User talk:Mattbuck/Archive9

Archives October 2007 - June 2008 June 2008 - August 2008 August 2008 - December 2008 December 2008 - April 2010 April 2010 - September 2010 September 2010 - May 2011 May 2011 - December 2011 January 2012 - March 2012 April 2012 - July 2012 August 2012 - October 2012 November 2012 - January 2013 February 2013 - April 2013 May 2013 - July 2013 August 2013 - October 2013 November 2013 - December 2013 January 2014 - February 2014 March 2014 - April 2014 May 2014 - July 2014 August 2014 - September 2014 October 2014 - November 2014 December 2014 - February 2015 March 2014 - September 2015 October 2015 - December 2017 Current

Month Year in City

Nonsense. Leeds and Salford already have images by month and the overall volume by city is certainly there to justify very many others of this ilk. Ardfern (talk) 15:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Question about deliberate use of bad faith barnstar?

This appears to be deliberate use of the "Wikilove" function for a bad faith barnstar. Can something be done about this? It seems to violate our Commons project principles of COM:MELLOW, yes? I could use your advice here, -- Cirt (talk) 20:22, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• You can always remove it, Cirt. I'm surprised that you saw through my scheme--I guess I should give you more credit next time. Oh, "bad faith" should probably not be italicized; use quotes. Cheers, Drmies (talk) 21:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Mattbuck, this is clearly inappropriate behavior, yes? I think something should be done about this. -- Cirt (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

    I would concur, but I am now an involved admin and so can't do anything about it. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

    Oh I wasn't asking for you to do something, but thanks. :) Just advice about where to take this. I'll inquire with the closing admin. -- Cirt (talk) 23:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Update: Please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Drmies_.3D_use_of_bad_faith_barnstar_via_WikiLove_function. -- Cirt (talk) 02:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oldfield Park railway station MMB 08 158958.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Philips Marsh TRSMD MMB 03 153382 43183.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 19:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paddington railway station MMB 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 Good quality. --S nova 17:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caledonian Road and Barnsbury railway station MMB 07.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 Somewhat grayish capture but maybe I should blame the weather. The quality is quite good nevertheless. --Ximonic 10:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tamworth railway station MMB 01 170107.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Birmingham New Street railway station MMB 15 221133.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 too dark? But QI is it. --Ralf Roletschek 12:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pilning railway station MMB 04 158767.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. --Yann 12:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 18 220022.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. --Yann 12:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

A women's vulva

Can you please move File:A_women's_vulva.jpg to File:A_woman's_vulva.jpg? They're duplicates of each other. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 23:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 23:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Responses on en:WP

FYI, there were several responses to your post on en:WP: [1]. --JN466 20:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Please check this addition for correctness

Hallo Mattbuck, please check this addition for correctness (my source is not authenticated). Thanks. --Saibo (Δ∇) 21:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

your barnstar

Hi, I consider this barnstar a personal attack on a named editor. The fact that this editor is blocked and cannot respond makes the situation worse. May I please ask you consider changing of the wording in your wikilove message? Thanks. Oh, yes, the turtles image was taken by me, so thanks for commenting on it.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:55, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

FYE

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Mattbuck --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Good grief: that's not going to be the last one of those, I'm afraid. You've long been one of the good guys in my book (tough but fair, dedicated but level-headed), but I think you've been orbiting awfully close to the drama-black-hole event horizon lately. FWIW, YMMV, etc. --SB_Johnny ^talk 00:05, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Concerning one of your blocks

I forgot to let you know earlier, but I've started a discussion about Saibo's block: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Unblock. I'm proposing for Saibo to be unblocked. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality images

Bonjour. J'ai remarqué que vous posté quelque chose comme 20 images à la page Qualité Images aujourd'hui. Bien qu'il n'y ait pas de règle explicite contre cela, il est généralement considéré comme une mauvaise forme pour ajouter plus de 4 ou 5 en une seule journée. Merci. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Vous pouvez également envisager d'archiver cette page, car il est assez long. S'il vous plaît voir Commons:Bien utiliser les pages de discussion.. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, suite à ta remarque, je viens de supprimer des images. Bonne fin de journée. --Thesupermat (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Kuhmar sdd 9396.jpg

Where is this overexposed? Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:33, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The sky is white, grass is too bright. Even if it weren't, I wouldn't promote as there are awful JPEG artifacts, especially in the trees. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It was 95% JPEG or 94% JPEG quality -- about uncompressed... Too strange to hear about JPEG artifacts...--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Your comment helped me to reproduce the image from raw file. Could you please check it and share your opinion with me? Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 07:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

New version is better, but still not QI to me. Same problems actually. Not as severe, but still there. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paddington railway station MMB 12 332014 332006 43XXX.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. --NorbertNagel 17:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tondu railway station MMB 04.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. --Taxiarchos228 19:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stapleton Rd Stn 4.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 composition and OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 18:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flax Bourton railway station MMB 27 150281.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. --Yann 12:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Image rename

Thanks, and sorry about the ".jpg". --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yate MMB 05.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. --Cayambe 18:09, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Birmingham International railway station MMB 03 390035.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. --Cayambe 09:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Mass deletion of Sridhar Babu Peram's files

Although many of his (the various socks) files were copyright violations, not all were violations. The Kabandha's image was a PD-India|PD-art as artist Balasaheb Pant Pratinidhi died in 1951. A case to case basis decision should be taken instead of a mass deletion. Please revert the deletion. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Could you give me a link to the specific file? -mattbuck (Talk) 18:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

File:The Picture Ramayana 1.jpg or File:The Picture Ramayana 2.jpg. Other files also need to be scrutinized. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 18:03, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Undeleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

There were many other useful (PD-India/PD-art) images uploaded by Sridhar Babu Peram. Can undelete all and go by case to case basis on deletion? He planted many of his images of Hinduism-related articles of English wikipedia and many articles are suffering red links. Some of them: The_forces_of_Visvamitra_and_those_raised_by_Vasistha's_volition_battle_for_possession_of_Sabala.jpg, File:Hanuman vanquishes Nikumbha by wrenching off his head.jpg etc. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 18:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. Please take any other requests to COM:UDEL. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:30, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Revert_mass_deletion_of_Sridhar_Babu_Peram.27s_files--Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beeston railway station MMB 12 222019.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. --Iifar 07:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nailsea and Backwell railway station MMB 41 150239 153380.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. --Yann 10:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stratford International station MMB 10 395017.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 like such reduced colors and sharpness. --Ralf Roletschek 17:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Watford Junction railway station MMB 17 321415.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. --JDP90 17:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beeston railway station MMB 17 156415.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. --Cayambe 18:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 29 Sir Colin Campbell Building.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Leytonstone High Road railway station MMB 04 150130.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 -- MJJR 20:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 77 43149.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 18:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB F7 Atrium.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Homo en USA.pdf

Why do you add that sexuality cat to a DR that has nothing to do with sexuality? Being about sexuality is not a valid reason for keep or delete in this case. That fact that it is about sexuality doesn't make the file in scope or not and it doesn't create or block permission. I want to assume good faith, but the way you use the cat in this DR is quite strange. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:22, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand the idea of the category. It is not to watch deletion requests based on sexuality or nudity reasons, it's to watch deletion requests of media relating to nudity or human sexuality, no matter what the rationale. The PDF description mentions homosexuality in the US, so I assumed it is about sexuality and add the category. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: File:Jubilee Campus MMB C8 Melton Hall and Business School North.jpg

Hi, I was just wondering what you find unusual about this image, other than it's not of a train? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, No, I did not think about trains. I thought about the light, the perspective, the night, the lamp, the snow... All the mood I like very much. I think this kind of pictures is "refreshing" the usual way of "Commons", so it is to me "unusual" (but maybe it is not the good english word, sorry...). Well, I congratulate you for this image.--Jebulon (talk) 11:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thirsk railway station MMB 05.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. --Taxiarchos228 18:41, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston railway station MMB 12 378229.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. --Cayambe 16:23, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB C8 Melton Hall and Business School North.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 interesting. I've suggested a crop at left.--Jebulon 17:01, 1 May 2012 (UTC) Duly cropped. Mattbuck 01:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)Much better, IMO. Thanks for this unusual picture.--Jebulon 01:25, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Minehead railway station MMB 04 9351.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. --Cayambe 07:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 43 220003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Farringdon station MMB 10 C-Stock.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, nice view --Taxiarchos228 15:43, 8 May 2012 (UTC) yes, very good! --Ralf Roletschek 15:49, 8 May 2012 (UTC) The train spotters love it. -- MJJR 21:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kentish Town railway station MMB 09.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 where is the station? ;) --Ralf Roletschek 17:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chepstow MMB 15 Gloucester to Newport Line.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 picture. --Florstein 14:21, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burton-on-Trent railway station MMB 05 220029.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flax Bourton railway station MMB 22 220XXX.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 view. - A.Savin 23:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 80 Computer Science.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, despite some noise. - A.Savin 23:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Watford Junction railway station MMB 23 390025.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. --Iifar 17:58, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tondu railway station MMB 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. JLPC 19:09, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Comedor de la Universidad Técnica de Múnich para estudios mediáticos, Riesstr. 44, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 03.JPG

Hello, I worked the picture although you marked it with a red frame. The version I just uploaded is for sure better (easy to do with RAW and PS5.5), but I am not confident if it is good enough. Please, let me know what you think. Thanks and regards, Poco a poco (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Much better. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reaction! Will try to follow this path. Poco a poco (talk) 22:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yatton railway station MMB 20.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. --Cayambe 07:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Birmingham International railway station MMB 04 390035.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. --Cayambe 15:44, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston Square tube station MMB 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 Good quality. --Cayambe 15:44, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Watford Junction railway station MMB 27 378210.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 10:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oxford railway station MMB 05 165133.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 10:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reading railway station MMB 54 165116.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. --Taxiarchos228 14:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tal-y-Cafn railway station MMB 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me.--JLPC 21:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alexandra Palace railway station MMB 06 365521.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. --Taxiarchos228 14:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Radcliffe railway station MMB 10 156413.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 Fine! DimiTalen 07:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 15 319365 319385.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. DimiTalen 07:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nottingham railway station MMB 54 156414.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. -- JLPC 15:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parson Street railway station MMB 27 150247.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. --NorbertNagel 20:32, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dawlish Warren MMB 06 South Devon Main Line.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 composition, i think the quality is good enough for QI.--ArildV 09:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bedford railway station MMB 05 222022.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 Gauravjuvekar 08:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yatton railway station MMB 22 220021.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. --Cayambe 19:12, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Picture of Vojtech Sedlacek

How may I prove the autorship of the picture? I am the worker in Vojtech Sedlacek's company. He sent me his own photo he made and told me to put it to the bio article about him on Wiki.

We have a problem. The oldest photo of Vojtech, uploaded by me in Dec 2008 is always side distorted in the Biography page. That's why I started to experiment with the picture. Can this be solved, please?

I just tend to be suspicious when I see such images, as they're mostly culled from company websites without permission. I'm happy to accept what you say as true, though it would be best if you could forward your original correspondence to our OTRS team. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

File:BSicon exCONT3.svg

File:BSicon exCONT3.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please 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!

-Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 02:30, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Some people have too much time and imagination and not enough common sense… Useddenim (talk) 10:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bedminster railway station MMB 16.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 Yes.--Jebulon 09:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Much Dewchurch field MMB 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yatton railway station MMB 17 150267.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. --Cayambe 14:31, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hornsey railway station MMB 22 321418 365505.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. --Keymeulen 15:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brockenhurst railway station MMB 04 444010.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. --JDP90 18:45, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Guildford railway station MMB 17 455725.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello and sorry

(poor english, sorry) Hello Mattbuck. I check (or review) your images frequently, but I can not comment on them frecuently because my monitor is a bit dark and in my opinion your images are a bit dark. Sorry, others users can review: It is usual that I'm not sure--Miguel Bugallo 21:23, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Nevertheless, good work, congratulations--Miguel Bugallo 21:26, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try and make sure my images are a bit brighter in future. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB A5 222012 222003 43055 373XXX.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 what is the sense of this image? Showing the railway station? This picture does not show much of it. Showing the front parts of the trains? Seems for me curious. --Taxiarchos228 16:21, 24 May 2012 (UTC) The trains I suppose... It shows trains at a station, what more do you want? Mattbuck 16:30, 24 May 2012 (UTC) I am not that railway expert like you seem to be but I have chosen an angle more like this File:Paris - TGV.jpg --Taxiarchos228 16:34, 24 May 2012 (UTC) You'd need a fisheye lens for that at St Pancras really. One of the iconic railway images (for me anyway, maybe it was my dad who took it, he's certainly done a version of it) is a similar shot of HST sets at Paddington station - 4 or 5 of them in a row. This struck me as a slight update to it - a more modern terminal, and, mostly, more modern trains. Mattbuck 16:40, 24 May 2012 (UTC) ok, convinced --Taxiarchos228 16:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB B7 43XXX.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. --Taxiarchos228 16:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

About aurochs-morphology illustration.

Hi mattbuck!

The forest is from perfect vision graphics, and it have free license. The bull is a modification of some drawings of Tom Hammond (I have his permission) The man is my own work.

So I ask you to abandon your nomination.

I think you should have asked first.

Bye.

--Aurochs1 (talk) 04:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You will need to explicitly state the provenance of all images on the page and the licence. -mattbuck (Talk) 05:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paddington station MMB 48 166217 332010 332013.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 think that the image must be QI, but there are a bit of CAs on the three or four columms of the right. The detail is not excellent, but conditions are difficult--Lmbuga 21:38, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Williton railway station MMB 03 4936.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 like it, I love the wheels--Lmbuga 21:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cardiff Mardi Gras 2010 MMB 44 Amanda Protheroe Thomas.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... though the feet are missing --Cayambe 20:40, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bedminster railway station MMB 17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The lowermost flowers are nor in focus, but QI nevertheless to me. --Cayambe 17:24, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Temporary undeletion request

Just so that I can archive them:

• File:Secular Fascism.png
• File:First Commons upload of P v NP with Relativity.pdf
• File:Christian P versus NP.png
• File:Kraaiennest.tif
• File:Satan.tif
• File:Jesus Christ.tif
• File:Pi.tif
• File:Salvation.png
• File:SINGING.JPG
• File:Creation.jpg
• File:GCMOON.JPG
• File:Godwin's Law.GIF
• File:Lao (Laos) National Tourism Authority.jpg
• File:Internet Evolution.jpg
• File:Image-Genetic Code Structure.JPG
• File:Wikipedia Commons Censorship.pdf
• File:Tuple Imagery of encoded name d`youvan.jpg
• File:Tuple Imagery of encoded name d`youvan source code.JPG
• File:Tuple Imagery of encoded name joel`y``.jpg
• File:Tuple Imagery of encoded name joel`y`` source code.jpg
• File:Joeltup2.jpg
• File:Tuple Image of joel`y``code.JPG
• File:Image-Youvan Police Report Attempted Murder 2.gif
• File:Youvan Police Report Attempted Murder 1.gif
• File:Biological Manhattan Project.gif
• File:John (Jack) MCCABE.JPG
• File:Karr and Youvan, Copperhead Stagecoach Co. small.jpg
• File:Tuples.jpg
• File:TUPLE.JPG

You're free to delete them when I'm done, which will take minutes. I want a copy for posterity. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 21:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 38 Djanogly LRC and The Exchange.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. - A.Savin 20:09, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB 08 373XXX 373XXX 373005.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 nice! --ArildV 11:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nailsea and Backwell railway station MMB 64 150278.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 DOF and composition. Adequate detail level. I find it a tad underexposed, but just acceptable for QI --Slaunger 19:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blackfriars station MMB 11 319377.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. --Taxiarchos228 14:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parson Street railway station MMB 30 57303.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}}}

Can they recover?

Thank you for having removed the image. But why delete these files:

• File:Local int.jpg
• File:Smooth mesh.jpg
• File:Mudbox brushes.jpg
• File:Mudbox 1.jpg
• File:Brushes 001.jpg
• File:3ds Max logo.jpg
• File:Дым серый.jpg
• File:Облако.jpg
• File:Дым цветной.jpg
• File:Огненный дым.jpg

This image created by me, I am the owner of these images.

Can they recover?

Put simply, no, not going to happen. Most of them show a program which you clearly did not create yourself; then there's the logo, which is at best a derivative work; and that leaves only the smoky ones which are to my mind out of scope. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hornsey railway station MMB 17 365XXX.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 yes, very good! --Ralf Roletschek 14:32, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paddington station MMB 49 166217 332010 332013.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. --Cayambe 15:50, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB B2 43061 222006 222023 377505.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. --Cayambe 15:50, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Birmingham New Street railway station MMB 18 350104 220014 323212.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. --Cayambe 16:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB C9 395028.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. --Iste Praetor 15:30, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Jebulons behaviour at QIC

Hello mattbuck,

if you are consistent you have to ban User:Jebulon for this personal attack which was not his first time (I already said). Regards --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:33, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston station MMB 76 2009-stock.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. --Iste Praetor 18:12, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 22:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB G9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI, but noise IMO on the limit. --Sfu 19:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Holly Valance at Speed Racer premiere.jpg

File:Holly Valance at Speed Racer premiere.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!

Teemeah (talk) 12:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Holly Valance at Speed Racer premiere.jpg

File:Holly Valance at Speed Racer premiere.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.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Fred the Oyster (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined - DR is ongoing, plus, of the 3 tineye hits, 1 is a 404, the other 2 link back to us. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Try this then, seeing how you weren't convinced with the crap TinEye search. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 14:06, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Cube?

Now? :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Uhm... ok? -mattbuck (Talk) 17:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Or did I misread something somewhere a while ago ;) (if so apologies) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm just confused. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:00, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Aren't we all - if you saw the cube then it might have made far more sense given who was on it - if not then apologies - got that wrong :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:17, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

All I know about The Cube is that it's a gameshow with Philip Schofield, which was parodied by Jon Culshaw. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:07, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Please stop

In case you have not noticed I practically left commons. Please stop mentioning me at AN/U.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bedminster railway station MMB 24.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. Well lit, in focus, good composition --Mifter Public 15:03, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Uploads

Hi Mattbuck, thanks for all your feedback, it is helping me to improve the quality of my pictures. I have uploaded new versions of 3 pictures that you reviewed in the last days:

• File:Parque Olímpico, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 08.JPG: declined by you due to missing sharpness. I agree, but just realized that I had a wrong configuration when generation the JPEG file. I uploaded a better version
• File:Olympiastadion, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 09.JPG: you found CAs, that I fixed alreday some days ago, but haven't got any feedback from you anymore
• File:Centro diacónico de los Testigos de Jehová, Riesstr. 4, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 01.JPG: after the second try you stated that new problems appeared because I lowered the black point. I just uploaded a new version without touchingthe dark curves.

All the best, Poco a poco (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi mate. Regarding DD09, there are still noticable blue/yellow fringes around the horizontal(ish) bars. I've uploaded a new version of DD01 here, but cannot upload to Commons due to my connection. DD08, I am still seeing the same problems, and the new colour balance is worse. I'm afraid I don't think that will be QI, no matter how you play with it. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your reply. Regarding DD01, actually I like your version. Should I upload it to Commons although you are the author?. Regarding DD09 I think that I got it now, please, have a look. And finally in regards to DD08, I will follow your advice, I give up. Best regards! Poco a poco (talk) 21:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Please do upload, just add "white balance adjustment by mattbuck" or somesuch. And I agree, you've got it. promotion. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

 Uploaded and thanks for the promotion! Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hi. Please notice Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Pozor, úchyl.jpg. --ŠJů (talk) 08:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montpelier railway station MMB 10 143620.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}}}

Duplicate pictures

It seems we have two identical images of a class 483, File:Isle of Wight 483 001.jpg and File:483 001 at St John's Road, 1989 - geograph.org.uk - 790855.jpg. The first a direct upload and is used in lots of places, the second transferred from Geograph at a higher resolution but apparently not linked to from anywhere. Bringing it here since you're the person most likely to be able to sort this all out for me! Alzarian16 (talk) 14:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not inclined to delete, as the images are different in terms of quality. I grant you they have the same negative, but the digital outcome is rather different. I have added notes on the other's existence to each page. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thank you! Alzarian16 (talk) 18:02, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Picture nominated for deletion

Hi. I replied to your deletion request of File:Josef Hofinger.jpg. The man on the picture is my grandfather, and I suppose the picture was taken by my grandmother. Own work might be wrong, but since I am their own flesh and blood... and I own the negatives I scanned it from. Thank you in case of re-consideration! --Admi niko commons (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caledonian Road and Barnsbury railway station MMB 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Starcross railway station MMB 04.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. - A.Savin 11:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Pelouse Champs-sur-Marne.jpg

Hi Mattbuck,

Your comment was: "too bright". Could you please give me any suggestion in order to improve this ? Is a problem due to exposure ? Contrast ? Saturation ? I don't understand what I could do.

Thanks in advance, and thanks for useful reviews anyway.--Jebulon (talk) 10:12, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi mate. My too bright comment was mainly due to the sky being cyan rather than blue, indicating the blue channel is completely overexposed. The rest of the image could do with being darkened as well. I'd say there's probably also a general blue tint to the image which could do with fixing. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for quick answer, I'll try to check. (you know what ? It is the first time somebody calls me "mate", I did not know that word !!! Very kind of you !--Jebulon (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC))--Jebulon (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I should tell you, I'm from Bristol, we generally call everyone mate. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:27, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Now go review all my photos :p -mattbuck (Talk) 21:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I've tried something, I hope it's good. And because you tell me "mate", I'll review one or two of your pictures, even if I'm absolutely not interested by trains... Lol.--Jebulon (talk) 22:59, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't review things I'm interested in, I just review whatever's there, though there are a few things I tend to stay away from if I feel I'm not quite in a position to be able to say if it's a decent photo or not. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB E0 Melton Hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI IMO.--JLPC 08:45, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Uploaded pictures

Hi, I run into the problem. I was uploading pictures with Upload Wizard and on final step (when I already put categories, descriptions and the licences) Wiyard become frozen and on the end pictures came out with masages: "The database did not find the text of a page that it should have found" and so on...

Here they are: File:Pančevo Vajfertova pivara01.JPG, File:Pančevo Vajfertova pivara02.JPG in total 19 files. Those last 19 uploaded on my upload page. I can not do nothing with those files, when I try to ad category or description it is not working. can you do something about or just delete it. Thanks ----László (talk) 22:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Nuked. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks----László (talk) 00:44, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Hi muttbuck. How are you? I am asking you about File:SantisimoSacramento.jpg, I want to know if it may be QI, Best regards!!! Ezarateesteban 13:10, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

That image is not QI I'm afraid - high ISO noise, blurry and noticable bad JPEG quality. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!!!--Ezarateesteban 13:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

And this ? I nominated it 2 days ago and I am waiting for an evaluation --Ezarateesteban 13:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

It happens, keep waiting, someone will get to it. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:24, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Please consider

Hi Mattbuck. Please consider these remarks. Thank you.  B.p. 10:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB K5 Business School North.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 with the person --Ralf Roletschek 15:42, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Please undelete User:C3F2k/possibly copyrightable content. I forgot to remove the speedy tag. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 15:51, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Er... what? You want me to undelete something so you can remove your request that I delete it in the first place? That makes no sense whatsoever. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:53, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I changed my mind. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 15:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#File:Innsbruck_-_Bergiselschanze6.jpg

Hi,

I have uploaded a new version. Please check if this meets your perception of QI. Regards --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nailsea and Backwell railway station MMB 53 67016 67018.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. - A.Savin 07:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Newport railway station MMB 32 43187.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB F7 395027 395005.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, given the weather conditions.--Jebulon 23:14, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paddington station MMB 66 C-stock.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. JLPC 09:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB P2 Business School North.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 Fine for QI, in spite maybe of some noise in the dark parts...Well, QI.--Jebulon 23:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB H4 Melton Hall and Business School North.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. Not as good as the snowy one I remember, but good enough--Jebulon 23:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The Death Match Monument2.JPG

WHY DID YOU DELETE: " The Death Match Monument2.JPG "  ?

Because Ukraine has no Freedom of Panorama - images on Commons must be usable commercially, and Ukrainian freedom of panorama laws don't allow that. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:12, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flax Bourton railway station MMB 20.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 photo. --Florstein 16:44, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB C2 373213 373212.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good at full res. --Cayambe 20:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB E1 395025.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 21:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yatton railway station MMB 21 150238.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. - A.Savin 13:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tottenham Hale station MMB 00 2009 stock.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 00:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rugby MMB 01 Frank Whittle memorial.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 Too dark. Can you brighten the shadows? --NorbertNagel 17:02, 3 June 2012 (UTC)  Done Mattbuck 12:24, 10 June 2012 (UTC) I tried something, but I'm not sure whether it is an improvement. If you don't like it, please set pack to your version. --NorbertNagel 17:46, 11 June 2012 (UTC) A bit dark, and sharpness not perfect, but good for QI, IMO.--Jebulon 15:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC) At the 5th time of asking. Hurrah! Mattbuck 00:09, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 55 57309.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Minehead railway station MMB 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 16:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC) Strong CA on the left roof-side. Please remove. --NorbertNagel 22:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yatton railway station MMB 18 150267.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. --NorbertNagel 14:26, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paddington station MMB 33 43XXX 43185 43XXX 43088 43021 332003.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. --Cayambe 07:29, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston station MMB 74 2009-stock.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. JLPC 20:14, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston station MMB 13 350254.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. --ArildV 10:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blackhorse Road station MMB 10 172007.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. Next time leave more space to both sides. --Iifar 14:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flax Bourton railway station MMB 36.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:05, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Filton Abbey Wood railway station MMB 14 158956.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 now  Support after a tonality correction. --Alchemist-hp 15:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB 97 406-585 373010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. I like the composition here (unusual, busy, but it works IMO).--ArildV 22:52, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Willesden Junction MMB 05 378228.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. -- JLPC 22:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 82 220XXX 43154 43127.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 21:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston station MMB 90 221110.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. --JDP90 16:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Northwick Park station MMB 04.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 Composition is good, DOF very good. Sky might be a bit grainy but it was a cloudy day. QI for me. -- Aisano 18:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blackhorse Road station MMB 16 172001.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. --Coyau 12:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB Q2.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 for me it's correct so as it is, please don't distort --Ralf Roletschek 16:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)  Comment Well who am I to discuss that but if you tried you would be amazed that after rotating by 3.25° there does not remain much of a perspective distortion to correct. It's mostly rotation. -- Aisano 19:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB 46 395017.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, we need also such details. --Ralf Roletschek 13:31, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yatton railway station MMB 19 150267.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality Poco a poco 19:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

speedy deletion?

hi matt;

respectfully, i have a question:

why did you delete this file File:Two women helping to give handjob.jpg, which is part of a mass-nomination, after it had only been listed for <3 days, & without providing any comment or reason-rationale for doing so?

Lx 121 (talk) 04:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that. As I said at the time, clearly a different penis, attached to a different person. The person in the photo looks pretty tanned and thin, versus File:Full erection Clearly showing scrotal raffe.jpg and the majority which feature someone pale and overweight. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Parkway railway station MMB 22 220022.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 20:01, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

DR nominations

Please do not "renominate" files which are already up for deletion. It is not helpful. If you wish to post a comment, do so. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

play nominations

Thank you, I will nominate now files wich are for new deletion, ok so much!, though they never mind me to be erased already being there uploaded.How things in Bristol, sir? Skapheandros (talk) 20:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! King's Cross railway station MMB 12.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. --Cayambe 18:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! King's Cross railway station MMB 41.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. --Selbymay 17:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB 95 The Exchange and Djanogly LRC.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. --Cayambe 06:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oldfield Park railway station MMB 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 Good quality. --Cayambe 06:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caledonian Road and Barnsbury railway station MMB 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The most boring pic of 2012 but essentially nothing wrong with it for QI (no dust spots, no white lines, insignificant overexposure and CA, pretty clear detail etc... ;-)--Moroder 21:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Liftarn

Sorry if I'm un-"mellow", but I already found both the style and substance of the way Liftarn does things to be extremely tedious and tiresome five years ago. My patience with him was pretty much exhausted back then, and none of the old issues or longstanding points of dispute have been resolved or settled by mutual agreement in the meantime -- and whenever I'm faced with the unenviable chore of dealing with him yet again, I'm always rather quickly and forcibly reminded why I found the task so frustrating in the past... AnonMoos (talk) 16:01, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, I understand completely. I feel the same way about other people, for instance Mbz1. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:02, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Railway map

Hope that's what you had in mind :)--Nilfanion (talk) 22:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that'll do. I should comment though, your map shows the Portishead line going into Portishead: it doesn't, it goes to the docks. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The Portishead issue reflects what is contained in the OS data. I'm not satisfied with it, but I've used it to date for simplicity. One obvious problem is the heritage lines aren't included. Strangely enough, the track is still in place (judging from satellite imagery) towards Portishead.

This strikes me as the sort of thing OSM should be better at - so I'm going to look at making use of that.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

It is, but it's very overgrown, and it's built on within Portishead. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I've updated the Severnside map to use OSM data, and I'll have a look at the Metro one soon.

A couple questions about these though:

1. What to do about the heritage lines (especially the long ones like the WSR)? Should they be included as the background network shown on the maps? Seems odd to include barely used industry lines, and exclude the steam lines with heavier traffic...
2. Adding relevant stations is easy enough. However, would it be better to include that in the image itself, or via templates on WP (eg Superimpose2)? If I record the boundary info properly, the template option may be easier and also allows wiki-linking.

I can see value in maps to accompany the route diagrams for all the routes - so best to get it right early on.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I would say yes, heritage railways need to be included, and probably better not to differentiate between heritage and mainline if we don't differentiate between mainline and industrial. Regarding stations, I'd rather have two versions of the map, one with and one without the stations pointed out. I don't want the stations named, just a little marker which can be easily coloured. Superimposure isn't as easy as images are IMO, plus it's more susceptible to subtle vandalism or accidental changes. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll upload the maps without stations first (to get volume through). I suspect a bit of discussion to get the marker "right" will be good. Also investigating the OSM data more thoroughly - some of the pre-Beeching routes are plotted but its very incomplete. I think I can recover many of those data holes, to a good enough quality for WP (if not OSM).--Nilfanion (talk) 23:22, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cambridge MMB 07 Emmanuel College.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. --Berthold Werner 17:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB M6 Melton Hall and Business School North.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The motion blur on the snow gives a chilling feeling --AzaToth 00:24, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Temple Meads railway station MMB 46 220003.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}}}

Ferry Roland

You are welcome to examine Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Rolandhelper 2. Σ (talk) 00:56, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blackfriars Bridge MMB 02 319XXX.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 19:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Euston railway station MMB 33 350235.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. --AzaToth 17:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crowcombe Heathfield railway station MMB 04 88.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clapham Junction station MMB 08 455851 455835.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Florstein 18:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Willesden Junction railway station MMB 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough for QI --Poco a poco 20:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weston-super-Mare MMB 52.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 intresting image. while it's a bit grainy in the background, the subject is clear --AzaToth 13:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Balloon Fiesta 2009 MMB 04 G-OFXP.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:57, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teignmouth MMB 09.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 Can you lighten it a bit up? Poco a poco 15:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)  Done Mattbuck 21:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC) Better --Poco a poco 10:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stanway House MMB 18.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 YMCA?--Jebulon 19:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC) Something like that, yes. Mattbuck 21:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Redcar East railway station MMB 01 142021.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. --AzaToth 21:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crowcombe Heathfield railway station MMB 10 60163.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 Unusual composition, as ususally. I like it. --NorbertNagel 16:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB B4 222006 377505.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. --Taxiarchos228 13:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nottingham railway station MMB 41.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Newport railway station MMB 21 DR77327.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. -- JLPC 18:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Waterloo station MMB 08 450031 450561 455907.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 Needs a perspective correction. Apart from that, good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC) Is that better? Mattbuck 21:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC) OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 15:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol MMB «67 Netham Weir.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 generally dislike downsampling AzaToth 17:18, 4 July 2012 (UTC) What are you talking about? Mattbuck 11:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC) Maybe a bit dark for parts, but good quality. What we "dislike" has nothing to do in QIC, IMO...  Info Error: I did NOT review this nomination nor write the last comment--Moroder 15:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC) It's the usual missed signature QI bug. Mattbuck 22:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)The support vote and support comment were by me, sorry.--Jebulon 14:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Balloon Fiesta 2009 MMB 25 EI-ECC.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. --Cayambe 06:20, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cheltenham Racecourse railway station MMB 02 5619.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 17:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jubilee Campus MMB I1 Melton Hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --AzaToth 19:17, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Description

Hi Mattbuck, any idea why the file description shows only in Italian here?. Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:06, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I can see english in the description and on the video itself. Only seeing one language I think is a setting you can check, which blanks out all non-your-wiki-language-setting languages. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Right, I found it. Thanks a lot --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:22, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

FOP deletions

Glad to see someone who actually has the inclination to purge that lot :)

However, I would suggest using a better rationale than "no FOP for 2D works". Some essentially 2D works (stained glass) are classed as works of artistic craftsmanship and are covered by FOP, and some works with 3D elements (embossed text) are not covered as they are still clearly a textual work. Remember that ultimately all real world things are 3D, even a pencil drawing on a sheet of paper(!) The 2D/3D is a crude oversimplification and asks for trouble like on the NT request.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bedminster railway station MMB 30 150101.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol MMB «C0 Clifton Suspension Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 20:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC) I added a note, isn't that dust? Poco a poco 20:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Your personal attacks

As I asked you on IRC and on my talkpage (User_talk:AzaToth#Complaint_of_reviews_of_QI_images), I would like you to retract your personal attacks. Thanks. _→AzaToth 16:41, 15 July 2012 (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#User:Mattbuck. personal attack.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reading MMB 17 The Blade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:31, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stanway House MMB 19.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Please reduce noise on the sky and remove one bright spot. --Iifar 17:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)  Done Mattbuck 20:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC).  Support Ok with me. --Iifar 16:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Balloon Fiesta 2009 MMB 27 G-UPOI G-CODM.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. --JDP90 18:57, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi mattbuck, Thanks for fixing File:Jubilee Campus MMB G0.jpg. I thought the number (MMB G0) was meaningless, that's why approved that rename request.--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 13:05, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

No worries. It only goes into the alphabet because I reached 100 and 100 sorts before 11. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

2D images

Hi Matt. I see you have deleted File:Hafod Fadog plaque.jpg. I wonder if you can point me to any clarification on what a 2D image is? On the face of it this is a 3D presentation of text within a frame. The examples I have come across so far seem to relate to paintings (excluding frame), photographs, diagrams and prints (litho, offset, screen). Regards.... Oosoom ^Talk 10:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It was my impression that something had to be "significantly" 3D in order to qualify for FOP, and that text like this did not count. However you may be right, I will undelete and send it to DR instead. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hafod Fadog plaque.jpg. Oh, and please remember to insert a : whenever linking to files, even when deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry about the colon. Oosoom ^Talk 19:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Balloon Fiesta 2009 MMB 03 G-BZDJ G-CEUV G-CFKF.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. --JDP90 18:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toddington railway station MMB 11 37324 5619.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! King's Cross railway station MMB 70.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}}}

Geograph Information boards deletion.

The sole value I can see for snapping an information panel is for the information it publishes. As a copyright breach they should go, and fast-- but as a potential reference in WP:English they or a link to them is valuable. Is there a technical way to zap the image- but to keep the geotag and a link to the Geograph page where they may be consulted ? Just a thought as we needn't throw out the baby with bathwater. --ClemRutter (talk) 15:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

No, there's no way to do that that I know of, except by inertia of however long it takes geocommons to catch up. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I haven't researched it- but after posting, and looking awesome of you awesome ballooon images it occured to me, that a little Python app that admins could use that simply overwrote the image with customised balloon image, and added hidden cat- Geograph images with information content deleted for copyright reasons. That would kill the image copyright vio, but maintain the data which already provides the link. Just a thought.--ClemRutter (talk) 08:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thing is, Commons is not here as a source of information, that's what WikiSource is for. Commons is here to distribute freely licensed media. Anything which is not freely licensed should not be hosted by us. We are not an encyclopaedia, we are not a repository of human knowledge, we're a store of pretty pictures. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with all you are saying- I just hate to lose data that would make someone else life easier. I work by geotags and a blob on Google map is an entry point to a category and from there I glean clues for articles. A good interpretation board can be the difference between an WP:Eng article or not- while the image is important the metadata can be more so. It seems simpler to maintain the metadata on Commons- than to script it to transfer WikiSource-then have some one write a tool to create blobs from both Commons and WikiSource.--ClemRutter (talk) 13:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Ask at COM:VP or something. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll copy all this across.--ClemRutter (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teignmouth MMB 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me, maybe with a (little) bit of contrast. Easy to fix. -- JLPC 18:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Pancras railway station MMB D8 395025.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! Jubilee Campus MMB G0 Chroicocephalus ridibundus.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}}}

File:Serra do Pilar, Oporto, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 05.JPG

Hello Mattbuck, could you have a look into this picture, you suggested that the sharpness could be too low and actually it was to low, but after increasing it I didn't hear anything else back from you, and right now it is the last image waiting for review, all the best, Poco a poco (talk) 17:53, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Impressed because once I forgot to adjust the sharpness to the usual level and you noticed that. Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Everyone at QI has their own criteria which they judge a bit more sternly and others a bit less so. I tend not to care much about perspective distortion, but pick up on overexposure and unsharpness more. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bristol Balloon Fiesta 2009 MMB 38 G-GOGB.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 18:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dawlish MMB 14 South Devon Main Line 43003.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. --Cayambe 08:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

UK FOP

Confused that you removed Dual_language_plaque,_Savoy_Theatre,_Monmouth_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1708043.jpg because (it said) there is no UK FOP ..... but I see lots of pictures on trains in the UK on your front page. The UK is well known for FOP. Can you explain? Victuallers (talk) 12:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Even if a country has no rules allowing freedom of panorama, certain things are considered ineligible for copyright anyway, on the basis that they are too old or are utilitarian. Trains fall into the latter category. As for the issue at hand, freedom of panorama in the UK extends to buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, but not that which is considered a graphical work. Quite where the line falls is difficult to say, but the general upshot is that if something is 3D it's fine, if it's 2D it's not. Unfortunately items like this which are barely 3D are a bit of an in-between which the guidelines provide no help for, so I tend to err on the side of caution per COM:PRP. I am happy to undelete and send to a deletion request if you feel that would be preferable. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! King's Cross railway station MMB 30 91110.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 photo. --Florstein 16:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Williton railway station MMB 02 4936.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! --Vcarceler 22:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clapham Junction railway station MMB 14 Class 377.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 Would it be possible to crop out the arm of train station employee on the left? Poco a poco 21:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)  Done Mattbuck 12:14, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nailsea and Backwell railway station MMB 66 43384.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. --Danrok 22:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nailsea and Backwell railway station MMB 84 221XXX.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. --Taxiarchos228 14:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Severn Beach railway station MMB 09 143621.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. --Taxiarchos228 14:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weston-super-Mare MMB 39.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stanway House MMB 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 17:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: File:Guildford railway station MMB 04 458010.jpg

Hi! Yes, the description is certainly wrong - my first feeling was "where is that train... oh, there you are..." :), but if you changed it to the railroad station itself, it would be OK for me and I'd cancel my declination. When it comes to technical details, I'm unsure. I've always had problems with rating such open spaces even on my own photos, mostly because of proper focus, and I'd like to hear an opinion of someone more experienced as well. By the way, you have a very nice collection of photos of trains, I really enjoy it! --Zyxist (talk) 19:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Glad you enjoy them. I must confess, I don't look at the photos when I nominate them, I have a long list of photos to nominate and I pick 4-5 fairly randomly from them, so yes, sometimes I end up with a bad QI description. Also I'm lazy. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dawlish MMB 19 South Devon Main Line.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. --Coyau 09:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Guildford railway station MMB 02 444010.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 photo. --Florstein 06:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weston-super-Mare MMB 51 Winter Gardens.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up

I probably got carried away with the "Nom for Deletion" button. No matter. 68.173.113.106 02:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weston-super-Mare MMB 44.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. -- JLPC 21:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Guildford railway station MMB 04 455912.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}}}

FoP deletion categories

Hi,

The France FoP deletion requests are nicely sorted for some years in specific categories. Recently, this system were extended to other countries.

When you nominate for deletion a picture taken in UK with a FoP-related rationale, please include it in the Category:United Kingdom FOP cases. --Dereckson (talk) 22:45, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brockenhurst railway station MMB 02 444010.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. --Cayambe 20:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clifton Suspension Bridge MMB 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Qi for me. -- JLPC 16:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! London MMB 12 River Thames.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 To me it looks underexposed --Moroder 16:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC) I'm not sure it was underexposed, but I agree the balance was a bit wrong. Altered. Mattbuck 22:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Barking station cat

Thanks - saved a bit of time there! Sunil060902 (talk) 19:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

You could have just left it actually - a bot would have done it in a couple of hours. But yes, cat-a-lot is helpful. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)