D4m1en

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, D4m1en!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}} For more information read the full deletion guidelines.
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Underground Parking Nantes Fisheye.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very interesting perspective. ZooFari 18:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smart Roadster Coupe 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good to me, perhaps the crop a bit tight (only tight at top?, I'm not sure) --Lmbuga 00:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smart Roadster Coupe 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. --Cayambe 06:37, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Set Promotion

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

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

--MrPanyGoff 07:51, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

QI Candidates

Good morning. I wanted to thank you for your comments on my pictures quality candidates. I've tried to correct some errors

• 
  Fixing chromatic aberration and noise
• 
  Fixed CA
• 
  fix Stitching error, Uneven luminance and Incurrect use of content-aware fill.

I would greatly appreciate your comments, thanks--The Photographer (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Matthias Church Budapest Corrected.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 Sky is a bit noisy but QI for me. (Could you reduce that noise a bit anyway please?) --Kadellar 18:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC<BR\> Done Thank you for the review. Selective denoising of sky applied. D4m1en 20:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC) Thanks!! --Kadellar 11:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Matthias Church Budapest Roof Tiles.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 18:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Matthias Church Budapest Altar.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for me. --JLPC 17:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vachette Radial NT key.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 „halo shadow“ looks unnatural, and there’s some CA on the right edge. However, it’s definitely good enough for QI :-) --Kreuzschnabel 16:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)  Done Thank you for the review. New version with CA removed and contour improved. D4m1en 09:11, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Keso 2000 key.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. However, please clone out the few very dark dirt spots around the key. Some disturbances of a grey background paper are always normal, but deep dark dirts are to be avoided. --Cccefalon 16:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)  Done thank you for the review. D4m1en 16:42, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Digipass 270 HSBC.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 Overall good quality but please apply perspective correction --Cccefalon 18:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)  Done also I made the background solid white (Photoshop curves are neat once you get the hang of it) D4m1en 21:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC) Good quality. --Cccefalon 14:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Digicode.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments It's slightly tilted ccw, but can be QI after correction. I also proposed a tighter crop to get rid of the darker area at the bottom --Cccefalon 18:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)  Done Rotated 0.3 deg CW. Actually the object isn't really a rectangle, it's a bit crooked... Also while I had Photoshop running I cloned out some small imperfections on the object's face. Thank you for your advice ! D4m1en 21:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC) Good quality. Yes it was only a minimal tilt, but because of the linear brush of the metal it was immediately evident. Now it's good. --Cccefalon 14:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kobo by FNAC White bg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Copyvio I think: See the page of FNAC, in spanish page: FNAC es una marca registrada explotada en España bajo licencia de FNAC S.A. © Copyright © 2000-2014 Fnac.es. Todos los derechos reservados.--Lmbuga 04:19, 3 August 2014 (UTC)  Comment In the french page: "© Fnac 2014".  Oppose Bad crop? (see note)--Lmbuga 04:25, 3 August 2014 (UTC)  Comment Regarding the bad crop, that's just the power switch on the top of the device. For the logo copyright, I didn't think it was a problem. The logo is just letters and a square so it doesn't look copyrightable to me, but I've asked for advice on Commons:Village_pump/Copyright D4m1en 10:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)  Comment According toyann the Fnac logo is covered by {{PD-textlogo}} so no copyright problem here. D4m1en 14:47, 3 August 2014 (UTC)  Comment Ok, no problem with the logo, sorry--Lmbuga 07:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)  Support I understand, QI for me, but a bit noisy to a photo of studio--Lmbuga 08:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kobo by FNAC White bg.jpg

File:Kobo by FNAC White bg.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!

Discasto _{talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis} 18:23, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chateau de Thoiry.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:06, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niverolle alpine (Montifringilla nivalis) - les Arcs 2018 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 Nice, high-quality picture, but I'm not seeing geographic coordinates. Could you add them? -- Ikan Kekek 02:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Dammit I totally forgot about coordinates, it is now  Done -- D4m1en 19:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Great.  Support. -- Ikan Kekek 06:59, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Playmobil Construction 1.jpg

And also:

• File:Playmobil Construction 2.jpg

Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 13:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thalasseus sandvicensis - Sterne Caugek - Saint Brevin les Pins 2022 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Drow male 14:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thalasseus sandvicensis - Sterne Caugek - Saint Brevin les Pins 2022 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --LexKurochkin 06:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)