User talk:Marc Lacoste

Please upload cropped files as a new file

Can you please not overwrite files which you are cropping, but rather upload them as a new file. The reason for this are numerous, including:

1. Uploaders/authors may upload photos with a specific resolution for a reason. A common reason is to allow the aircraft to breathe in the frame. Tight cropping is preferred some sites but not all photographers like to do this.
2. The original uploaded version is available for usage if one desires to use it
3. External reusers may hotlink to the images (which is allowed) and they may specify the size in their HTML. By overwriting you could be affecting the display of images on external sites.
4. There is plenty of server space available and overwriting a file doesn't free up that space

CropTool has the option available to upload as a new file (instead of overwriting), so you should use that. All necessary information is included in both versions.

An example is File:AW139 (14630958499).jpg which is the full image as provided by the photographer. File:Travira Air AgustaWestland AW139.jpg is a cropped version of the original. If someone else desires to crop the original in another resolution they are free to do so and upload that image as a new file too.

Thanks for your understanding. PK-LMN (talk) 03:25, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I cropped those per COM:CROP as highlighted in the edit summary. As an example you have this File:Miyasaka Hakuryu II - Tigress with Two Cubs - Walters 71909.jpg. The original have mostly grey, useless background. The tighter crop is nearly four times smaller, but it enhances the image which is more meaningful. Observe the thumbnail compared to the preserved original : do you prefer the cropped or uncropped in en:Sculpture? As for your bullet points, we can argue:

1. there is no change in resolution : e.g. the sculpture was ~1000px wide and still is. When there is en:negative space to let the subject breathe, it is already cropped by a meaningful photographer, either when shooting or in post before uploading. I correct those absence of post and leave breathing space. Especially for an aircraft which is often thin in the middle and already have most of the top and bottom of the frame empty. Note that I leave the aspect ratio between 3:2 and 2:3, thinner are unnatural.
2. the original is still available in the file history
3. external reusers benefit from a better frame! if they want a specific composition, they shouldn't rely on hotlinking but even if they dislike the change they can still hotlink to the file history.
4. I don't want to economise server space but user time : if pictures are duplicated, the time users spent on image manipulation (category, contrast, etc.) doubles and this ressource is certainly not unlimited

I understand your concern, but cropping empty sky enhances pictures! if you find some of my crops too tight, don't hesitate to revert and replace it by a less tight crop. The guideline is "DO overwrite [...] where the essential composition is not altered", and "cropping much closer to the object was considered a minor crop". Its limit is when the background isn't empty. If you disagree, I suggest a more interesting discussion would be in Commons_talk:Overwriting_existing_files. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:21, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

See Commons_talk:Overwriting_existing_files/Archive_1#RFC --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:28, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Cropping empty sky doesn't necessarily enhance photos. It's really a subjective thing. Take File:Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 at Sydney Airport.jpg for example which was nominated for FP. That wasn't successful but File:Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 at Sydney Airport room added.jpg was. One photo you cropped (File:RSAF G550-AEW.jpg) has had its composition changed dramatically. At the end of the day, I think the concerns I mention are valid, and you do understand them, so could you possibly just agree not to overwrite files when being cropped and simply upload them as a new file. Then you have a situation where people who want the original can use them, and people who want to use your crop can use them, and then everyone is happy :) PK-LMN (talk) 07:58, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I agree in File:RSAF G550-AEW.jpg I cropped also a bit of land and not only sky. I leave it as it is then. But when there is empty sky, my position still stands, and and I don't want to add complexity in commons. If you think it is too much I propose to discuss it over Commons_talk:Overwriting_existing_files --Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:07, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I think you are missing the point here. Someone is objecting to the crops, and has presented very clear rationale for those objections. That is reason enough to upload as a new file. Is it really that difficult to use CropTool, as an example, on File:Gulfstream V - XA-RGB (7082398313).jpg to create File:Gulfstream V - XA-RGB (cropped).jpg? I am asking you, again, to please upload crops as a new file. And this will stop complex discussions and everyone will be happy. :) PK-LMN (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I observe the guideline. If you disagree with it, please talk of it there. I'm not against revising guidelines, but my talk page isn't appropriate. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

And please stop reverting my edits unless you disuss the guideline in the guideline talk page.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Gulfstream V from below.jpg is yet another file where the crop has changed the image in a fundamental way. File:Gulfstream V from below (cropped).jpg fixes the issue, and now provides the original for use and your version. I am seriously unable to understand why you insist on keep going. I am only going to revert all of your crops where necessary, and will re-upload your crop as a new file. Talk about creation of additional work/waste of time, geez man. :) PK-LMN (talk) 08:44, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't want to change every link while the crop is within the guideline. Please discuss in the appropriate guideline talk page. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

You even understand the guideline since you applied it in [1] !--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:49, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

In that file, we are talking of an inanimate objects. Let's use the Gulfstream file directly above (which I have reverted, because it exists as a new file, and I've changed all the links for you!), aircraft belong in the sky, not in a box. Your crop, which I am guessing you have done in order to focus on the underbelly, still makes the aircraft look like it is in a box, not in the sky. Can you understand what I am trying to say to you here? PK-LMN (talk) 08:56, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I cropped more tightly to better show the aircraft in the picture, that's all. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 09:05, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

That's absolutely OK. You've cropped the photo to suit the purpose for which you personally wanted it for. But you need to realise that others may want the original. At the end of the day, I think Commons:Overwriting_existing_files#Controversial_or_contested_changes is also quite relevant.

Keep up the good work you're doing with the galleries and such, it's about time someone has put time into them, but please, please, please just upload crops in future as a new file.

If you can agree to do that in future, I will help to go back over the files you've cropped so far and upload them as new files and fix the usage in galleries, etc where necessary. Is that a deal? PK-LMN (talk) 09:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour, je me me permets d'interjecter.

PK-LMN a raison : les proportions des images et des zones de ciel, voire des applat noirs, sont dictées par des règles de composition qui remontent à la Renaissance et à l'Antiquité. Elles reflètent des processus neuro-cognitifs de lecture des images que j'essaye de synthétiser à User:Rama/Composition de photographies, mais que vous trouverez sous différentes formes dans n'importe quel livre d'art.

Par ailleurs, pour ce qui est de la stricte procédure sur Commons, il est d'usage de ne pas remplacer les images, mais de publier les versions dérivées sous des noms différents. Il peut arriver que l'on écrase l'image d'origine, mais cela n'arrive que lorsque la version suivante est évidemment et consensuellement meilleure que la précédent (par exemple la même image avec une meilleure résolution), ce qui n'est pas le cas en l'espèce.

Merci pour votre compréhension et bonne continuation ! Rama (talk) 08:56, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Il vaudrait mieux poursuivre en anglais. Ce n'est pas une histoire de composition, je l'améliore plutôt que d'avoir un grand vide inutile, mais de procédure. C'est prévu et c'est tant mieux, c'est une amélioration mineure qui justifie un remplacement. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 09:05, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Cropping reviaited

please stop overwriting files with cropped image, instead upload under a new name. It is against policy.--KTo288 (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

USCG AC C37A Flight

I also notice that you overwrote File:USCG AC C37A Flight.jpg with another photo. These are actually two different photos. I've uploaded the other photo to File:United States Coast Guard C-37A.jpg in case you want to use this elsewhere. Please ensure you do not overwrite files with images which are different. PK-LMN (talk) 03:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

thanks, it was because the original didn't have a source and I found this one. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:28, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Duplicate files

Hi again, I notice that you have nominated for deletion some duplicate photos. Instead of putting them up for deletion, can you use {{Duplicate}} on the file instead? For example. This is to ensure that any external users are not affected by a deletion. Cheers, PK-LMN (talk) 09:48, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Removing watermarks

When removing watermarks that contain copyright information, it is quite important to add {{Attribution metadata from licensed image}}. Thanks. Revent^talk 15:51, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Please stop overwriting files

Please stop overwriting files that have been around for a while, or that are in use at WP, with your preferred crop or rotation composition. I am referring to File:Boeing 737-8 MAX N8704Q (27946580010) (rotated).jpg yesterday but you have done this many other times also. If it’s not a minor fix, upload a derivative instead. Thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 05:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Again: please stop. Upload derivatives as new files. Thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 11:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

File:Stratolaunch comparison.svg

Hi Marc, I've declined your request to rename the above mentioned file because of it's ambiguous nature. Many articles and a quick google search show similar design features for both of them. Can you provide additional references to prove otherwise so that we can move the image? Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle 16:40, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for verifying. I don't remember my precise message, but File:Stratolaunch comparison.svg in its summary states "Stratolaunch Systems' carrier aircraft, which is intended to use the planform of the File:White_Knight_Two_planform.png and have a wingspan of 117m..." but the actual aircraft is very different, see its diagram, showed on the current website: 6-engines instead of 4, a deeper wing chord but slimmer fuselages, a longer payload interface, normal cockpit windows and not rutan-style circles...--Marc Lacoste (talk) 18:01, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

File:CSeries_comparable_aircraft.png

Thanks. Probably the Embraer 170 could be added: Embraer said already, it would be continued, when scope clause isn't lifted. And its reality: scope clause continues, and Embraer receives orders for E170. 2001:16B8:4805:1000:5D7C:FB3B:12CE:EBB4 17:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

File copyright status

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons. While everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the project, one or more of your recent file uploads had missing or false information regarding its source and copyright status. Please note that Wikimedia Commons takes copyright rules and infringement very seriously. Files may only be uploaded and included if their copyright status meets the conditions stated in our licensing policy, and if their provenance is clearly documented. Files that fail to meet those conditions may be deleted, and users who fail to meet them may be blocked. Please follow our first steps, if you haven't already. If you have questions, feel free to ask at the Village Pump copyright question page or on my talk page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 09:09, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: which one?--Marc Lacoste (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

File:E190e.jpg, File:CRJ200-cabin.jpg, File:Sikorsky S-97 on ground 3 feb 2015.jpg, File:Sikorsky S-97 inflight 22 may 2015.jpg, and File:ILA 2018, Schönefeld (1X7A5246) (cropped).jpg.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 13:22, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: for File:CRJ200-cabin.jpg, File:Sikorsky S-97 on ground 3 feb 2015.jpg and File:Sikorsky S-97 inflight 22 may 2015.jpg I was mislead by false flickr licenses. File:ILA 2018, Schönefeld (1X7A5246) (cropped).jpg is a cropped variant of File:ILA 2018, Schönefeld (1X7A5246).jpg, not my upload, and for File:E190e.jpg honestly I don't remember and no history is kept.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 13:37, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Please do not overwrite files

---

I noticed that you uploaded a file using the name File:Embraer Phenom 300 (N585EE) on display at the 2015 Australian International Airshow.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.

You made a significant crop, which goes totally against COM:OVERWRITE, please do not make any further overwriting where the file has been significantly altered. --Bidgee (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Embaer 195-E2, Paris Air Show 2019, Le Bourget (SIAE0871).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. --Cvmontuy 21:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Embraer Phenom 300 cabin, EBACE 2019.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. --Cvmontuy 12:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Cropping files

Good day, Marc. I saw you cropped File:Boeing advanced blended wing body concept 2011.jpg and overwrote the original image. Please don't do this in the future, unless you uploaded the original image or the crop is minor, such as removing a border, watermark, text, or the like. Choose to save under a new filename instead. I've gone ahead and done this, and placed the new image in Fuel economy in aircraft, as I'm guessing that was your impetus. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Once again, you have been overwriting uploads with your preferred crops, despite being warned against doing so on multiple occasions. This is in violation of COM:OVERWRITE. Going forward, please upload all new crops to a new filename. — Huntster (t @ c) 18:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Huntster, cropping empty space is anticipated in COM:overwrite as a minor crop, more specifically in Commons:Overwriting_existing_files#Substantial_crop_or_un-crop. When the composition is substantially modified, I upload a crop as a new image. See both examples right above in this talk page: the Embaer 195-E2 with background sky is better when cropped (the original image is in its history) while I uploaded the bizjet cabin crop as a new picture. Cheers, --Marc Lacoste (talk) 19:05, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

In your opinion, it is better. In several cases I saw, the crops were too severe to the detriment of the image overall. When you crop to remove watermarking, or borders from old NARA images, as I've seen you do as well, that's a great application of overwriting. But crops like what I reverted here and here are *not* minor crops and absolutely fall afoul of COM:OVERWRITE. What I'm specifically asking is that when you are making a crop to suit a personal preference, such as with those above and ones like File:Galactic Girl flyby (G-GALX).jpg, please just make the extra click and have CropTool upload them to a new filename rather than overwriting. It will keep everyone happy. — Huntster (t @ c) 21:40, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I concur with Hunster. Marc, again, please stop overwriting files. Thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 10:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Boeing Phantom Eye.jpg

File:Boeing Phantom Eye.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Source https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/multimedia/imagegallery/Phantom_Eye/MCF13-0015-294.html specifically credits this image as "Boeing Photo / Bob Ferguson". Not a public domain NASA image. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

— Huntster (t @ c) 18:09, 27 December 2020 (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:2018-01-28 StratolaunchAircraft 26071200028 6bbee9a16b o (crop).jpg

And also:

• File:2018-01-28 Stratolaunch Aircraft.png

Yours sincerely, Ytoyoda (talk) 15:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

File tagging File:IVVA-INNEN (cropped).JPG

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:IVVA-INNEN (cropped).JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:IVVA-INNEN (cropped).JPG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Masur (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Please do not overwrite files

---

I noticed that you uploaded a file using the name File:General Aviation Maintenance (VH-YJU) Aero Commander 500U Strike Commander.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.

--Bidgee (talk) 08:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

We need your feedback!

Hello. Apologies if this message is not in your native language: please feel free to respond in the language of your choice. Thank you!

I am writing to you because we are looking for feedback for a new Wikimedia Foundation project, Structured Data Across Wikimedia (SDAW). SDAW is a grant-funded programme that will explore ways to structure content on wikitext pages in a way that will be machine-recognizable and -relatable, in order to make reading, editing, and searching easier and more accessible across projects and on the Internet. We are now focusing on designing and building image suggestion features for experienced users.

We have some questions to ask you about your experience with uploading images here on Wikimedia Commons and then adding them to Wikipedia. You can answer these questions on a specific feedback page on Mediawiki, where we will gather feedback. As I said, these questions are in English, but your answers do not need to be in English! You can also answer in your own language, if you feel more comfortable.

Once the collecting of feedback will be over, we will sum it up and share with you a summary, along with updated mocks that will incorporate your inputs.

Also, if you want to keep in touch with us or you want to know more about the project, you can subscribe to our newsletter.

Hope to hear from you soon! -- Sannita (WMF) (talk to me!) 09:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

File tagging File:AirSWIFT Airlines ATR.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:AirSWIFT Airlines ATR.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:AirSWIFT Airlines ATR.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Howhontanozaz (talk) 06:32, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Flaris LAR01.png

File:Flaris LAR01.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2013-06-19/start-flaris-unveils-all-composite-single-engine-very-light-jet-paris-air-show Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

-M.nelson (talk) 16:13, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@M.nelson: Blatant copyvio. I'm sorry I didn't saw it, the copyright is even in the exif data. Please delete asap. Shame on the original uploader for stealing.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 16:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Pipistrel Panthera aircraft.JPG

File:Pipistrel Panthera aircraft.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!

El Grafo (talk) 08:34, 22 September 2022 (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:Piasecki X-49-3 (cropped).jpg

Yours sincerely, -M.nelson (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Embraer E195-E2, Air Show 2019, Le Bourget (SIAE0894).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. --Jakubhal 19:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

Ariadacapo (talk) 09:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked

You have been blocked from editing Commons. The reason for the block is available in the block log as is the name of the administrator who blocked you. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.

--Yann (talk) 11:10, 12 February 2023 (UTC)