User talk:Adbar

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

For older content, see the Archives subpage


Rearranging

[edit]

Greetings Adbar: I noticed you placed several photographs on pages about Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties, California. Nice trip, but your locations of your photos are sometimes quite off place. File:High Bluff Overlook Del Norte Coast.jpg isn't in Crescent City. File:US 101 Fortuna.jpg isn't in Fortuna; but Alton, California, (you might wish to go to COM:RENAME and request renaming) and the images of HSU really don't need to be on quite so many pages, nor did the extra beach need to be added to Mendocino County. I have fixed the location also of the entrance to Humboldt State University which wasn't there at all. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 09:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Ellin, thank you for your effort. I am sorry that I did not tag the proper locations, the heuristics I use do not seem to work well when population density is low, I should have checked the city boundaries first. I'll handle the renaming. I quite sure the geocodes are correct though, so that I maintain that File:High Bluff Overlook Del Norte Coast.jpg was taken in Del Norte Coast Redwoods State Park for example. As for the Humboldt State University, the picture of the entrance is better than nothing, as available pictures for the university are scarce. The same is true for the beach in Mendocino County, there is no category "Beaches in Mendocino County" and I do not see much of it in Category:Parks in Mendocino County, California. I do not upload pictures just for the sake of it but I generally hope to fill an empty space. The beach may not be strictly necessary as it is not particularly well-known, but if you agree I am going to use File:High Bluff Overlook Del Norte Coast.jpg and File:US 101 Fortuna.jpg once they are properly renamed. Cheers and happy easter --Adbar (talk) 18:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

[edit]
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Chisos Mountains, N view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Petrified Forest National Park - Blue Mesa, view towards NW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Valued Image Promotion

[edit]
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pacific Beach, San Diego, view towards south.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Valued Image Promotion

[edit]
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Panorama photos of Hvar, view from south.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Västra hamnen Malmö panorama.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  CommentGood composition but not very sharp, maybe ok for QI but I am not sure.--ArildV 11:59, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Almost 1/2 of the image is wasted on grass. Maybe crop it wide and short like a pano getting rid of some of the grass (and the shadow on the left)? It is soft focus (distance?) And for once, here is a tower where we can't comment on verticals. --Generic1139 19:43, 29 July 2014 (UTC)  Comment I released a tighter crop --Adbar 20:35, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A much stronger image with this crop. QI. --Generic1139 21:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

[edit]
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Toudon, from the east.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tulips at Lund's Botanical Garden.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. Vassil 10:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Port Orsoy (Rheinberg), Rhine and Duisburg-Walsum.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 crop should be better at the bottom, but nice atmosphere : QI for me. --JLPC 11:29, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Prosopis velutina Anza-Borrego.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 06:11, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:South Korea Population Density.png

[edit]
File:South Korea Population Density.png 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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ /−

211.215.156.184 02:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tallinn CBD.jpg

[edit]
File:Tallinn CBD.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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ /−

Flying Saucer (talk) 20:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks!

[edit]

Thank you for your efforts! I am using your picture for a talk about technology and people, I wanted to find some people who were not all from the same place. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.225.176.226 (talk) 07:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ /−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:42, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adbar&oldid=673954504"