Swarovski Crystal Chandelier in Abu Dhabi Sheikh Zayed Mosque 02.jpg File:The Entrance Hall of Sheikh Zayed Mosque 01.jpg File:The Entrance Hall of Sheikh Zayed Mosque 02.jpg Yours sincerely Stefan4 (talk) 22:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Celebrity Solstice in Port Melbourne, Australia Dec 2012 (01).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -Kadellar 11:21, 29 December 2012 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Celebrity Solstice in Port Melbourne, Australia Dec 2012 (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 11:24, 29 December 2012 (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: Celebrity Solstice (ship, 2008). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review  Comment Please link to the category. Thanks, Yann (talk) 12:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)  Comment Thanks very much for your advice Yann! Now the category has been linked. 110.32.107.165 13:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)  Support Good now, all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Yann (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Port Melbourne Beacon Cove.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC) COM:OVERWRITE Please do not overwrite images. Concerning: --McZusatz (talk) 15:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Valued Image Promotion ★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope: St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne (Southwest Facade). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review  Comment Certainly the best image for this facade, but I'm not sure it's the best for the entire cathedral. cmadler (talk) 15:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)  Comment I agree. For example, File:St Patrick's Cathedral - Gothic Revival Style.jpg may be more valued. ---Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)  Done changed Template:VISC to Template:VIC. --Ikar.us (talk) 23:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)  Comment It is sufficient to add: facade in scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC)  Comment Thanks for all your review and comments for this valued image nominated. I changed this nomination image to the category of Facades. As per Walter Siegmund suggested, the image of File:St Patrick's Cathedral - Gothic Revival Style.jpg is inserted below for valued image nomination in the scope of St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne. Donaldytong (talk) 12:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC) "Facades" is certainly too broad a scope. The suggested scope would be for this facade (e.g., "St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne (facade)" or "St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne (southwest facade)"). cmadler (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Yes that's what I meant. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)  Done I agree with Archaeodontosaurus and cmadler suggestions and changed the scope to St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne (Southwest Facade). Donaldytong (talk) 08:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)  Support new scope (as corrected). --Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)  Support Meets all criteria in new scope. cmadler (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC) ★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope: St Patrick's Cathedral, Melbourne exterior. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review  Support I think this image is best. cmadler (talk) 14:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)  Support I think so --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)  Best in Scope --Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:14, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Result: 3 support, 0 oppose => promoted. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daniel Mannix Statue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernand Léger - Grand parade with red background (mosaic) 1958 made.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 better now. --JLPC 20:50, 17 April 2013 (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 grand parade, mosaic by Fernand Léger.. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review The scope is not good: I don't see "Fernand Léger" here, but one of his works...--Jebulon (talk) 10:01, 20 April 2013 (UTC)  Comment Thanks Jebulon for your review. As per your suggestion, the scope has been changed to "Fernand Léger, mosaic" if this change can be applicable. Donaldytong (talk) 11:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)  Comment Problem Scope: This work can not represent all alone mosaic of Fernand Leger. This work is it free of copyrith? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC) The scope has been changed to The grand parade, mosaic by Fernand Léger Donaldytong (talk) 02:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)  Support Very good ! Best in scope ! if not copyrighted--Jebulon (talk) 19:12, 24 April 2013 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:36, 26 April 2013 (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! Affected: File:The Dubai Mall (Fashion Avenue & Round Hall).jpg Yours sincerely, LGA talkedits 11:42, 25 August 2013 (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! Affected: File:Abu Dhabi - Family Park Fountain.jpg And also: File:ADIA Tower 01.jpg File:ADIA Tower 02.jpg Yours sincerely, -mattbuck (Talk) 19:04, 3 September 2013 (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! Affected: File:The Dubai Mall (Fashion Avenue).jpg Yours sincerely, russavia (talk) 22:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC) Hi Hi, I am Benison. Shall I nominate your en:File:Burj Khalifa.jpg for Featured picture in english Wikipedia?? Benison (talk) 06:53, 2 November 2013 (UTC) Thanks Benison. Please go ahead. Donaldytong (talk) 07:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC) Hi again, Now I have nominated the picture but have some copyright issues. Please refer them and also hit a Support on the pic as author.... Benison (talk) 06:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC) Thanks Benison for your works. I have done my part as you advised. Donaldytong (talk) 01:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC) Quality Image Promotion Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Surfers Paradise Dec 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 13:03, 27 December 2013 (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: Buildings on the Gold Coast, Australia. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates. review  Comment The scope must be attached to a category --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Thanks for the remind. Now the scope of the category has been attached. --Donaldytong (talk) 00:14, 29 December 2013 (UTC) Your image is categorized over. If it is in a category it should not be present in the lower categories. The scope is too broad it must be made more specific. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:18, 29 December 2013 (UTC) I saw now it has been changed to Buildings on the Gold Coast. If this change meets the specification, I agree with the change. --Donaldytong (talk) 00:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC) w:File:Burj Khalifa.jpg Hello. Could you possibly take a moment and comment at w:Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2014_August_15#File:Burj_Khalifa.jpg? I'm concerned about the source of the image, and an assertion from you one way or another would help to clear this up. If you are in fact the author, could you verify the license stipulated on the image description page? Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 21:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC) File:Burj Al Arab Hotel - Elevators.jpg   File:Burj Al Arab Hotel - Elevators.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! 2003:88:6A5D:E257:E05F:7D2C:9B67:E279 00:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC) File:Burj Al Arab Hotel - Elevators.jpg   File:Burj Al Arab Hotel - Elevators.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! 2003:88:6A5D:E257:E05F:7D2C:9B67:E279 00:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC) RE: Inquiry of permission of re-using a figure in our book Dear Donaldytong, This is Dr. Jia He of The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. I'm writing this letter to you for inquiring the permission of reusing one of your photos as Figure 1.1(a) of our forthcoming book. The figure is about Burj Khalifa, and the link to this figure is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burj_Khalifa.jpg If you don't mind, could you please show me your permission via a confirmative email or just response on this website. The source of this figure will be properly cited in our book. My email address is hj19830507@126.com The detais of our book are 'You-Lin Xu and Jia He. (2016). Smart Civil Structures. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.' Please allow me to reuse the aforementioned figure. Thanks very much for your kind help and support. Look forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 158.132.127.192 (talk) 05:25, 28 June 2016 (UTC) Dear Dr. Jia He, Thanks for your request. Please go ahead to use my image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burj_Khalifa.jpg if you can make sure that attribution of this image author is required. Regards Donaldytong (talk) 14:06, 28 June 2016 (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! Affected: File:Dubai - Nakheel Developments.jpg Yours sincerely, Ras67 (talk) 16:45, 16 October 2016 (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! Affected: File:Madinat Jumeirah (A).jpg And also: File:Madinat Jumeirah (B).jpg Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 07:27, 15 August 2017 (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! Affected: File:Atlantis, The Palm, Dubai (Hotel Lobby Are Sculpture).jpg Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 07:55, 15 August 2017 (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! Affected: File:Abu Dhabi - Ferrari World (Junior Training Camp).jpg And also: File:Abu Dhabi - Ferrari World (Piazza Enzo Ferrari).jpg Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2017 (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! Affected: File:Dubai - Burj Al Arab Hotel - Restaurrants.jpg Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:05, 23 March 2021 (UTC) Hi User talk:JWilz12345, I am not sure what the reasons are to delete Dubai - Burj Al Arab Hotel - Restaurrants.jpgs, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dubai_-_Burj_Al_Arab_Hotel_-_Restaurrants.jpg, while some other images are kept in https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_al-%E2%80%98Arab? User:donaldytong — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 45.132.225.91 (talk) 02:06, 23 May 2021 (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! Affected: File:Atlantis, The Palm (Hotel Lobby Corridor).jpg And also: File:Atlantis, The Palm (Hotel Lobby Lounge).jpg Yours sincerely, Ras67 (talk) 20:51, 22 May 2021 (UTC) Hi Ras67 , I am not sure what the reasons are to delete File:Atlantis, The Palm (Hotel Lobby Corridor).jpg and File:Atlantis, The Palm (Hotel Lobby Lounge).jpg , while some other images are kept in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantis_The_Palm,_Dubai#/media/File:Ceiling_Inside_Atlantis_-_panoramio.jpg? User:donaldytong — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 45.132.225.91 (talk) 02:01, 23 May 2021 (UTC) File:(UAE) The Dubai Fountain at Dusk 01.jpg   File:(UAE) The Dubai Fountain at Dusk 01.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! A1Cafel (talk) 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)