B.navez

Babel user information
fr Le français est la langue maternelle de cette personne. en-3 This user is able to contribute with an advanced level of English. de-2 Dieser Benutzer hat fortgeschrittene Deutschkenntnisse. pl-1 Ten użytkownik posługuje się językiem polskim na poziomie podstawowym. nl-1 Deze gebruiker heeft elementaire kennis van het Nederlands. it-1 Quest'utente può contribuire con un italiano di livello semplice. la-1 Hic usuarius simplici lingua latina conferre potest.
Users by language

Mango tree

Where is the mangoe tree you took that photo? --Ligia 18:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Furcifer

Image:FurciferPardalisMale.JPG

Hello, I'm letting you know that I nominated this picture to be a Featured Picture. You can vote on it here: COM:FPC#Image:FurciferPardalisMale.JPG. cheers! pfctdayelise 14:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:FurciferPardalisFemale.JPG

Bonjour,

Je t'invite à aller voir la discussion sur les modification par Erin Silversmith à mon avis trop intenses de FurciferPardalisFemale.JPG.

J'avais annulé sa modif mais il l'a re-annulée. Je ne vais pas déclencher la guerre pour ca, mais comme tu est l'auteur peut être as tu ton avis a donner.

j'ai mis la discussion sur Image talk:FurciferPardalisFemale.JPG et sur User talk:Erin Silversmith

21:43, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Vanilla

Image:VanillaFlowerLongitudinalSection.jpg

Salut, l'atelier français a détouré ton image, n'hésite pas à nous demander des retouches mineures :] Par ailleur, si tu fais des versions propre à une langue (francais par exemple), emplois plutot IMAGENAME.png => IMAGENAME-fr.png , IMAGENAME-en.png, etc. C'est plus pratique ensuite.

This image was improved or created by the Wikigraphists of the Graphic Lab (fr). You can propose images to clean up, improve, create or translate as well.

Yug (talk) 21:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Sur l'atelier, on tente d'ordonner un peu tout ca. le système de -fr.png permettrqis d'ordonner les traductions plus clairement que le meme shema Dog.png/Chien.png/pero.png qui ne fonctionne aue si l'on est bilingue. On tente d'organiser ceci. Voila. --Yug (talk) 03:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:VanillaFlowerLongitudinalSection(FrenchCaption).jpg

Hello, B.navez, gratulation for your excellent picture. It ist possible for you, to create a botanical latin - caption? (perhaps also a german version) Greetings Orchi 22:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

..hello, B.navez, thank's for your quick answer. In the next days I will give an answer to you. Thanks and greetings. Orchi 22:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

... hello, B.navez, today I send the german translation of your "VanillaFlowerLongitudinalSection" to you. The latin version follows.

Your question for the pollinies: I don't no. The pollen are very small. I try to obtain more information.

german version:

• longitudinal section of a vanilla flower = Längsschnitt einer Vanilleblüte
• upper sepal = dorsales Kelchblatt
• right/left lower sepal = rechtes/linkes laterales Kelchblatt
• labellum = Lippe
• right/left petal = rechtes/linkes Kronblatt
• anther (with pollen) = Anthere (mit Pollen)
• rostellum (membrane) = Rostellum
• stigma = Narbe
• column (or gynandrium) = Säule (oder Gynostemium)
• ovary (to be the bean) = Fruchtknoten (spätere Kapseln)
• ovules (to be the seeds) = Samenanlage (ovula)
• width of some sepals and petals has been reduced to make the picture clearer = Um die Abbildung deutlicher zu machen, wurde auf die Darstellung weiterer Kelch- und Kronblätter verzichtet.

Greetings. Orchi 22:08, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, B.navez, du fragst, ob die Seite gut ist. Sie ist sehr gut! Ich habe die Blütenanalyse sofort in der deutschen Wikipedia (Vanilla planifolia) eingesetzt. (Kleinigkeit zum Korrigieren: "Pollen" statt "pollen" und "Kapsel" statt "Kapseln" ]).

Latein folgt. Merci beaucoup und viele Grüße Orchi 19:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, B.navez, and now the version in botanical latin. I hope, it ist correct.

botanical latin version:

• longitudinal section of a vanilla flower = Sectio longitudinalis: Flos Vanilla planifolia
• upper sepal = Sepalum dorsale
• right/left lower sepal = Sepalum laterale dextrum / Sepalum laterale sinistrum
• labellum = Labellum
• right/left petal = Petalum dextrum / Petalum sinistrum
• anther (with pollen) = Anthera (cum Pollinium)
• rostellum (membrane) = Rostellum
• stigma = Stigma
• column (or gynandrium) = Columna (Gynostemium)
• ovary (to be the bean) = Ovarium (Capsula)
• ovules (to be the seeds) = Ovula
• width of some sepals and petals has been reduced to make the picture clearer = Sine omnia petala et sepala

Greetings. Orchi 19:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, B.navez, thank you very much for your very good pictures. There is in the latin version a little error: Gymnostemium ---> Gynostemium. No problem for you. Your picture in the german version is in the meantime part of the german main article de:Orchideen. Viele Grüße Orchi 12:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flore-bassin-bleu.jpg

Hello! As you uploaded many plant photos from Réunion, I hope you can help with identification of this plant from Réunion. It looks like Helianthus, but the photo does not show much of the plant. And I do not know, which species are occurring on Réunion - native, naturalized and cultivated. Maybe, you have an idea? Regards --Franz Xaver 08:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, this is Tithonia diversifolia. But now I have another problem: Maybe I made a mistake, when I named this photo Tithonia diversifolia. I did this because of the similarity of the flowers to this photo, as the leaves to the left side of the flower head also seem to be tripartite and as there could be this apically thickening of the peduncles at the left bottom margin of the photo. But now I am not sure any more. Either these photos show different species or different stages of flowering. What do you think? Thanks for your help. Best regards --Franz Xaver 19:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I removed this other photo from Tithonia diversifolia. So I have to wait for a better idea. Thanks --Franz Xaver 08:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

En ce qui me concerne, j'ai créé l'article sur l'encyclopédie en français sous le nom de Tournesol mexicain. Merci pour tes informations. Thierry Caro 11:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Eugenia brasiliensis

Hi. We know here E. brasiliensis as grumixama. E. involucrata is called cereja (cérisier), or cereja-do-rio-grande (a state in southern Brasil). --Ligia 23:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Gossypium herbaceum flower.JPG

Hello B.navez! In my opinion this plant is Gossypium hirsutum, not Gossypium herbaceum. According ot this key (PDF), epicalyx teeth are too long and narrow for G. herbaceum. Moreover, leaves of G. herbaceum are lobed more deeply. G. hirsutum has been found on Réunion: there is one herbarium specimen in the Tropicos database. Regards --Franz Xaver 21:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Kerguelen images

Salut! It is obvious that you've visited Kerguelen Islands and made a lot of pictures... I wrote nearly the complete German Kerguelen article which does include many of the images you contributed to Wikipedia. This article requires two more images of Port-Jeanne d'Arc station and L'arche des Kerguelen (what is left of...). If you own images of it please upload it for a common use on Wikipedia! To me it's not possible due to the fact I never set a foot on Kerguelen. Unfortunately... By the way, thank you for uploading the images of Bernhard Herrmann's grave, it answered some questions I had on this southernmost German soldier grave... Regards, --Varp 17:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Desinsertion du muscle CO.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Desinsertion du muscle CO.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 22:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Demande de reproduction de photo “SalersBreed Cow 3”

Dear B.navez,

My apologies for writing in English. I would be glad to receive a reply in either French or English. I write from Focus Publishing, a college-level textbook publisher in Newburyport, MA, USA.

We are developing a textbook for second-year French that integrates language learning with a study of French film. One chapter in this book is focused on the film “Etre et avoir.” Our author would like to use your photograph captioned “SalersBreed Cow 3” on Wikimedia Commons as an illustration for this chapter.

I write to request permission from you to reprint your photo in our textbook, and am hopeful you could provide us with a high-resolution file (minimum 600 DPI) for this image. Please also let us know how you would like the credit line to appear.

You can contact me at [email protected]; I would be glad to answer any questions you might have about either this project or Focus Publishing.

Sincerely, Kathleen Brophy Assistant Editor, Focus Publishing PO Box 369 Newburyport, MA 01950 USA

Commons Picture of the Year 2006 Competition

Interested in honouring the best of the best? Vote now in the Commons Picture of the Year competition 2006 Voting to select the finalists is open until 14th February. Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 日本語 | Nederlands | português | svenska | 中文（简体） | 中文（繁體） | /−

The arrangements for the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition are now complete, and voting will start tomorrow, Feb 1st. All Featured Pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As a past contributor to Featured Pictures, we invite you to participate in the competition (but please wait until tomorrow to vote). --MichaelMaggs 20:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Älmhult CoatOfArms.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Älmhult CoatOfArms.png. This image 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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS ([email protected]).

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. Lokal_Profil 23:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Your pictures about fruits to be published

Dear B. Navez, We found at Wikimedia some pictures uploaded by you (Image:Syzygium jambos.JPG; Image:Litchi chinensis (tree).jpg; and Image:Litchi chinensis fruits.JPG). Editora Sarandi (see below) intends to publish these photographs in a book about fruit trees, in Portuguese, named "Árvores Frutíiferas Exóticas". Editora Sarandi (www.sarandi.com.br) is a Brazilian publishing house that publishes textbooks for K-12 students to be used in public schools. The legal agreement associated with the image at the site (Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 2.5 License) states that we are free to “distribute and modify the file as long as you attribute its author(s) or licensor(s)”. So we write to you to ask if it is correct to credit the images as the following: B. Navez / Wikimedia. If there is any problem in publishing your image, please inform us as soon as possible. If you do confirm the terms but wish to change the credit line, please inform us. On the other hand, if the terms and the credit line are correct, please do not feel obliged to confirm them. Thank you very much, Best regards, Roberto Homem de Mello ([email protected]) Editora Sarandi Ltda. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.207.190.99 (talk • contribs) at 21:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Please use Edit Summaries.

When editing a page on Commons there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Merci de ne pas retirer les messages de demande de suppression

---

Bonjour ! J'ai remarqué que vous aviez supprimé un message d'avertissement indiquant que la page sur laquelle il était apposé ne contenait pas assez d'informations sur la source de son contenu et/ou que les conditions de réutilisation n'étaient pas claires. Pourtant, il semble que ces informations sont toujours manquantes et j'ai donc remis le(s) message(s) d'avertissement. Vous pouvez compléter ces informations de licence en vous aidant de la page "Commons:Incomplete license" ou bien, si vous pensez que toutes les informations utiles sont présentes sur la page, signaler la page sur la liste des pages à supprimer pour qu'elle ne soit pas automatiquement supprimée. Merci. Siebrand 12:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Merci de bien vouloir expliquer pourquoi les licences sont incomplètes alors que l'auteur est nommé, qu'il est décédé depuis plus de 70 ans et que son oeuvre se trouve dans le domaine public. Que faut-il de plus ? --B.navez 13:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Submarine Eruption-numbers.svg

Bonjour,

Merci pour tes commentaires sur cette image. Le problème, c'est que je ne connais pas grand chose sur les volcans (d'ailleurs, travailler sur cette série m'a appris des trucs), moi je suis un simple wikigraphiste, et j'ai fait ce qu'on m'a demandé. Après, je me doute bien que ces schémas ne sont pas parfait, ce sont juste des dessins génériques, mais s'il y a moyen de les améliorer, je suis preneur ! D'où ma demande de photo ou de schéma desquels je pourrais m'inspirer. Évidemment, si les volcans sous-marins sont très peu étudiés, ça ne va peut-être pas être possible.

• Concernant la circulation de la lave, là mon champ d'action est assez limité. Je dois représenter quelque chose qui sera visible dans un article, avec une taille de 250 pixels minimum. Difficile de représenter la circulation de la lave à travers des fissures ! J'ai néanmoins dessiné des sills sur d'autres schémas de la série. Pour les formes en "rideau", je ne vois pas ce que ça peut donner. Là encore, si tu as des exemples... (et si j'arrive à les représenter de manière visible)

• Concernant l'impact du volcan sur le socle, je crois que je peux faire quelque chose. Si je te comprends bien, le socle sous le volcan prend un peu la forme d'une assiette à soupe ?

• Pour le volcan sous-marin, je dois pouvoir l'aplatir un tantinet (même si ce n'est pas le plus simple à réaliser).

N'hésite pas à faire des demandes à l'Atelier graphique, il est fait pour ça !

Sémhur 12:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:MC Rotfeuerfisch flaws.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 18:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, my bot can't read the permissions because they aren't always OK and they won't categorize the image. And, after all, a human brain should be better than a bot ones, so it (the human) should fix the license in a better way (but yes, I'm not so convinced in that point). However, as you can see, my bot has done nothing wrong when you have fixed the image (I wonder what has make you say it can't see when a licensed picture is re-loaded with corrections or addings because I don't see no further edits in the image's page). Please make me know, bye, --Filnik 20:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Butterfly

Dear B.navez, i nominated a new version of my Butterfly on COM:FPC and withdrawn the old nomination. Maybe you want to drop an eye on it again ? :-) Thanks Richard --Richard Bartz 11:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Merci

Merci d'avoir identifié ces espèces ! Je n'avais pas pensé à demander leur identification parce que je pensais qu'il n'y avait pas assez de détail. Arria Belli | parlami 21:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anacridium melanorhodon arabafrum 2.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}}}

Pringlea

Dear B.Navez,

For the German Wikipedia I wrote an extensive article on de:Pringlea antiscorbutica, which now is running to receive an award. This would not have been possible without your exceptional pictures of this plant, so thank you very much for this.

During my work on the article I have edited one of your pictures, as it seemed to carry strong signs of age. I hope you are satisfied with the result. If not, please tell me, what is wrong or missing.

• 
  Old
• 
  New

Best regards, Denis Barthel 07:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No Mans Land

Hi B.Navez,

thanks for the new picture. Would have liked to know how you are looking too, but thats okay, you can't always get what you want. All the best, Denis Barthel 00:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Shall we re-organise the QI gallery pages?

see Commons_talk:Quality_Images#What_is_the_purpose_of_these_galleries.3F --Tony Wills 22:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hibiscus rosa-sinensis flower 2.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}}}

Image:Winter sea.jpg

Thank you for promoting my photo to QI, it's also one of my favourites. But I doubt it will pass because of size. It was already nominated more than one year ago...and failed miserably. Salut, c'était gentille quand même... -- Alvesgaspar 23:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mangifera indica var. José.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}}}

You forgot...

... to sign here. ;-). Lycaon 10:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Artocarpus heterophylla flowers.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 informations 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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 07:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dombeya acutangula Apis mellifera3.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rainbow over the house in the sugar cane fields.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}}}

Scolopendra morsitans photo

Hey! It's not a Scolopendra morsitans. It'a a Rhysida specie. As You can see it has spiracles on 7th and 8th tergite, only Rhysida, Ethmostigmus and Alluropus has spiracles there. From body shape I guess Rhysida, 100% sure it's not a Scolopendra specie. Greg

Hi Greg,

I've transmitted your opinion to a local entomologist. As he's not a specialist he would like to know who you are, what are your sources and how to contact.

You may contact him : [email protected]

Sincerely

--B.navez 16:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jasna_Góra_-_mosaic_01-removed_from_the_wall.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Jasna_Góra_-_mosaic_01-removed_from_the_wall.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 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Calliopejen 22:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

FYI

Just letting you know I made a stub for Dictyosperma and attached your pictures to it. See them here. Thanks for the pics.Mmcknight4 00:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

And today one pic is on the main page of wikipedia because the article is in the 'did you know'. Mmcknight4 72.184.183.175 23:04, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Réunion_Demi-Piton.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Réunion_Demi-Piton.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 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

B.navez 09:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reunion PitonFournaise PitonChisny.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 Lovely colors. Was this at dawn/sunset or is the earth this color there? Arria Belli 01:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC) Light of late afternoon enhanced the stones colors, all natural except one, the colouring of the road surface which I chose to be mixed into the tar. --B.navez 10:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cosmos bipinnatus & Ipomoea nil.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 Beautiful picture and good enough quality. The composition is a bit confusing though -- Alvesgaspar 12:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Improving DOF

Do you have any tips on how I might, in the future, be able to get better DOF? Specifically, I'm thinking of the image referred to with this edit regarding this image, where there's a lot of different subjects (each petal) all at varying depths. Is that something I need a fancy lens for, something I need to focus bracket & combine, or something I could do with a pocket camera am just not too sure how? Merci! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 02:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think ...

about this ? --Richard Bartz 20:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Zosterops_olivaceus.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Zosterops_olivaceus.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 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

B.navez 09:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hedychium gardnerianum.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  CommentGood, but needs a category!--Nevit 19:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC) Slight CA fringes, but sufficient quality for QI. Lycaon 20:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Basanite&Dunite bomb.JPG

Hi, I believe that the green mineral in your image might be w:olivine.--Mbz1 19:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Narcissus poeticus

Hi, if you are certain, please don't hesitate to change the discuss back to promotion. Cheers. Lycaon 20:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FormicaLeo.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 Great angle of view. Unfortunately I am verry sorry for the lost human ants!--Manco Capac 09:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)  Oppose Sorry, sharpness does not seem sufficient for me. More opinions? Lycaon 09:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)  Comment I've slightly corrected the picture --B.navez 10:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC)  Support At this resolution I'm not gonna fault the sharpness. --Calibas 03:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)  Support Support--Nevit 08:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)  Support Excellent IMHO. Striking image, encyclopedic value to boot :) Fvasconcellos 17:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC) Result: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose -> promoted -- carol 20:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nephila inaurata conjugal meal.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 --Mbdortmund 23:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toliara market 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 You do realize that your geocoding claims accuracy approximately down to the diameter of a proton(!), do you? ;-) --Dschwen 20:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC) Yes, I used this tool which told me the proton was in the purse of the woman--B.navez 20:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC) Nice photograph of a day at a market. -- carol 05:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 12b85a87c8f3ed244be3dd898e62729a

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Nominated your image for featured

en:Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Leopard_seal Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Leopard seal nomination

Hi, B.navez, Have you seen this yet? Maybe you could review and vote on the image? I miss your reviews at Commons FP too. Best.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Dombeya acutangula

Good, thanks! Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Furcifer pardalis images

Hello,

I'm working on Palapeli, an open-source jigsaw puzzle game for the KDE desktop. As not all of our users have colorful images on their disk which are suitable for puzzling, we would like to distribute some colorful pictures along with the program. I found your pictures Image:FurciferPardalisFemale.JPG and Image:FurciferPardalisMale.JPG very suitable for this purpose. I'm well aware about the fact that the GFDL permits me to immediately copy the pictures into my source tree, as long as I keep the license and attribute your work properly; but I want to hear what you think about my idea and esp. if you want to have your full name in the attribution. -- Stefan Majewsky (talk) 13:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Réunion Mafate TamarinsToMarla PassingTheFence.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 Beautiful image, sharp and well composed. Is the dark spot in the center a shadow of a cloud? -- carol 01:45, 17 August 2008 (UTC) Yes, it is --B.navez 03:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Latania lontaroides young foliage (detail).JPG

Hi on your beautiful island.

I reuploaded your palm fronts with a bit of noise reduction. Feel free to revert if you don't like it. The only downside (to me) is that I can't promote it on QI any more as I have co-authored the file now ;-). Cheers from dreary Belgium. Lycaon (talk) 08:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Réunion PitonFournaise CratèreRivals surroundings2.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 candidates

Hello! Could I ask your opinion on how best to address Carol's recent posting to the Rose with Mantis nomination on the QIC page? I confess I'm not quite sure what's being asked, or why all the previous votes and my comments were struck, so I thought I'd seek a second opinion before responding. (This is my first time in QIC and I'm still trying to learn the ropes.)  :-) Thanks! Huwmanbeing ☀★ 14:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support and guidance. I notice that CarolSpears made good on the threat to oppose, though, so that may end its chances. Huwmanbeing ☀★ 11:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Latania lontaroides young foliage (detail).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 ;-). Lycaon 09:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC) Editor should not be the promotor. -- carol 08:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC) Good colors and composition. Estrilda 05:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/Papaver somniferum 01.JPG

Hi Bruno,

Could you revisit this one and confirm your support? I like your photos by the way. Thank you for sharing them with us. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:54, 5 September 2008 (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:
Passiflora foetida flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Scope too narrow and not even really a close-up. IMO Even Passiflora foetida would do. Lycaon (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Fails category 5: geolocation. Lycaon (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Passiflora foetida flower close-up to Passiflora foetida flower --B.navez (talk) 18:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

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

---

• Geolocation :  Done --B.navez (talk) 18:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria fulfilled, scope OK. Plenty (good ones) to choose from, but only one geolocated ;-). Lycaon (talk) 19:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry, I think that Image:P foetida flower.jpg is better. That image is not geocoded, but can still be cited as "better" under the VI rules: see Commons:Valued image value#Can a comparison be made with Commons images that would not themselves qualify as VIs?. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Agree in principle with Michael, but in this case I actually sligthly, slightly, slightly prefer the nominated version relative to the alternative suggested my Michael and other close and good competitors. Future enegy is probably better spend in finding and photographing species we do not have here already;-) -- Slaunger (talk) 11:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 12:47, 7 September 2008 (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:
Harvesting the bilberries Vaccinium myrtillus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I have not come further in this review than considering the scope. I am not too fond of the bilberry word in the scope, as I had the species Vaccinium uliginosum (also called bog blueberry and many other names) in mind, when I read it, and then I was confused as that was a species I saw in North-West Greenland, and I was wondering what that was doing in France!? On closer inspection on the image page I then read, it is actually Vaccinium myrtillus, which is also known as Bilberry as well as Whortleberry and other names. So, to avoid this ambiguousness, I suggest you modify the scope to Harvesting Vaccinium myrtillus, or perhaps Harvesting Vaccinium myrtillus (bilberries) although that is not as readable for the layman, but it is more precise, I think. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

  Cool, you have even contributed with a photo comparing the berries of V. uliginosum and V. myrtillus. Very nice! -- Slaunger (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Done Scope changed. P.S. : However, both species have very large distributions all over the northern hemisphere. --B.navez (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Meets all criteria. Could have been even better if the harvesting comb was better seen. Yes, I learned during this review that V. uliginosum is also widely distributed, most often at higher altitudes as we go south. Getting this knowledge is one of the things I enjoy about reviewing VICs;-) And here in this photo we are also at 1400 m ASL. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 09:04, 8 September 2008 (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:
King Penguin (Aptenodytes patagonicus).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

This illustration was made by Samuel Blanc

•  Support Everything ok for me. --Eusebius (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support It is again the geo-location that does the trick, that and of course the fact that this picture was taken in the wild and the fulfilment of all other criteria. Lycaon (talk) 09:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I agree with the previous statements; besides, it displays a very rare view of the species, as if it has been retouched, allowing us to see either front, side and almost back view. Diti (talk to the penguin) 17:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support This could be a featured picture if you would be prepared to upload a larger version (at least 2Mpx). --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

  The photographer isn't willing to, I think. See Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Bébé Phoque de Weddell - Baby Weddell Seal.jpg Diti (talk to the penguin) 18:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 09:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Argemone mexicana flower 2.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 I don't see a problem here --Massimo Catarinella 15:09, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Trusted user

You are a trusted user for renaming mow.--Ahonc (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Renamings

Thank you for identifying the flora and proposing to address its filename. I intend to reupload my images as they become positively identified, but I tend to give it some time because there have been some occassions where people wrangle back and forth with its true identity. I have renamed these images and tagged the old ones. The new images have been renamed to be language-neutral and also include a numerical identifier, which serves both for my own reference as well as to reduce the possibilities of conflict with other files' names. Cheers! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 12:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Perfect, I am all for better names. Have we finally solved the renaming bug? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 13:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Renaming of Blossoms IMG 8543.jpg

Thanks very much for the headsup and very informative name of the flower, I must admit, I myself have been pondering for months over the exact name of this particular specie of flower, therefore the inexplicit naming of "Blossoms". I'm no expert on flowers, but since you have given the exact name of it, (Which I hope it is correct) I don't see any reason not renaming it to File:Caesalpinia pulcherrima flowers. Go ahead and change its file name.

Thanks.

SomeFormOFhuman

14:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Picture of the Year/2008/Preparation

We are starting the discussion on POTY 2008. Would you like to join? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Osteospermum ecklonis flower (Réunion).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}}}

Commons:Picture of the Year/2008/Preparation

We are starting the discussion on POTY 2008. Would you like to join? - Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:54, 20 September 2008 (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:
Green roofs.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Nominated for a MVR. --B.navez (talk) 19:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support My preference is for this one, though I can see arguments for both. It is very close as they are both good. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think "grass roofs" would be a more appropriate scope. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
  • The word in english is green roof :that's not a matter of choice. Look on WP--B.navez (talk) 16:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

    I am sorry! I had not even considered that "Green roofs" could be the correct English term for a roof covered with grass. I withdraw my oppose then. An spin-off curiosity question: How would one write a scope dealing with roofs, which have the green color? -- Slaunger (talk) 20:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria met, and I prefer this version. The alternative image has a too complicated composition for best viewing in the review size in my opinion. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

MVR scores:
Commons:Valued image candidates/Norðragøta, Faroe Islands (2).JPG:  1
Commons:Valued image candidates/Norðragøta, Faroe Islands (3).JPG:  2 <--
Result:
Image:Norðragøta, Faroe Islands (2).JPG: Declined
Image:Norðragøta, Faroe Islands (3).JPG: Promoted <--

-- Slaunger (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hibiscus boryanus fruit flower & bud.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 A bit noisy, but good DOF and composition --Ianare 20:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Persea americana fruit 2.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 OK and useful --Mbdortmund 21:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Persea americana new foliage 3.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good lighting. Vassil 21:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

humans and not bots

Always good to see a real being (and not a bot) at QI. -- carol (talk) 22:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Leszek Biały

Merci d'avoir positivement evalue ma photo et d'avoir fait sa publicite. Amities. Albertus teolog (talk) 22:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Raising the bar

Salut Bruno,

You might want take a look at this discussion -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image

I am awaiting your reply on the Sun Diagram at the Quality Image Candidates. Pbroks13 (talk) 23:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Leszek Biały Marcinkowo.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Leszek Biały Marcinkowo.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

- Benh (talk) 21:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Gordon Dam

It doesn't matter obviously, but i noticed your comments at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Gordon Dam.jpg. You may be interested to know that the dam actually does lean forwards in reality, not just the photograph. Noodle snacks (talk) 04:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neomarica gracilis 3.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good exposition of flowers Albertus teolog 18:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Réunion Piton des Neiges Lune.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 It's OK. --Lestath 18:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Image: Flower of Ribes uva-crispa

I nominated this image as a Quality Image candidate and see that you have declined the nom, stating that the flower had been incorrectly classified. Thank you for this information. Do you by any chance know what species this gooseberry is of? I know it is of genus Ribes, but am unsure of the exact species. Your help would be much appreciated. Thanks, Elucidate (talk) 13:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The plant is definitely a gooseberry; the sort is well known in South Africa. I can upload an image of the plant itself, as well as the fruit. Hopefully this will help. I should be able to upload an image by next Monday. Elucidate (talk) 18:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a load. That's why the Wikipedia article didn't show gooseberries like the sort I know. Do you think there is any way I can change the image name? Does a simple page move work? Elucidate (talk) 18:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Much appreciated. Elucidate (talk) 18:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I have proposed the correctly named and identified image as a QIC. (As well as two of my other images of flora) Care to comment? It's listed under the October 28 images. I was also wondering, is Lantana montevidensis the correct identification for this image? Thanks in advance, Elucidate (talk) 18:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Buste de Cambronne

Bonjour, (je me permets le français et le tutoiement), suite à ta remarque sur ma candidature QI, j'ai légèrement modifié les couleurs du buste de Cambronne. Est-ce que c'est mieux, suffisant pour revoir ton vote, ou est-ce que tu as un autre conseil ? Merci d'avance, --Eusebius (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hypericum lanceolatum lanceolatum.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, nice composition, technically OK. TimVickers 17:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Castelo de Pambre 2.JPG

New image upload with tilted correction. Could you review it again, please? Best regards and thank´s for your indications. --Lansbricae ^{(Ti dirás)} 15:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Voladores Moon.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 Uncommon format, quality looks ok to me. --Eusebius 10:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erigeron karvinskianus RouteDuVolcan 1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice. --Eusebius 10:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Acer platanoides map

Thanks for the note, I'll adjust it later today. - MPF (talk) 09:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Faune de La Réunion

Bonjour M. NAVEZ, je découvre vos images et vos interventions (par le biais d'échanges avec Thierry CARO). J'ai créé un petit site internet [[1]] sur la faune de l'île et je serai heureux d'avoir votre avis si vous avez le temps d'y jeter un oeil. Merci, JjArgoud (talk) 17:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Liens entre page perso de photographes Commons

Bonjour.

J'ai créé sur ma page un chapitre appelé "D'autres photographes talentueux". Vous pourriez créer un chapitre similaire sur votre page perso Commons et m'inclure dedans. --ComputerHotline (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, B.navez!

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 05:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Essars Mairie.JPG is uncategorized since 18 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Prosopis juliflora flowers.JPG is uncategorized since 20 June 2009.
• Image:Mauritius Port-Louis CaudanWaterfront2.JPG is uncategorized since 13 July 2009.
• Image:VanillaFlowerLongitudinalSection(FrenchCaption).jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Erica reunionensis regeneration 5 years after wildfire 1.JPG was uncategorized on 1 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Photographers Blackbelt

		THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S BLACKBELT
		J'ai l'honneur de vous décerner la Photographers Blackbelt (ceinture noire des photographes) pour vos photos remarquables et excellentes. --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Merci, cette distinction me va droit au coeur.

Thanks, this distinction sincerely touched my heart.

--B.navez (talk) 07:38, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Rodrigues West.jpg

Hi, am I correct in assuming the photo was taken near the location I added as coordinates? Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 04:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Flag_of_Rodrigues.gif

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Flag_of_Rodrigues.gif, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Please help replace this outdated license

Hello!

Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

Thank you for your help. If you need help feel free to ask at Commons talk:Licensing or contact User:Zscout370.

The images we would like you to check are:

• File:Flag of Rodrigues.gif

BotMultichillT 20:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Routes de Kerguelen

Bonjour Bruno,

Merci pour ces précisions. Le problème de la cartographie ici est qu'il faut utiliser les sources disponibles, pour les endroits un peu reculés certaines informations sont peu précises, notamment les routes. Je la referai donc dès que possible - mais pas tout de suite pour des raisons de temps !

Cordialement, le Korrigan →bla 21:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Voilà, c'est corrigé ! Enfin :-) le Korrigan →bla 14:13, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Charles de Foucauld, Abbaye Notre Dame des Neiges

Bonjour B.navez, j'aimerais de demander si j'ai bien enregistré toutes les photos des deux articles wikipédia (que je cherche à faire passer en AdQ dans les semaines à venir. Comme je débute encore dans wikicommons (et à vrai dire je trouve cela très complexe), j'aimerais que tu me dises si j'ai bien enregistré (ce serait bête de voir les photos disparaitre dans une semaine ou deux pour un problème que je ne comprend pas. Pour toutes les photos que j'ai mises, elles sont libre de droit (car très anciennes) ainsi que les nouvelles. De plus je n'arrive pas à mettre les photos récentes dans le wikicommuns de Charles de Foucauld. Comment faut il faire? Merci de ton aide !Babouba (talk) 12:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clypeaster reticulatus both sides.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 and useful -- George Chernilevsky 18:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Biodiversity Photo - route

Hello B. Navez,

My name is Rita Neves. I work in Câmara Municipal de Lisboa, that is a Public Organism in Portugal. Actually, we are working on a road book of Biodiversity of Lisbon, for which we are going to produce a panel and a brochure. We found your photos on Wikimedia Commons and liked specially one of them very much, so we would like to know if you could allow us to use your photos, for free, to publish on this project, knowing that the brochure of will be for free distribution to everyone. The photo we are considering to use are the following:

Schinus_terebinthifolius http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schinus_terebinthifolius_fruits.JPG

The brochure will have four brackets. - Broochura a pocket to take the route - A brochure to present the day of inauguration

- Schedules for species identification
- Panels that will be fixed in the Land

As i said the Free Access will be everything :)

If you are the author and provide us that photo, we will refer your name in the bibliografy and we need to know what´s the name you want on the bibliography? B. Navez? If it´s possible please respond to [email protected] or [email protected] or here on Wikimedia.

Thank you very much. Our best regards

use of GPS monitoring station photo in a textbook

Bonjour!

I'm a freelance photo researcher working on a geology textbook for Pearson Science and the author would like to use this photo of yours in the textbook: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ReunionFournaise_GPSMonitoringStation.JPG

I see your license covers commercial use, but the publisher requires me to contact the sources of images to get permission directly from them. We would need printing rights, plus any electronic rights, and all derivatives and ancillaries connected to the book for this edition and all future editions.

This is the book info:

Earth 11e Tarbuck/Lutgens ISBN: 9780321814067 2013

You can contact me via email: [email protected] Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best regards,

Kristin

-- Kristin Piljay Photo Researcher [email protected]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ReunionFournaise_GPSMonitoringStation.JPG

Bonjour!

I'm a freelance photo researcher working on a geology textbook for Pearson Science and the author would like to use this photo of yours in the textbook: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ReunionFournaise_GPSMonitoringStation.JPG

I see your license covers commercial use, but the publisher requires me to contact the sources of images to get permission directly from them. We would need printing rights, plus any electronic rights, and all derivatives and ancillaries connected to the book for this edition and all future editions.

This is the book info:

Earth 11e Tarbuck/Lutgens ISBN: 9780321814067 2013

You can contact me via email: [email protected] Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best regards,

Kristin

-- Kristin Piljay Photo Researcher [email protected]

Port-aux-Français Chapel

Dear Bruno, the church in Port-aux-Français seems to appear as “Notre-Dame des Vents” in some sources, and as “Notre-Dame du Vent” in others. Could you please advise, which exactly is the correct (or more preferable) name to use – “Notre-Dame des Vents” or “Notre-Dame du Vent”? Best, Apcbg (talk) 08:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear user,

according to official references, the right name is "Notre-Dame des Vents". I take it from this very reliable website which refers itself to the report of the Commission of toponymy. I regretfully don't hold this report for an ultimate checking but I personnally know the webmaster of kerguelen-voyages and take his assertions for certain. In addition the engraved inscriptions below the statue are actually "Notre-Dame des Vents".

We could add the building is not really a church but only a chapel, because it doesn't link to any parish and has been built on private intitiative.

Amazingly, the only grave that has been placed close to the entrance of the chapel is a muslim one.

Yours sincerely,

Bruno

Well I had the same impression but feel less certain now. And one could be mislead by one's memory sometimes, that's why it's better to have sources. For instance, you wrote that the statue's inscription reads “Notre-Dame des Vents” but this picture (which by the way is eligible for Wikimedia Commons uploading) says otherwise. Best, Apcbg (talk) 19:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I understand well now why there is such a discussion about the name of the chapel. But there is no failure in my memory. Obviously, the plate has been replaced during the 2000s anf the inscription has been changed. You may check it on older pictures like this one taken by the photographer André Fatras in 1987. However the right name is the one officially chosen by the commission of toponymy, the one used officially by the TAAF like on their stamps. Why this change recently on the inscription? Has the engraver simply made a mistake or has some people decided to recover the name originally wished by the builders. I don't know. --B.navez (talk) 09:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for the explanation. So we may regard “Notre-Dame des Vents” as more authoritative, unless some new information appears. And yes, it's a chapel; my mistake, and I am amending the title of this topic accordingly. Best, Apcbg (talk) 07:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Publication of Official Biological Emblems of the World E-Book

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your permission to use your photo in this project to document, sort out and analyse the official biological emblems of the world. The results of this two-year project from 2011 to 2013 can be freely obtained at Raffles Museum Books (http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/raffles_museum_pub/raffles_museum_books.html) under:

Lim, R. C. J., H. H. Tan & H. T. W. Tan, 2013. Official Biological Emblems of the World. Raffles Museum Of Biodiversity Research, National University Singapore, Singapore. 231 pp. Uploaded 7 August 2013. 40.8 MB

Thank you very much again! Cheers,

Research Assistant, Reuben C. J. LIM :: Botany Laboratory :: Department of Biological Sciences :: Faculty of Science :: National University of Singapore, 14 Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore :: 65-6516 2708 (DID) :: 65-6779 2486 (Fax) :: [email protected] (E) :: www.nus.edu.sg ;http://www.dbs.nus.edu.sg/ (W) :: Company Registration No: 200604346E

Important: This email is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify us immediately; you should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you.

New user template

Hello.

I've created a new template to describe yourself : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:User_info2

I've use it on my user page.

Regards. --ComputerHotline (talk) 07:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

New level {{User PH-4}}

Hi ; new level 4 for you ?

PH-4

This user is able to take professional quality photographs.

--ComputerHotline (talk) 08:51, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Kerguelen cabbage photo

Hi B.navez, you've got some great pictures on Wikipedia, but I'd like to talk about one. On the page Pringlea antiscorbutica (the Kerguelen cabbage), you have put up a photo of the Kerguelen cabbages in the landscape of the island (this), but I see that this is an altered version of a original photo with someone in it (this one). I think that the original photo with the person is actually better then the "fake" version, for two reasons. Firstly the original is a higher resolution image (and we generally want as high as possible) and secondly, the adding of a person shows the true size and scale of both the plants and the landscape around. So I would suggest replacing the photoshopped version with the original. I was going to go ahead and do this, but I don't know who the person in the photo is and whether you edited them out for some reason (like not wanting to be on Wikipedia). So anyway, I thought I'd ask your opinion before doing anything. What do you think? --Hibernian (talk) 23:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

As you can see, both pictures are available. So please don't change anything and just let people choose what is better for their articles on wikipedia projects.I am the person on the picture and I don't mind being seen. Cheers. --B.navez (talk) 16:18, 3 April 2015 (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:Rodrigues PortMathurinMosquee.jpg

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 22:21, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Miel letchis 02.JPG

Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Miel letchis 02.JPG. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Saccharum officinarum yellow canes

Dear B.navez,

we are currently working on a student textbook with the title “Biologie” scheduled to be published in 2019. In addition an electronic version of this book is planned which will be sold to scientific institutions and libraries. In this book we would like to use the following illustration

Saccharum officinarum yellow canes

We want to kindly ask you for the nonexclusive permission to use this material in this and future editions of our book including the electronic version and for the German speaking countries (Germany/Austria/Switzerland). Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Kindest regards--UniDuE Biodiversity (talk) 14:07, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Desinsertion du muscle CO.jpg

File:Desinsertion du muscle CO.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!

92.192.160.93 20:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)