User:Ikar.us/promoted

		The Valued Image Barnstar
		I hereby award Ikar.us the Valued Image Barnstar — For your 10th own VI and for all the work done, visible and invisible, while reviewing VICs and also for the tedious tasks you carry out in VI project maintenance, as closing VI sets. --Myrabella (talk) 06:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SchiffeMaxau.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 --George Chernilevsky 05:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karlsruhe Gottesaue3.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. Without wires composition may be better --George Chernilevsky 05:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karlsruhe Fliegeropfer II.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 Nicely lit. I like the headstones fading into illegibility in the background, although I wonder if a vertical shot might have let the viewer follow the statue's gaze better. QI anyway.--Avenue 01:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erloeserkathedrale.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 --George Chernilevsky 08:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karlsruhe Durlach Brunnen Friedrichschule.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 --George Chernilevsky 08:03, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karlsruhe StStephan.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 in the evening --George Chernilevsky 08:18, 10 March 2010 (UTC)  Comment Very important building, but it looks like too high JPG compression level to me. The stone layers are melted into each other. Elekhh 20:58, 10 March 2010 (UTC)  Done I'm not sure if's compression or original quality. Here is a bigger file. --Ikar.us 22:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC) Much better now, thanks. --Elekhh 23:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karlsruhe ErnstFreyStr.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 Interesting juxtaposition but can you do anything about the CA at the highrise building? Desaturating the purple might work in this case. --Iotatau 12:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)  Done Oh, I ljust learned that CA means chromatric aberration, not compression artefacts. Tried to reduce it. --Ikar.us 19:36, 12 March 2010 (UTC) Thanks, acceptable for me. --Iotatau 20:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! VDNKh Allee.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. Very sharp. I don't mind the top crop, not everything can be shown here. --Cayambe 09:39, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skulptur ERLIEGEN.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice composition/crop, and beautiful lighting. Is that the top of your own shadow at the left bottom? ;-) --MichaelBueker 16:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)  Info Thank you! I'd guess it's the shadow of a traffic sign near me, taller than me, but maybe it's me. --Ikar.us 22:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eggenstein Zs12.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 Quality image, useful, sharp, interesting perspective, nice curves and lines, composition OK, natural colors. And...I like it ! --Jebulon 23:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
river transport.

review

 Support I checked that category,found 2 pics similar quality,one was too small.I think its worth of VI status. --Mile (talk) 19:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Thanks for your review. Just out of curisity, which category have you checked over? (I wasn't able to find a category in Commons for "inland navigation"). --Myrabella (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Info I checked the 1st cat picture is into (Berges of Germany.), i think that category is main for this kind of picture. Maybe considering narrowing of scope to more specific (River transport,etc) --Mile (talk) 20:50, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • As the scope is much broader ("inland navigation"), the whole Category:Barges should be looked out (and even the larger Category:River ships), but also some of "Category:River transport" ("Category:Water transport by river", "Category:River ports", Category:Riverboats...) and maybe other ones. It's a challenging scope, indeed, for reviewers too :-) --Myrabella (talk) 21:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment River transport was indeed the first idea I had, but I couldn't find this term in w:en, so I chose inland navigation. Although not happy with that, because Navigation has a different meaning in some languages, and seems ambiguous in English. --Ikar.us (talk) 10:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment The en:Inland navigation article is a really short stub. In French, the usual term is "Transport fluvial". River transport seems to be used in English (see http://www.loc.gov/fedsearch/metasearch/?cclquery=%22river+transport%22&search_button=GO#query=%28%22river%20transport%22%29&filter=pz:id=catalog). I would suggest changing the scope. --Myrabella (talk) 10:18, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
    •  CommentThe whole topic seems underrepresented in en:. Compare de:Binnenschifffahrt...
    • Forgot to say, transport fluvial/river transport isn't equal to Binnenschifffahrt/inland navigation, the latter includes shipping on lakes. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from inland navigation to river transport --Ikar.us (talk) 10:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

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

---

•  Support recornfirmation of vote. --Mile (talk) 18:50, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
• The nominated image is a very good candidate for the scope indeed. It shows two kinds of merchant river ships, in a large river—the Rhine—where river transport is important. It is well documented and geocoded. It's a QI. Two remarks however: 1/ Even if the carrier of goods (cargo) is predominant, transport river concerns also the carrier of people (passengers). 2/ One could regret that cargo on the ships is not clearly depicted in the nominated image at the review size. About 1/ I didn't find a good image showing both passengers and cargo carried, except File:Schiffsverkehr-main-ffm001.jpg, not very suitable because its quality is lower but above all because it highlights passengers' tranport more than goods'. About 2/ Some images in Commons show river ships with cargo, e.g. File:Canalul Dunare Marea Neagra.jpg, File:MVS Graciosa on the Rhine in Basel.jpg, File:Battsea freight.jpg—but an image showing different types of ships will illustrate the scope better. There are some interesting images in Category:Barges of China, e.g. File:LupuBridgeandBoats.jpg or File:Wuhan-boat-0157.jpg, but they aren't of tremendous quality. File:Dusseldorf barges.jpg might be a valuable competitor if it wasn't so greenish. So finally, after this long review, I  Support the nominated image. --Myrabella (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Файл:ВДНХ 58.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Файл:ВДНХ 58.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}}}

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Momument for the Siege of Pleven in Moscow.

review

 Comment I have passed it so many times being in Kitay-Gorod, i am angry i didt photograph it. But, why that strange angle, why not front capturing ? --Mile (talk) 21:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Question Which side is the front? Didn't know at that time what it is. Light was good from this side, the cross is frontal, an inscription is present, and the skyscraper a nice addition. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment A little bit to the left, but yes, i see that shadow would made it bad, You didnt have much choice. Maybe little more central position but fine picture. Otherwise i saw that from postcard before, its very good too. --Mile (talk) 22:33, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment Ah, that's what you mean. QI folks like to decline frontal, centered views for "bad composition"... --Ikar.us (talk) 22:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Luckily we are not among them. I will support, till better show up. I dont calculate that nice from postcard, but its good also. --Mile (talk) 23:18, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 12:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Geodetic control points.

review

•  Comment I'd like to review but I know quite nothing about geodesy. More expert opinion asked. --Myrabella (talk) 09:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Request Thanks to the nominator for the kind and detailed explantions he has provided on his talkpage. For a layperson, it's somewhat difficult to understand at first sight that this image depicts, if I am not wrong, two kinds of geodetic marks, one ground mark (the stone), and one elevated mark (the pyramid), and that these two marks both materialize the same geodetic trig point (all trig points on one continent forming a network of triangles). May I suggest to complete the description with this information, in the descriptive text and with two annotations pointing to the marks? --Myrabella (talk) 09:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done--Ikar.us (talk) 00:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Added french translations for all the annotations.----Jebulon (talk) 18:39, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks, the annotations and the complements in the description clarify the purpose of this image. A square stone with a triangle symbol somewhere and a small hole (or a cross) indicating the exact point are common features, I have been said :-). In Commons, there are not so many images of geodesic ground marks bearing those typical signs, but without national elements. Those other ground marks—1, 2 or 3—present those geodesic symbols, but in a too narrow close-up. And it seems to me that for this topic, it's important to show the landscape, the topography of the site. An fr-WP editor had suggested File:Camp celtique de la Bure - borne IGN (closeup).jpg but IMO the carved acronym is too specifically French. I guess that a geodesic "stone" (? "borne" in French) could be a good illustration, but I can't find an image of a geodesic stone in a landscape, with discernible symbols (perhaps because the signs are upside), except File:Clifton Hill Trig Point - geograph.org.uk - 205842.jpg. Nevertheless the nominated image has something more: it's interesting to have here two kinds of marks, a ground mark and an elevated one, and the amended description now explain what they are. So I support it as the most valuable within the scope, however hoping that the nominator will upload someday an image as illustrative as this one but of greater size. --Myrabella (talk) 21:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I wonder myself why this image is smaller than the opposite view - they're scanned slides, maybe the quality wasn't satisfying. Will have to search the slide. Or visit Nice again. --Ikar.us (talk) 22:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 21:43, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
All-Russia Exhibition Centre in Moscow.

review

•  Support This image shows the park being visited, with one of its main buildings, the Central Pavillon, in the background. I find it better and more illustrative than e.g. 1, 2 or 3,—and than the nominated image too. Otherwise documented, geocoded, well categorized => all criterio met, OK to me. --Myrabella (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support agree. Its good. --Mile (talk) 23:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Applied enhancements like in the other image. Shouldn't influence review appearance. --Ikar.us (talk) 22:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. VDNKh Allee.jpg: 0
2. ВДНХ.jpg: +2 <--
=>
File:VDNKh Allee.jpg: Declined.
File:ВДНХ.jpg: Promoted. <--

--Ikar.us (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Stephan church in Karlsruhe, Germany.

review

previous review

•  Support This church is worth a scope IMO: It has its own article on de:WP; it has been designed by Friedrich Weinbrenner (even if he isn't among the three most famous German architects of the period, he is quite notable) and it is said to be one of the most interesting buildings by this architect (see [1]). To me, this view it is the most valuable of the two available images in Commons (there are two more in :de:WP), because it depicts well the (neo)classical facade but still showing the dome, which are two main features of this church. --Myrabella (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 23:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Contemporary Jewish cemetery in Germany.

review

•  Comment This image has been put forward several weeks ago, without being commented since its nomination. To me, the scope seems very narrow (and possibly rather delicate, because of the geopolitical entailments that this scope may evoke). --Myrabella (talk) 08:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

• What do you mean by the scope being narrow? Elekhh (talk) 00:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for answering to my invitation for more comments :-). I would say I find it narrow, as I would find narrow, taking an exaggerated fictive example, such a scope as "Contemporary calvinist cemeteries outside Swiss". The chosen scope must be broad enough to be realistically useful to somebody who wishes to search the VI repository (see Commons:Valued image scope). Moreover, the nominated image shows the modern part of a cemetery existing since a longer time, if I understand the description correctly; it isn't a "contemporary cimetary" strictly speaking. The description says also that it "looks much like contemporary German graveyards" so if the main feature is this similarity, one can wonder if it is worth a specific scope. @Ikar.us: is this cemetery entirely Jewish, or does the image depict the Jewish part of an ordinary cemetery? --Myrabella (talk) 07:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Request about description - By the way, please amend the description: "looks much like contemporary German graveyards" seems incorrect and controversial to me. The photographied tombs can be those of people being Jews and German --Myrabella (talk). 08:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC).
  • That's right. Of course, in the old parts, most people are German. In the new part not, for well-known sad reasons. Most are Russian. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I guess there are several thousand active Jewish communities than calvinist communities in the world, most of then having graveyards.

The two Jewish cemeteries (orthodox and liberal) are adjacent to the general cemetery, but separate, having their own entrances.

Yes, the cemetery exists since 1897. In the background are older parts. So we see a freshly established Grabfeld. I searched for an image of a really new cemetery, but didn't find one.

--Ikar.us (talk) 10:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

 Comment Let's take the easy route to deciding whether the scope is valid: Can you link us to some Wikipedias with articles that this seems useful to? By getting an idea of how such articles are divided up, we can decide if this is a useful scope. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

 Oppose: Oddly, the scope both seems too narrow, by excluding Israel, and too broad, by treating all Jewish culture outside of Israel as one and the same. No justification for this odd division has been given. Suggest considering other scopes, to find a more natural division. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not helpful to dismiss the answer before it's given.

The bisection between the en:Land of Israel and en:Jewish diaspora is always a matter in Jewish culture, as well as the question of en:Jewish assimilation in the diaspora.

Seen practically, most things in Israel are Jewish, and many Jewish things are concentrated in Israel. And they are alle still growing. In the rest of the world, they are more or less exceptions.

Seen wikipedially, see e.g. en:Category:Images of Jewish cemeteries, which has only one subcategory, Images of Jewish cemeteries in Israel. Or see en:Jewish cemetery. The article is disappointingly short, but one of the few sentences deals with adjustment to local traditions. (en:Bereavement in Judaism is a bit better. fr:Cimetière juif seems mainly advice to visitors.)

In knowledge sources outside Wikiedia, e.g. books about Jewish history and traditions, I find that many reports and examples about cemeteries explain how much in each epoch Jewish traditions were adhered to or neglected in favour of local christian costumes. So the question, how is it manifest recently, is natural.

About 'treat all one and the same', of course, it would be fine to have a VI set with examples from all over the world. Are there more candidates? Anyway, besides of being in my operating range, a German example is somewhat representative, beacuse Germany has had the fastest growing Jewish population during past decades (emigrants from former Sovjet Union).

--Ikar.us (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I should point out I did wait a day for an answer, and there had been other, similar comments. I think I'd much, much rather have a scope on the lines of "in Europe", which this would be a fairly good illustration for, as opposed to try to make Germany typical of the non-Israeli world. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:40, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I try to use Germany as an example for an country with rapidly growing Jewish population. This is not the whole world, only a very small part.

In the context of Jewish culture, "in Eurpoe" is a very strange suggestion for fraction the world, throwing together parts of ashkenazi and sephardic regions. ::::--Ikar.us (talk) 20:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Awkward. But I think that Ashkenazi and Sephardic graveyards in Europe would look more like each other than, say a Jewish graveyard in a Muslim country, or in East Asia, or South America, etc, etc, would. Thoughts? Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

A personal though: all at one time, this photograph tells a story of old settlements, more recent immigration, assimilation, and says also that life (yes, life) has started again after WWII and the Shoah. In this respect, the fact that is has been taken in Germany makes it even more evocative. But it's difficult to sum up all this in a single, sensible ans relevant scope. I agree with Adam Cuerden, the present scope both seems too narrow, by excluding Israel, and too broad. Restricting it to Europe isn't adequate either. We may have examples in the U.S. (e.g. File:Ahavas Chesed 02.JPG depicts a a rather freshly established Grabfeld too, doesn't it?). And how to translate 'Grabfeld'? (my dictionary only indicates that it is a region in Germany...) --Myrabella (talk) 10:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Grabfeld is an administrative sector within a cemetery. Directions to a special grave would lokk like "Grabfeld F5, third row, 6th grave". Usually a Grabfeld is reserved for either coffins or urns. Most have specific regulations for size and decoration of the graves, to avoid discrepancies between neighboued graves. Some are dedicated to specific groups, e.g. catholic clergy, unborn children, muslims, etc. I guess avery nation that has cemeteries has also Grabfelder and a term for it in its lamguage, but it seems difficult to find translations. See e.g. [2], where they didn't find a valid translation. (The one who answered even didn't know the term and misunderstood it as unreligious synonym for Friedhof. However, most Friedhöfe are run by municipalities and not affiliated with any religion.)--Ikar.us (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

• I've taken images to illustrate usage of the term Gräberfeld (is interchangeable with Grabfeld, I think): File:Karlsruhe Hauptfriedhof 15A.jpg, File:Karlsruhe Hauptfriedhof 11B.jpg. --Ikar.us (talk) 15:02, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

This was one of the first VIs I nominated. At that time thought a typical scope represents a large field of interest. Wanted wo name it simply "contemporary Jewish cemetery", but then was afraid that it would be presumptous to compete with Israel on a contemporary topic and therefore narrowed it to diaspora. Since this term is also controversial,I worded it "outside Israel". Now that I've learned that most scopes are a specific topic, I'd narrow it to "contemporary Jewish cemetery in Germany". --Ikar.us (talk) 16:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the Alabama example. Accorsing to the dates, it's a bit older, but still recent. It shows a more conservative style, with stone tombs and hebrew inscriptions. --Ikar.us (talk) 16:41, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

First off, thank you for proposing VICs within ambitious scopes, even if those are sometimes difficult to deal with and need some adjustments. "Contemporary Jewish cemetery in Germany" could be a more suitable scope, and reviewers would still have images to check through in the numerous related category and subcat. --Myrabella (talk) 06:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from contemporary Jewish cemeteries outside Israel to Contemporary Jewish cemetery in Germany Ikar.us (talk) 14:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

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

---

•  Support with this new scope now.--Jebulon (talk) 14:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment The new scope makes sense, see discussion above. Within this scope, some competitors exist. e.g. File:Juedischer Friedhof Mannheim 34 fcm.jpg. I found that third one, File:JuedischerFriedhofHLMoislingneueGraeber.jpg, particularly interesting with regard to the discussion above. --Myrabella (talk) 06:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you. The second has too much covering snow and reflecting water IMO. The third I had found myself and would have nominated it instead of mine - if there wasn't that striking green watering can, which is too much of what I wanted to show. Perhaps it was just the photographer's own can, and he removed it afterward, but it looks awkward and perhaps compromising to me, because storing ugly gardening tools on graves is often regarded as objectionable. --Ikar.us (talk) 12:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• These are sound arguments. I found also File:Wuppertal - Jüdischer Friedhof am Weinberg 04 ies.jpg, pointed out just for information, because the overhead power line makes it too much contemporary ;-) moreover, the current candidate shows an older part in the background as noticed and that adds value IMO. I am now convinced that the nominated image is the most valuable for the scope and I  Support. --Myrabella (talk) 13:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• I withdraw my oppose but suggest "Contemporary Jewish cemeteries in Germany" seems more in line with how we describe other scopes: Itmake it sounds more like it's meant to represent cemetaries in Germany as a whole (which it is), but the singular term sounds more like a description of the image, than marking it as an exemplar. This is nitpicking, though, so I  Support as-is or my suggested modified wording. Also, I really should try to start writing in simpler English here. I'll try to fix this later, but I'm worn out from not getting much sleep. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • I learned that scopes are worded in singular? --Ikar.us (talk) 12:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Petroleum products storage.

review

•  Comment Interesting view, with several types of containers. Suggestion: IMO, it would benefit from a crop more focused on the industrial installations, making them more prominent at the review size (criterion 3 would be fully met then). Question : Which are the containers for solid petroleum products? --Myrabella (talk) 09:23, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Done cropped and annotated --Ikar.us (talk) 10:23, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Info While de: and fr: don't have an article corresponding to en:petroleum product at all, fr: has fr:stockage du pétrole et du gaz, matching the scope. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC).
•  Support Thank you. OK to me now, all criteria met: the most illustrative of its category for the scope IMO + documented, geocoded, well categorized. --Myrabella (talk) 18:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 22:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you uploaded has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you uploaded 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:
Philippsburg nuclear power plant.

review

•  Support All criteria met, best in scope IMO, following this previous VISC discussion. --Myrabella (talk) 13:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support I support this image because here we can see a bit of the shore in the background (important for a lighthouse) and something of the salt marshes which are notable in this landscape, according to en:Westerhever; this cropped version without distracting sheep is better than the first nominee IMO. Otherwise documented and geocoded => criteria met to me. Maybe the Category:Salt marshes could be added. --Myrabella (talk) 15:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Thank you, also for rotating. I'd like to give some additional  Info: This lighthouse is a well-known motif, from a famous beer advertising, postcards sold all over the sea shore, etc. It appears in TV series, spmetimes pretending to be located in a different sorrounding, like on an island in the sea, or within mellow meadows with cows near a village. That's why I find it especially important to chhose a wide view, which shows the character of the location. --Ikar.us (talk) 15:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
•  Support The sky above the lighthouse adds little value. The composition with the centered tower is mitigated by the asymmetric complex. But quibbles aside, I think this one satisfies the criteria best. Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Westerheversand Leuchtturm.JPG: 0
2. Westerhever.jpg: 0
3. Leuchtturm Westerhever.JPG: 0
4. Westerheversand Leuchtturm.jpg: +2 <--
=>
File:Westerheversand Leuchtturm.JPG: Declined.
File:Westerhever.jpg: Declined.
File:Leuchtturm Westerhever.JPG: Declined.
File:Westerheversand Leuchtturm.jpg: Promoted. <--

--Ikar.us (talk) 11:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Grabkapelle (Karlsruhe).

review

•  Comment I would say either "Grabkapelle (Karlsruhe)" (if Grabkapelle is counsidered a proper noun here in German) or "Sepulchral chapel of the Great Duchy of Baden (Karlsruhe)". --Eusebius (talk) 09:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
•  Done Scope changed. --Ikar.us (talk) 09:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
•  Support OK for me. Trees are distracting but the building is nevertheless decently depicted IMO. --Eusebius (talk) 09:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 22:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Karlsruhe-Durlach, Germany.

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 22:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

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

review

 Comment There is a high-rise building on this viewpoint. If anyone takes a photo from there, it has very good chances. --Ikar.us (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Question I was here some years ago, but I don't really remember. Is it now as it was on this pic ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Roads and vehicles have a different appearance, but their ground plot and the overall situation looks much the same on the Google map. Even the small driveway approaching from the left seems to have a tarmac successor. (But File:Nikolskaya tower, Novodevichy convent.jpg looks frightening.) --Ikar.us (talk) 09:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the information about the difference of appearance of roads and vehicles and macadam at the end of the XIXth century and at the beginning of the XXIst, my precious friend ... I'm sure you know that politic matters here are different too, and that's why my question (you did not answer) concerned the building (destruction ? reconstruction ? restorations ?) complex inside the walls... Well, if this pic is the more complete, then I  Support (I like vintage views, too...)--Jebulon (talk) 22:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
    • In the short period when the monastery was completely secularized, the facility was assigned to the state history museum. From 1944 on it was again partly in religious use. No evidence for any destructions. Restorations have been performed, of course (thus he scaffold problem), but without major changes. Transfiguration cathedral looks white on the painting, but has much red now. I should link detail photos to make it clearer. --Ikar.us (talk) 07:13, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

       Done image links. --Ikar.us (talk) 10:33, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

    • PS. Thank you for voting; I feared that this MVR would remain undecided. --Ikar.us (talk) 23:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Russie - Moscou - Novodevichy 4.jpg: 0
2. Novodeviči.JPG: -1
3. Novodevichy Monastery.jpg: +1 <--
3. Novodievivhi-p1030345.jpg: -1 
=>
File:Russie - Moscou - Novodevichy 4.jpg: Declined.
File:Novodeviči.JPG: Declined.
File:Novodevichy Monastery.jpg: Promoted. <--

File:Novodievivhi-p1030345.jpg: Declined.

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Tor des Schmerzes memorial in Karlsruhe, Germany.

review

Interesting to say in this review that this monument concerns victimes of nazi eugenics.--Jebulon (talk) 00:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Thank you, Jebulon, for pointing out this feature. More than of local interest; and one can notice that the related article is in nl:WP and not in de:WP (but could regret that this article about the memorial doesn't credit its sculptor). All criteria met IMO. --Myrabella (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Credit added. Lycaon (talk) 20:12, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 21:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Christus-Kathedrale in Karlsruhe, Germany (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Request As you highlight an architectural feature, could you add the name of the architect in the description, if it can be found? And a specific category could be created—there are two images of this church now :-) --Myrabella (talk) 23:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done category, filled up with another picture, following your suggestion concerning urban environment, and one of the old building. Sent question about architect. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
    • It's curious but unless I'm wrong, there is no information about the building itself on the website of the congregation, but a page about an inflatable church (to rent) on the pattern of the big one. --Myrabella (talk) 23:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Yes, there's only a photo tour through the building with six pictures, but no textual information. In the basement there's a photo exhibition from the previous state of the location and the construction stages. --Ikar.us (talk) 23:25, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment - I suggest you add (Exterior) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done --Ikar.us (talk) 12:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:47, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

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

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:45, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Best in scope. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 21:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

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

review

•  Comment Thank you for your full report on Karlsruhe SkateNite :-) For the scope, I'd tend to prefer File:Paris rollers dsc03843.jpg (more a street; shows participants and organizers ; not geocoded but geotag could be guessed (categ "Rue du Temple (Paris)" + signs)). If the concept includes competitive sport, File:Berlin inlinemarathon riesengrppe.JPG could be a competitor too—but maybe "Street skating" is only for the leisure sport? --Myrabella (talk) 23:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you for finding many more examples. (I had noticed that there were no good images in the articles and no category and thought I would fill a gap.) Organizers are here, too - those with blue shirts and yellow-red suspenders. One rolling beside the car, two in front of the participants and one on the left, grabbing a traffic cone to place it on the joining lane. About the term: Seems that en: talks about road skating with athletic ambitions, while street skating is for fun. --Ikar.us (talk) 00:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Geotag found => MVR set up. --Myrabella (talk) 09:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support The overall quality is so-so and I found the sound truck too prominent in this view but the argument that this truck can be seen as an extra element illustrating the atmosphere of this kind of event makes sense. Otherwise documented, geocoded and well categorized => OK to me. --Myrabella (talk) 14:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Scores:

1. Karlsruhe SkateNite 5.jpg: +1
2. Paris rollers dsc03843.jpg: 0
=>
File:Karlsruhe SkateNite 5.jpg: Promoted. <--
File:Paris rollers dsc03843.jpg: Declined.

--Yann (talk) 14:30, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Île des Cygnes, Seine island in Paris.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support OK to me, all criteria met. --Myrabella (talk) 23:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 06:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gottesaue Musikwalzen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and original .--Jebulon 00:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Lutherkirche in Karlsruhe, Germany (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Please link to allow assessment. Lycaon (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
  • There is no article yet. --Ikar.us (talk) 22:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Criteria met. You better write an article soon then ;-). Lycaon (talk) 22:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done --Ikar.us (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Changed file, tried to remove wires. --Ikar.us (talk) 01:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Nice! Was about to suggest such a manipulation :-). Lycaon (talk) 05:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Found another image, created category. --Ikar.us (talk) 13:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Court Pharmacy building in Karlsruhe, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info Changed file, enhanced. --Ikar.us (talk) 14:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support OK to me now, all criteria met. Scope OK after reading (which has given opportunity to learn a bit more about Art Nouveau architecture in Karlsruhe). This image shows better that it is an "angle building", with different ornaments and windows on the two facades; in addition, the bottom isn't crop here. It's a detail, but I like the glittering golden lines. Seem part of the original ornementation? --Myrabella (talk) 08:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes. The rectangular seams were painted green, the ornemants golden, as Billing liked it. (The Baischstraße portal had also golden ornaments all over the facade and a larger-than-life golden nude woman on the gable.) --Ikar.us (talk) 08:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Karlsruhe Hofapotheke.jpg: -1
2. Karlsruhe Hofapotheke ganz.jpg: +1 <--
=>
File:Karlsruhe Hofapotheke.jpg: Declined.
File:Karlsruhe Hofapotheke ganz.jpg: Promoted. <--

--Ikar.us (talk) 01:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fahrrad Schnee.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 image! --A.Ceta 17:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses in Karlsruhein Baden-Württemberg.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 Please increase the brightness by about 10 points. --Jovianeye 00:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC) What are points?  Done Enhanced histogram. --Ikar.us 09:34, 27 June 2011 (UTC) I was referring to 10 points in Photoshop. Now it's better. --Jovianeye 22:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Jehovah's Witnesses' Kingdom Hall.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good ilustration of "Kingdom Hall" --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Car Culture exhibition in Karlsruhe 2011.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Car Culture exhibition in Karlsruhe 2011.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Tramway station Gare Centrale (aérienne) in Strasbourg, France.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 00:06, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Strasbourg Gare Tramway.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. --Fandecaisses 19:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Synagogue of Haguenau, France.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Synagogue of Haguenau, France.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Daimler Double Six X305.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Daimler Double Six X305.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Pont d'Auvergne in Strasbourg, France.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Pont d'Auvergne in Strasbourg, France.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Synagogue of Saverne, France.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeodontosaurus (talk • contribs) 2011-10-01T11:02:17 (UTC)--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Baischstraße, Karlsruhe.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Baischstraße, Karlsruhe.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Swing bridge.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Swing bridge.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Russian Chapel on Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt, Germany (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best photographic quality. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

•  Comment What about this undecided nomination of the same image? I think that it had to be renominated instead of the syntax variant. --MrPanyGoff 12:53, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
  • User:VICbot used to have the bad habit of removing renominations immediately if the page name was the same as before. That's why I have the habit of avoiding this. If there was no activity at all in the old nomination, what's lost? --Ikar.us (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Mathildenhoehe Russische Kapelle Pano 2.jpg: 0
2. Mathildenhoehe_RussischeKapelle.jpg: +1
3. Mathildenhöhe Kapelle.jpg: 0 
=>
File:Mathildenhoehe Russische Kapelle Pano 2.jpg: Declined.
File:Mathildenhoehe_RussischeKapelle.jpg: Promoted.
File:Mathildenhöhe Kapelle.jpg: Declined.

--MrPanyGoff 20:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Rethe lift bridge in the port of Hamburg, Germany.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Rethe lift bridge in the port of Hamburg, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

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

review

Renomination, previously without comments. --Ikar.us (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Support Seems to be a good illustration of the scope, refering to en:Hells Angels#Insignia. VI to me. Now in use in WP articles. --Myrabella (talk) 11:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 16:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Judas Thaddäus church in Karlsruhe, Germany (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

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

review

 Comment Geo-coding and proper description missing. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)  Done --Ikar.us (talk) 12:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria met now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Support §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zabergäubahn Pfaffenhofen BÜ.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 18:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Rheinhafendampfkraftwerk power plant in Karlsruhe, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Magasin Vauban, Port de Strasbourg, France.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Good but : It is necessary that the selected category in the scope contains the image.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:39, 12 June 2013 (UTC)  Done, and removed a redundant word from scope. --Ikar.us (talk) 06:13, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

 Info Created category. --Ikar.us (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:46, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Chapelle des Annonciades, former church in Haguenau, France (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Petit Temple, Haguenau, France (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : best in scope. --JLPC (talk) 15:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:08, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tribunal de Saverne, France (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : best in scope. --JLPC (talk) 15:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:09, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neckar-Quelle Tafeln.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 Just about ok. --Mattbuck 19:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Immeuble Volkskunst, Strasbourg, France (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support The perspective distortion is disturbing but this is the best picture for this scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Neckar-Ursprung.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Neckar-Ursprung.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Coal silo in Pforzheim, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope Poco² 18:54, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Bonifatius church in Karlsruhe, Germany (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Good picture, but it lacks the geocoding :) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

•  Done--Ikar.us (talk) 10:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Rudolf-Fettweis-Werk hydro-electric plant, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful, VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:47, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mühlaubrücke lift bridge, Mannheim, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

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

review

 Support : all criteria met imo. --JLPC (talk) 15:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
North lock in Strasbourg, France.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Good. Yann (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Fankel barrage, Mosel river, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 15:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

★ An image you edited has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you edited 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:
Diving bell river service vessel Carl Straat, Germany.

review

 Comment Good but a caption in English is required. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

•  Done caption and links. --Ikar.us (talk) 20:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 18:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Josef reaction ferry, Mosel river, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment. Could you fix the upper right corner, please ? --JLPC (talk) 15:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

• How could it be fixed? Is the result of a necessary rotation. Clones trees would look more ugly IMO. --Ikar.us (talk) 15:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment If not fixed, I'm afraid the image will not be considered valuable. --Joydeep _Talk 15:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
• New file uploaded : not perfect of course, but better, I think. Anyway, feel free to reverse. Friendly. --JLPC (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
• Looks really good, thank you! --Ikar.us (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
• Looks very good. Very well edited. --Joydeep _Talk 18:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Good & Useful. Good example of cooperation --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (façade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment : This (slightly tilted) picture could be used as a note in the previous view of the church, imo.--JLPC (talk) 09:22, 26 September 2014 (UTC)  Done perpective correction. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:56, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

 Support : OK now. --JLPC (talk) 18:15, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (main door).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 09:23, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (south door).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 09:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (north door).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 09:25, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (extern objects, view from the church).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. "WNW view" added to the scope, as we usually do here. Correct me if I'm wrong. --JLPC (talk) 09:15, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

• You're right, but I still dislike the compass scopes. Suggest a more meaningful direction indication "view from church". --Ikar.us (talk) 11:41, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from (extern objects), WNW view to (extern objects, view from the church) --Ikar.us (talk) 13:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

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

---

•  Support Ok with new scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:56, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB Christoph.jpg

★ 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:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany - statue of Saint Christopher.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:45, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany - statue of Mary and Child.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 14:16, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany - processional cross, crucifix side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:02, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany - processional cross, resurrection side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB Altar.jpg

★ 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:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany - altar and ambo.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

---

Scope changed from altar and pulpit to altar and ambo : Catholics don't have pulpits. --Ikar.us (talk) 09:22, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

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

---

•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:38, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Capitainerie du Port du Rhin à Strasbourg, France (land side).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:57, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that the scope name was unfortunate. Although here is now a post office in part of it, the building should be identified as the capitainerie. And the scope be narrowed to land side, because for this building two different exterior views are really appropriate. --Ikar.us (talk) 03:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Post office, Port of Strasbourg, France (Exterior) to Capitainerie du Port du Rhin à Strasbourg, France (land side). --Ikar.us (talk) 03:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

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

---

•  Support I agree the image and approach. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Capitainerie du Port du Rhin à Strasbourg, France (water side).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (backside).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:57, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (bell tower).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB innen.jpg

★ 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:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (interior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB unten.jpg

★ 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:
Road church Baden-Baden, Germany (crypt).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 14:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Schwabenheim barrage, Neckar river, Germany - hydroplant, view from upstream.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Schwabenheim barrage, Neckar river, Germany - canal lock, view from downstream.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:50, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Schwabenheim barrage, Neckar river, Germany - hydroplant, view from downstream.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Schwabenheim barrage, Neckar river, Germany - canal lock, view from upstream.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tunnel des Halles, Strasbourg, France - entrance.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 19:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tunnel Wodli–Wilson, Strasbourg, France - exit.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:01, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Halavar (talk) 23:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tunnel Wodli–Sébastopol, Strasbourg, France - exit.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support : useful (... but maybe a slight perspective correction is needed, especially on the left). --JLPC (talk) 10:03, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Halavar (talk) 23:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Meidingerblock gates, Karlsruhe, Germany.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Meidingerblock gates, Karlsruhe, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Assisi, Italy - E view from Mt.Subasio.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope and useful. (I linked your scope to the right category. Feel free to correct.) --JLPC (talk) 14:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 15:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Assisi, Italy - W view from valley ground.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope and useful. --JLPC (talk) 14:31, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

•  Info Changed scope to valley ground. village ground was nonsense. --Ikar.us (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 15:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Assisi, Italy - S view from valley ground.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Sankenbach falls, Germany - front view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Sankenbach falls, Germany - weir and bridge.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:50, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Valwig on the Mosel, Germany - view from river.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:39, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:01, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Talgangbahn Erdetueten 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality--ArildV 07:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Martin's church, Ebingen, Germany - tower N view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Martin's church, Ebingen, Germany - S facade.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ancient nunnery in Ebingen, Germany.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)