User talk:Moheen/Archive 2015

Archives 2013-14 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-22 2023

File:Garçon à la pipe.jpg

File:Garçon à la pipe.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!

Alinea (talk) 13:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

ORCID

I see from your user page that you have an ORCID iD. We need someone to translate en:ORCID into Bengali; can you do that, or me help to find someone who will, please? Andy Mabbett (talk) 22:44, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I can do that. --Moheen Reeyad (talk) 04:13, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Hello! I already started about ORCID in bn:ওআরসিআইডি. Regards. --Moheen Reeyad (talk) 19:00, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

---

Hi Moheen Reeyad, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

--Steinsplitter (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Gracious! --Moheen Reeyad (talk) 16:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Composition 01 (1979) - Rashid Choudhury.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Composition 01 (1979) - Rashid Choudhury.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Composition 01 (1979) - Rashid Choudhury.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Yann (talk) 20:32, 30 August 2015 (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:
Faculty of Science at University of Chittagong.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Useful --Hubertl 00:52, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

•  Support -Motiur Rahman Oni (talk) 05:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment 3 nominations in the same scope, so I'm moving this to the "most valued review" section. --El Grafo (talk) 13:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (10).jpg: 0
2. Faculty of Biological Science at University of Chittagong (03).jpg: +2
3. Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (04).jpg: 0
4. Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (05).jpg: 0 
=>
File:Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (10).jpg: Declined.
File:Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (03).jpg: Promoted.
File:Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (04).jpg: Declined.
File:Faculty of Science (Second) at University of Chittagong (05).jpg: Declined.

--Aftab (talk) 14:39, 4 September 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:
Port of Chittagong (East-west view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The scope is imprecise --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -Motiur Rahman Oni (talk) 05:43, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose scope too broad --El Grafo (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment scope has been changed. @El Grafo: --Moheen Reeyad (talk) 14:17, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Karnaphuli River to Port of Chittagong (East-west view) --El Grafo (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2015 (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".

---

• @Motiur Rahman Oni: please note that you'll have to vote again (or confirm your previous vote) because of the scope change. --El Grafo (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Aftab (talk) 18:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Raihan Rana (talk) 18:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Usable -- Motiur Rahman Oni (talk) 04:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Scores:
1. Karnaphuli River at night (01).jpg: +2
2. Karnaphuli River at night (02).jpg: 0
=>
File:Karnaphuli River at night (01).jpg: Promoted.

File:Karnaphuli River at night (02).jpg: Declined.

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:
Patenga (Patenga sea beach west-east view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful-- Aftab (talk) 19:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

1. Bangladeshi Boat at Patenga sea beach (07).jpg: 0
2. Side view of Patenga sea beach (10).jpg: +1
3. Washing net at Patenga (05).jpg: 0
4. Motorboats in Patenga (10).jpg: 0
=>
1. File:Bangladeshi Boat at Patenga sea beach (07).jpg: Declined.
2. File:Side view of Patenga sea beach (10).jpg: Promoted.
3. File:Washing net at Patenga (05).jpg: Declined.
4. File:Motorboats in Patenga (10).jpg: Declined.

--Aftab (talk) 14:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Deleted content

---

Hello Moheen/Archive 2015, the following content you uploaded violates one or more of our policies and therefore has been or will soon be deleted:

File:Composition 01 (1979) - Rashid Choudhury.jpg

The Wikimedia Commons (this website) only hosts media files with a realistic educational purpose and that can be used for any purpose, including:

• use in any work, regardless of content
• creation of derivative works
• commercial use
• free distribution

See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons, and Commons:Image casebook for some specific examples. Some other Wikimedia projects have different licensing policies. For example, the English Wikipedia allows fair use of sounds and photographs. This is not the case on Wikimedia Commons; "fair use" materials are not acceptable here.

Please make sure that you only upload educational content you have created yourself, those which are out of copyright, or those for which you have the required permission for the work to be used in all the ways described above. Please note that derivative works of copyrighted material are also considered copyrighted. Again, please read through Commons:Licensing, which is quite crucial, to understanding how Wikimedia Commons works. Thanks for your contribution, and please do leave me a message if you have further questions.

Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 07:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:The Louvre Pyramid (7308371254).jpg

And also:

• File:The Louvre Pyramid (7309032748).jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 19:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Katrina Kaif in Filmfare, November 2006.jpg

Hi. I'm confused about this photo. You've uploaded it with a date of 31 August 2012 but you say it is from Filmfare November 2006. Can these dates be correct because effectively that means the photo was taken six years after it was published? Just in case you're not aware, the date in the file page is supposed to be the date the file was created. By the way, doesn't the magazine hold the copyright for this photo if it was published by them? Thanks. FredWalsh (talk) 11:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Originally this photo was published on Filmfare magazine in November 2006. After get the copy I scanned this photo in August 31, 2012 and upload as own work. So that I mention this date. Thanks to clear it. ~ Moheen (talk) 12:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Stamp Tobago 1886 1p.jpg

Hi, it would have have been better to check with me before renaming File:Stamp Tobago 1886 1p.jpg - the 1889 was correct, both Scott and Stanley Gibbons agree, while Colnect (and embarassingly, my own site StampData) are wrong. (In general, I check and doublecheck filenames before uploading.) Stan Shebs (talk) 15:54, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

@Stan Shebs: As per File renaming criterion #3, I just follow the reason: Queen Victoria. Otherwise I've no problem if you want to rename. ~ Moheen (talk) 16:49, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

@Moheen Reeyad: , @Stan Shebs: : People are starting to change the filename in other Wikipedias now. Would it be possible to determine which is the correct year? Thanks and kind regards, Grueslayer (talk) 04:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Review your signature

Hello! Your signature seems to be wrongly formated and you should review it. Since I don't know what should be italic and what should be bold, I can't help you without further indications. --Scoopfinder^(d) 03:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I just review it, and you are welcome. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 06:44, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Perfect =) Kitos, how we say it here in Finland --Scoopfinder^(d) 21:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Problem in VI

Do not master a subject is never ashamed, but be careful not to do anything. Butterflies have a major part in the sexual dimorphism. And they have two faces. The advice that you will give in VI are always caring. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Nancy Wilson (center), actress Marla Gibbs with another guest, Trumpet Awards Foundation gala, Atlanta, Georgia, 1994.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Nancy Wilson (center), actress Marla Gibbs with another guest, Trumpet Awards Foundation gala, Atlanta, Georgia, 1994.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

• File:Rosa Parks & Marla Gibbs.jpg

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:38, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Its okey I want to delete both of them. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 04:09, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Side view of Patenga sea beach (10).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. --Ermell 22:07, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:East Pakistan Agricultural University - View of model (32687v).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:East Pakistan Agricultural University - View of model (32687v).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:31, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

File:East Pakistan Agricultural University - View of model (32687v).jpg

File:East Pakistan Agricultural University - View of model (32687v).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!

Amitie 10g (talk) 06:15, 22 December 2015 (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:
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 01:16, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Rafaell Russell (talk) 17:22, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. --Raihan Rana (talk) 15:29, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 23 December 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:
Swami Vivekananda in 1893.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Swami Vivekananda in 1893 contains the image which is Subcategory of Category:Swami Vivekananda. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 09:59, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

@Moheen Reeyad: It is necessary that the image is in the category. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:32, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

@Medium69: added. I think its ok now. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 12:35, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support Good now. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support good enough.--Rafaell Russell (talk) 18:01, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose This image is excellent and deserves the label. But it is in the wrong category. It must be placed in the right category and scope should point to it. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:01, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment @Archaeodontosaurus: This photo can be found in this scop. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 10:46, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Perfect now, historical value --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:00, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 23 December 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:
Jessie Bond.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:18, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 23 December 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:
James Cagney.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 10:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 23 December 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:
Pablo Picasso, young.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:47, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Portrait photographs of Pablo Picasso contains the image which is Subcategory of Category:Pablo Picasso. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 09:55, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

@Moheen Reeyad: It is necessary that the image is in the category. [[:Category:Portrait photographs of Pablo Picasso|Portrait photographs of Pablo Picasso]] is good. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:34, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

 Done ~ Moheen ^(talk) 12:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support I put the right category and changed the scope. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 14:31, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 23 December 2015 (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:
Surya Sen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support Raihan Rana (talk) 10:02, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 11:58, 23 December 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:
Pritilata Waddedar.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support Raihan Rana (talk) 10:03, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 11:59, 23 December 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:
Lalon.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 11:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. Raihan Rana (talk) 10:04, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 11:59, 23 December 2015 (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:
Willem Aantjes.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 14:26, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Raihan Rana (talk) 10:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 19:04, 23 December 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:
Audrey Hepburn.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 14:27, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 19:05, 23 December 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:
Anita Ekberg, young.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 01:41, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 19:05, 23 December 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:
Portraits of Nikolai Gogol by Moller.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 01:42, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 19:05, 23 December 2015 (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:
Portrait of Karl Marx.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support I have checked this submision against the six VI criteria. AS this is a studio image, the geocoding requirement is not neccessary. In my opinion this submission meets the other five critieria. I would however recommend changing the scope from "Portraits of Karl Marx" (plural) to "Portrait of Karl Marx". (Singular) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvl (talk • contribs) 14:28, December 20, 2015‎ (UTC) (UTC)

 Done ~ Moheen ^(talk) 10:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, There are several very good portrait paintings of KM. It is usual here to add "photographic portrait of KM".--Jebulon (talk) 20:56, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support --Raihan Rana (talk) 10:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:25, 25 December 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:
Bombus impatiens (Common eastern bumblebee), mounted specimen, queen, side view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Very good choice. For this type of image, giving the binomial always in italics followed by the vernacular name in English. The scope is reduced to "monted specimen" and Side view, finally Queen. here's the perfect scope: you can set it up. ''[[:category:Bombus impatiens|Bombus impatiens]]'' (Common eastern bumblebee), mounted specimen, queen, side view --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Done. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 06:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support Perfect --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Raihan Rana (talk) 10:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:29, 25 December 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:
Sylvia Field.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 10:05, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:30, 25 December 2015 (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:
Wikipedia Monument.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment We must add a geocoding. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 14:27, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

@Medium69:  Done. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 13:31, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 13:53, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:43, 26 December 2015 (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:
Portrait of Rabindranath Tagore.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 00:10, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support Useful. Raihan Rana (talk) 10:08, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support important--Rafaell Russell (talk) 05:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:21, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:MusicBrainz homepage.png

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:MusicBrainz homepage.png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:MusicBrainz homepage.png]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Stefan2 (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2015 (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:
Leonardo De Lorenzo.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 13:57, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support--Rafaell Russell (talk) 05:20, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2015 (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:
Martyred Intellectuals Memorial at University of Chittagong (West-East front view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:37, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support--Rafaell Russell (talk) 04:54, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:59, 30 December 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:
Allen Ginsberg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Support--Rafaell Russell (talk) 04:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:59, 30 December 2015 (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:
Chittagong University Central Martyrs Monument (East-West front view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

* Oppose. Taken by the same photographer (and the nominator), but I see this as the better image from the standpoint of composition and effective illustration. -- WikiPedant (talk) 08:53, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Never mind. This image is not in the same limited scope. Still the better image, though. -- WikiPedant (talk) 08:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

 Comment I prefer No. 11 of this series anyway as it shows the entire monument. I doubt if the limited scope "... (East-West front view)" is necessary as all sides seem to be the same. --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 Support Though limited scope but this photo is still ok to me.----Raihan Rana (talk) 05:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 Comment @Raihan Rana: The photo is also ok to me, but that cannot be a VI criterion. Actually, I don't bother if it gets the label or not, but if we accept the scope "East-West view", we will consequently have to accept every other view from all sides, which are obviously all the same. From an encyclopedic p.-o.-v. the above-mentioned no. 11 of the series is the most suitable. --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:33, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:56, 31 December 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:
Gymnasium at University of Chittagong (West-East view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Perspective correction necessary. Easy to fix --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:29, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support It is true that it would be better if it was corrected, but it does not judge the quality here. Otherwise a lot of picture would not be promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 09:57, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Useful Photo.-- --Raihan Rana (talk) 03:55, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose No this is not a quality problem. You do not answer the criterion 3. The walls of the building are not inclined as you watch it in your image. You do not describe the subject well. This is not a big effort but we must follow this rule. My negative vote is temporary. In seconds you can modify your images. If you do not know to do, many of us are able to teach you or do for you. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:08, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
•  Support As you can see, there are contributors of good will who seek always to help you spontaneously. Thank you to user:Jacek Halicki‎ --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC).
•  Support --Rafaell Russell (talk) 12:28, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 21:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Problem in MVR

Please note you have not understood the competitions layout images MVR. Re-read this paragraph carefully. These are images which must have the same scope and deal with the same subject. If today you set up two different images and two different scopes. If you doubt do not hesitate to ask before; because the images put in place takes time. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:35, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your collaboration. Accept my apology, I'll try to do better in the future. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 17:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem, mistakes we all did, and we still do. I saw that you want to progress and that's nice. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

:) ~ Moheen ^(talk) 17:18, 31 December 2015 (UTC)