User talk:Mummelgrummel/Archive/2012-13

2012 hat es begonnen.

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Mummelgrummel!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions 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 (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 11:41, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Überkategorisierung

Hallo Mummelgrummel, bitte überkategorisiere Deine Bilder nicht.
Beispiel File:Seminarraum in Brannenburg.jpg:

• Category:Ver.di ist i.O.
• Category:Gewerkschaftliche Bildungsarbeit ist i.O.
• Category:Trade unionism of Germany ist überkategorisiert, da Elternkategorie sowohl von Category:Ver.di als auch von Category:Gewerkschaftliche Bildungsarbeit und daher als zusätzliche Kategorie nicht i.O.

Was fehlt, ist die Kategorisierung des Ortes oder des Gebäudes im Ort.

Beispiel File:Karlovy Vary Schnabelgefaess.JPG:

• Category:Karlovy Vary spa cups ist i.O.
• Category:Karlovy Vary ist als zusätzliche Kategorie wieder überkategorisiert und daher nicht i.O.

Siehe auch Commons:Categories. Grüße, -- Ies (talk) 10:09, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Ies - vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Es ist nicht so ganz leicht, in den Commons mit der Kategorisierung zurecht zu kommen. Zum Teil funktioniert es automatisch, zum Teil muss man in die Kategorien die Dateien noch einmal einbinden. Aber ich werde mich in Zukunft verstärkt bemühen, nicht überzukategorisieren. Bzw. vorhar genauer nachzusehen, welche Kategorien in Frage kommen. --Mummelgrummel 12:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Albert Heinziger - Voran auf neuen Gleisen (Gewerkschaftshaus München).gif

File:Albert Heinziger - Voran auf neuen Gleisen (Gewerkschaftshaus München).gif has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

GeorgHH • talk   22:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Weiße Baumnymphe

Photo [1] is of Idea leuconoe Deutsch: Weiße Baumnymphe I admire your photography (and generosity) Happy New Year Notafly (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Notafly - thank you very much for your hint. I will label the Picture as you suggested it. --Mummelgrummel 05:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Post

Ich habe die sehr ausführlich geantwortet. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Und nochmal: Post. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick durch eine Tür in den Gang.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 Noise / artefacts from NR are visible. But looks still OK for me. You should change the German filename: "View through a door into a floor" is not a very good filename :) If you have another filename I can do it for you. --Tuxyso 21:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Schloss Brannenburg

Hallo, Kollege,

anscheinend waren wir beide letzten November im Ver.di-Haus in Brannenburg, allerdings nicht in derselben Woche. Du hast da ein schönes Foto von einem Schloss hochgeladen, das ich eine Woche zuvor fotografiert hatte; allerdings glaube ich, dass es sich um Schloss Neubeuern auf dem anderen (rechten) Innufer handelt. Schloss Brannenburg ist schwer zu fotografieren, wenn man keinen Zugang zum Gelände hat. Ich werde mal versuchen, ob so was zu organisieren ist.

Vielleicht überprüfst du mal die Beschreibung deines Bildes.

Grüße, -- Aisano (talk) 21:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Aisano - vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Ich übernehme ihn einfach so, weil ich dazu geografisch zu wenig Ahnung habe. Ich meine, dass ich vorher auch auf den Commons bzw. der Wikipedia Seite von Brannenburg nachgeschaut habe. Aber sicher sehr oberflächlich. Ich ändere also die Beschreibung. --Mummelgrummel 05:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Glaskuppel im Justizpalast.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 --Poco a poco 20:58, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Sinaltrainal - Resistencia.jpg

File:Sinaltrainal - Resistencia.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("File:Sinaltrainal - Resistencia.jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

Denniss (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Luciano Romero (Porträt).jpg

File:Luciano Romero (Porträt).jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("File:Luciano Romero (Porträt).jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

Denniss (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Sinaltrainal - 3-COL-TradeUnionists-killed.jpg

File:Sinaltrainal - 3-COL-TradeUnionists-killed.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("File:Sinaltrainal - 3-COL-TradeUnionists-killed.jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

Denniss (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Luciano Romero.jpg

File:Luciano Romero.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("File:Luciano Romero.jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

Denniss (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Luciano Romero als Arbeiter bei Cicolac (ohne Datum).jpg

File:Luciano Romero als Arbeiter bei Cicolac (ohne Datum).jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("File:Luciano Romero als Arbeiter bei Cicolac (ohne Datum).jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

Denniss (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Answer

Hallo, I left an answer to your questions here. Grüße --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mae West 003 - von innen.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  Weak support OK to me, despite some noise --A.Savin 22:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Blutenburg - Eisfläche betreten verboten.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 21:45, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schild Pension Wöhlerstrasse 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. --JLPC 17:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blossom-Memorial (Schuttblume) in Munich at the olympic mountain 004.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 21:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus München - Wappen und Decke 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Malchen53 19:02, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus München - Wappen und Decke 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Malchen53 19:02, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus München - Fassade 004.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. --JLPC 17:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus München - Wappen und Decke 18.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good quality. --Malchen53 23:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Auer Dult Mai 2013 - Gassen und Licht 004.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 Wo ist da ein Schild? --Ikar.us 09:30, 14 May 2013 (UTC) O.K. - Thats a fault of me naming the picture in Vicuna Uploader. I have corrected it. Please forgive my carelessness ;-) --Mummelgrummel 16:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 20:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Auer Dult Mai 2013 - Gassen und Licht 001.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 Seems a bit bright. Mattbuck 20:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)  Done I have adjusted the brightness and hope its o.K. --Mummelgrummel 16:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC) Looks better. Mattbuck 19:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Auer Dult Mai 2013 - Gassen und Licht 001.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 Seems a bit bright. Mattbuck 20:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)  Done I have adjusted the brightness and hope its o.K. --Mummelgrummel 16:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC) Looks better. Mattbuck 19:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! München - Altes Rathaus - Julia 002.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. Who is the artist of the statue? --Moroder 11:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC) It was built by Nereo Costantini. I made a new description now. --Mummelgrummel 11:53, 16 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks --Moroder 21:15, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Westbad - Freibad - Wegweiser 002.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 21:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Katholische Akademie Bayern - Swapo 003.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 plaque says 1934, but the transcripion 1943? --Ikar.us 22:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)  Done Thank you for the hint. I corrected the text. --Mummelgrummel 17:11, 23 June 2013 (UTC)  Info Added some links and categories. --Ikar.us 19:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC) Thank you for the additions in the text. They are useful. --Mummelgrummel 06:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Westbad - Freibad - Wasserkopf 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 16:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - See - Tutzinger Löwe 001.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. --Vassil 07:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Schloss Tutzing / Evangelische Akademie Tutzing

Hallo Mummelgrummel, vielen Dank für Deine schönen Bilder vom Schloss Tutzing. Wie Du bestimmt schon gesehen hast, habe ich die Struktur der Kategorien Schloss Tutzing und Evangelische Akademie Tutzing etwas geändert, um sie dem hier üblichen Aufbau anzupassen, was auch der Übersichtlichkeit zugute kommt. Weil die Kat. des Schlosses eine Unterkat. der Akademie ist, braucht man die Bilder (und weitere Unterkats) nicht nochmal in die Kat. der Akademie einordnen. Ich finde, das erhöht die Übersichtlichkeit beträchtlich. Nun hast Du noch Bilder von der Kapelle nachgeliefert, und ich würde vorschlagen, dass wir das dort genauso handhaben. Ich denke, ich kann schon mal in dieser Richtung tätig werden... Womit ich noch ein Problem habe, sind so Kategorien wie "Ausblick vom Ufer in Bayern". Solche unspezifischen Kategorien helfen m.E. nicht weiter, niemand weiß, was für ein Ufer gemeint ist, und auch, wenn ein bestimmter See gemeint wäre, ist doch klar, dass die meisten Bilder eines Sees wohl vom Ufer aus gemacht worden sind. Anders läge die Situation bei Luftbildern vom See. Kurz: Ich würde die Category:Views from the lakeshore in Bavaria gerne wieder verschwinden lassen. Deine Bilder können am Besten gefunden werden, wenn sie in möglichst spezifische Kategorien einsortiert sind. Und die Kat. für das Schloss bzw. den Schlossgarten sind definitiv solche, und dann brauchen sie meiner Meinung nach nicht unbedingt noch eine weitere Kat. der Art Geranien in Bayern. Ich habe leichte Zweifel, dass dort viele Nutzer suchen werden, wenn sie schöne Geranienbilder suchen. Du kannst sie natürlich trotzdem anlegen, wenn Du meinst. Viele Grüße, --Gras-Ober (talk) 08:15, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Gras-Ober, danke für das Kompliment :-). Registriert habe ich Deine Änderungen. Ich habe noch weitere Bilder, komme allerdings nur am Wochenende zum Bearbeiten und hochspielen. Es wird noch der Musiksaal und das Schloss (Lüster, Salons) folgen. Vor allem aber die Rotunde (Auditorium) bzw. das, was tatsächlich die Akademie ausmacht. Gerne nehme ich deinen Tipp an. Wobei ich mit durchaus vorher in den Commons ein wenig orientiert habe. So gibt es eine Kategorie "Ufer Tutzing" unter den Lakeviews. Eigentlich dachte ich, ich hätte lediglich bereits vorhanden (Ober-)kategorien übertragen. Wäre denn der "Blick auf den Starnberger See" eine spezifischere Kategorie? Immerhin heißt die darüberliegende Kategorie "Views of lakes from the lakeshore". Die war schon angelegt. Mir fällt es manchmal tatsächlich schwer, die passenden englischen Begriffe - bzw. Kategorien - zu finden. Gerne nehme ich aber den Ausblick vom Ufer in Bayern zurück - so schön er auch sein mag ;-). --Mummelgrummel 09:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Noch eine Ergänzung: Der Musiksaal ist jetzt ein Beispiel dafür, bei dem ich es für sinnvoll halte, die Kategorie sowohl beim Schloss, als auch bei der Akademie aufzunehmen. Denn genutzt wird er im Akademiebetrieb für größere Veranstaltungen. Ich persönlich würde auch in der Evangelischen Akademie danach suchen, wenn ich ihn suchen würde. Was meinst Du? Ich bin gespannt auf Deine Antwort --Mummelgrummel 12:09, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Wenn das der Saal mit einer gerade stattfindenden Veranstaltung der Akademie wäre, dann wäre ich ganz bei Dir. Aber so ist es in erster Linie auch nur eine "Untereinheit" des Schlossgebäudes. Aber das wäre auslegungsfähig. In diesem Fall fände ich es aber auch nicht unangemessen, wenn ein oder zwei Bilder in der Kat. der Akademie einsortiert würden. Auch evtl. die ganze Kat., wenn wir denn eine solche anlegen wollten. Ich dachte ja, dass wir nicht für jeden Raum eine eigene Kat. brauchen, sondern nur für die Innenansichten im Allgemeinen, so wie bei diversen anderen Schlössern auch. Ich persönlich fände es auch besser, wenn man sich nicht durch viele Mini-Kategorien klicken muss, sondern gleich einen schönen Überblick hat. Es schadet auch nichts, wenn in einer Kat. mal mehr als 50 Bilder drin sind, ein Umbruch wird erst ab 200 Bildern erzeugt. Aber das ist halt auch wieder eine gewisse Geschmacksfrage. Die Akademie als solche ist eine Organisation, und da ist es von Haus aus sehr viel schwieriger, passende Bilder aufzutreiben, beispielsweise vom Leiter oder den Veranstaltungen. Und, wie schon angedeutet, wenn Du in der Kat. für die Akademie schaust, kommst Du automatisch auch auf die Kat. des Schlosses, weil sie ja eine Unterkat. ist.
"Views of lakes from the lakeshore" war schon angelegt, das ist richtig. Aber diese Kat. hatte (bis auf eine Mini-Kat. mit zwei Bildern) keinerlei weitere Untergliederung, wie z.B. by country, o.ä. Das spricht dafür, dass es sich um ein Relikt handelt, bei dem es keiner sinnvoll findet, diesen Kat.-ast weiter auszubauen. In eine solche Kat. Unterkategorien einbauen zu wollen, ist meist nicht empfehlenswert, und auch mit einer Menge weiterer Arbeit verbunden, wenn man sie in die vorhandenen Strukturen einbinden will. "Ufer Tutzing" finde ich ebenfalls nicht glücklich, wobei ich schon finde, dass man den Starnberger See (und die übrigen beiden großen oberbayerischen Seen) nach dem Muster Category:Lake Constance by municipality untergliedern könnte. Dort gibt es allerdings keine einheitliche Benennung, wodurch ich bisher davon abgehalten worden bin. Lake Starnberg in Tutzing trifft es vielleicht nicht ganz korrekt, weil die Seefläche an sich ja gemeindefreies Gebiet ist. Von daher sollte man vielleicht Lakefront of Tutzing nehmen. Aber da habe ich außer beim Bodensee noch keine weiteren Beispiele gesehen. Ich finde es meist auch nicht einfach, den passenden Kategorienamen auf englisch zu finden. Grundsätzlich ist es immer sehr sinnvoll, sich auf Commons vorher etwas umzuschauen, wenn man eine neue Kat. aufmachen will. Aber meist findet man halt dann doch verschiedene Varianten. Dann bin ich mal gespannt, was noch für schöne Bilder vom Schloss in Tutzing kommen... Ach ja, ich wollte vielleicht die Category:Garden of the Evangelische Akademie Tutzing noch umbenennen lassen, damit sie besser in das Schema passt. Außerdem besteht der Garten ja schon viel länger, als die Akademie der Besitzer ist. Garden of Tutzing Castle oder Garden of Schloss Tutzing, oder was gibt es sonst noch für Möglichkeiten? Grüße, --Gras-Ober (talk) 14:27, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Heute Morgen habe ich mal die Bilder vom Schloss hochgeladen. Du hast sie bestimmt schon gesehen. Ich habe auch, was die Kategorisierung betrifft, nicht zu viel vorgenommen. Und die Bilder in die Kat. Schloss Tutzing eingebracht. Wir können übrigens gerne die Kategorien ändern. Ich würde dann aber auch die Kat. Schloss Tutzing anpassen und sie umbenennen in Castle of Tutzing. Und dann eben den Garden of Tutzing Castle. Ich werde mich morgen dem Vorhaben widmen, wenn Du es nicht vorher machst.

Was die (zu kleinteilige) Unterkategorisierung betrifft: Da hast Du womöglich recht. Ich mache es halt bei der Bildbearbeitung so, weil ich mich dann leichter tue und die Dateien auch für mich passend benennen kann. In der weiteren Bearbeitung habe ich dann nicht zu viele Bilder auf einmal. Das habe ich vielleicht zu schnell übertragen. Auch hier ist es sicher immer ein Abwägung notwendig, inwiefern Unterkategorien die Möglichkeit eröffnen, detailreich eigenständige Untereinheiten mit Bildern darzustellen. Ich werde das in Zukunft genauer überdenken. Für den Park fand ich es passend. Der Musiksaal hätte nicht sein müssen. Bei den Statuen bin ich mir unsicher - sie hätten sicher auch in den Park gepasst. Den Musiksaal habe ich jetzt zur Akademie geschlagen - und die Kategorie eigenständig beschrieben (was der Vorteil einer eigenständige Kategorisierung ist). Dann wird es sicher deutlicher warum.

Wir gehen da unterschiedlich mit den Kategorien um. Ich z.B. klicke mich gerne mal durch (Unter-) Kategorien durch um eine Impression zu bekommen, was es dazu alles gibt. Ich würde mich also sowohl von der Seite der Evangelischen Akademie den Unterkategorien nähern können, als auch von Seiten des Schlosses. Spricht aus Deiner Sicht wirklich so viel dagegen, zumindest die Unterkategorien beiden zuzuordnen? Ich vergleiche das eher mit einem Portal in dem der geneigte Betrachter die Möglichkeit hat, sich umzusehen. Dann wäre es eben von zwei Seiten her möglich. Die wirkliche Schwierigkeit ist eher, wenn sich Kategorien gegenseitig enthalten, wie etwa Schloss Tutzing gleichzeitig Evangelische Akademie - und umgekehrt. Aber auch das kann ja in Ausnahmefällen stimmig sein. Denn Verwendung findet das Schloss und sein Park im Moment halt im Akademiebetrieb. Das weiß ich, weil ich öfter die (wunderbare) Gelegenheit habe, eine Tagung dort zu besuchen. In diesem Zusammenhang sind nun auch die (zum Teil schönen) Fotos entstanden :-).

Nun habe ich noch eine Frage an Dich: Ich habe auch Bilder gemacht, die ich Dir gerne (via Dropbox-Link) zeigen würde, ob ich sie in die Commons stellen soll. Es handelt sich jeweils um das Logo, aber nicht nur in einer einfachen Abfotografie. Vielleicht kannst Du mir einen Tipp geben, wie ich damit verfahren soll. Ich würde sie gerne raufladen - habe auf der anderen Seite aber Bedenken. Die Bedenken betreffen schließlich auch Bilder von Tagungen: Ich habe von unserer letzten Kooperationstagung einige sehr nette Fotos mit Tagungsteilnehmern. Aber ganz große Bedenken, was das Hochladen betrifft, weil ich keine Persönlichkeitsrechte verletzen will. Manchmal habe ich mir damit geholfen, Gesichter unkenntlich zu machen. Das ist bei einer größeren Tagug aber schlichtweg Unsinn. Insofern bleiben eigentlich nur ein paar wenige übrig, die ich hochladen werde. Mal sehen - es wird auf jeden Fall welche mit "Livebetrieb" geben. Vielen Dank noch einmal für Deine Hinweise. --Mummelgrummel 17:28, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Ist ja großartig. Schloss Tutzing wird damit nicht nur quantitativ, sondern auch qualitativ zu einem sehr gut bebilderten Objekt. Damit steht der Anlage eines WP-Artikels über das Schloss, also das Bauwerk, und seine Geschichte nun wirklich nur noch sehr wenig im Weg (wer immer das auch angreifen mag...).
Zu Deiner Frage: Logos sollen nicht auf Commons. Dafür gibt es in der deutschsprachigen WP einen Ort unter der Voraussetzung, dass das Logo keine Schöpfungshöhe erreicht. Was das genau heißt, frag' mich bitte nicht. Ich würd' mich daran orientieren, was dort schon alles vorzufinden ist. Der Ort ist: Kategorie:Datei:Logo und dort evtl. eine passende Unterkategorie, z.B. Kategorie:Datei:Logo (Bildung). Was das Hochladen von Bildern mit erkennbaren Personen angeht, ist große Vorsicht angebracht. Im Zweifel eher nicht hochladen, oder alle vorher fragen. Bei in der öffentlich stehenden Personen ist das wohl nicht nötig.
Schloss Tutzing als Eigenname muss nicht unbedingt übersetzt werden. Könnte also auch so stehenbleiben. Ansonsten ist das Kategoriensystem eben ein Baum, und dort sollen die Objekte (also die Bilder) auf dem Weg vom Stamm zu den Blättern nur einmal eingeordnet werden. Hingegen können sie auf benachbarten, also nicht einander über- bzw. untergeordneten Knoten beliebig oft platziert werden. In begründeten Ausnahmefällen kann aber im Kat.baum auf Commons davon abgewichen werden. Der könnte hier vorliegen. Verboten ist aber, Kategorien sich gegenseitig überzuordnen, das würde zu unangenehmen Nebeneffekten führen, obwohl die Software auch das toleriert. Ich würde vorschlagen, dass wir noch eine Unterkat. des Schlosses anlegen, in der alle Innenraum-Bilder zusammengefasst werden. Bilder, die etwas mit der Tätigkeit der Akademie zu tun haben, können in der Akademie-Kat. (ggf. zusätzlich zur Schloss-Kat.) eingeordnet werden. Viel Freude bei der Arbeit wünscht --Gras-Ober (talk) 06:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - Kapelle - Tafel 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 17:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - Brunnen 2 006.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. Somewhat distracting backgriund. --Smial 18:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - See - Sitzgruppen 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - See - Blumenschale 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Vassil 19:16, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you.--Steinsplitter (talk) 08:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Vielen Dank. Ich wusste gar nicht, dass es das gibt. Und hoffe natürlich, den Erwartungen gerecht zu werden. --Mummelgrummel 04:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Figuren & Skulpturen - Statuen 003.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 Light is a bit hash (probably a moderate fill flash had helped) but still OK. Tried to increase the shadows a bit. Some moderate noise on the sky, try selective sharpening and/or selective noise reduction. Nonetheless QI. --Tuxyso 07:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - Schloss - Fenster 001.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. --Kreuzschnabel 08:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Figuren & Skulpturen - Skulpturen 001.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 If you have the RAW I would suggest to increase the shadows. --Tuxyso 07:20, 22 July 2013 (UTC)  DoneI have uploaded a new version. I tried to increase the shadows with a gradation of the dark areas. Please look. Thank you for commenting - I think its a bit better. --Mummelgrummel 04:51, 23 July 2013 (UTC) Still not perfect, but better and imho QI now. --Tuxyso 21:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - Rotunde - Lichter 001.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 Background is rather noisy. --Kreuzschnabel 08:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)  DoneI have uploaded a new version with noise reduction. And a little more brightness. I hope its o.k. now. --Mummelgrummel 04:28, 24 July 2013 (UTC) Not the most breathtaking QI ever but OK now ;-) --Kreuzschnabel 07:34, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Evangelische Akademie Tutzing - Schloss - Salons 011.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 Tilted clockwise, a bit dark. Mattbuck 11:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I have uploaded a new version. More bright and less tilted, so I hope. --Mummelgrummel 13:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC) I get the idea the room wasn't straight. Mattbuck 20:59, 23 July 2013 (UTC) I dont't think its the room. When I look exactly it seems to me that the chandelier in itself is crooked. But that is the main objected in this case. --Mummelgrummel 04:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Insel - Pavillon 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I would apply some additional sharpening. What do you think about a tighter 2/3 crop (see notes)? The photo would also profit from addtional black (micro contrast) --Tuxyso 05:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC)  DoneI have uploaded a new version. Thank you for commenting - I learn a lot from the discussions about quality pictures. I hope that the result ist what you suggested to me ;-). --Mummelgrummel 04:48, 26 July 2013 (UTC) Much better. I would still crop a bit tighter at the right to archieve golden ratio (I was wrong, not 2/3 but golden ratio was meant). But it is a matter of personal taste. QI for sure. --Tuxyso 07:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)  DoneThe last adaption. I hope the result is o.K. --Mummelgrummel 05:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC) Looks good. Hope, you are also satisfied and convinced with the result. --Tuxyso 10:59, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Kirche St Marien - Decke & Stuck 001.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 Vignetting. Noise. The right side is a more dark than the left. I don't know the original, but I don't like the detail--Lmbuga 19:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I tried to correct the picture. What do you mean with "details"? I made a new crop. I hope that this one is better. --Mummelgrummel 11:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)  Support Much better! Good for me--Lmbuga 14:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Deutschordenschloss - Gärtnerturm 001.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 The top of the image (roof and sky) have little definition: bad detail and noise. Is it improbable?--Lmbuga 19:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I tried to correct the picture. This was easier than the other (the ceiling painting). I hope that this picture is good enough. Please let me know. --Mummelgrummel 11:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)  Support Good quality IMO--Lmbuga 14:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Orchideen - Frauenschuh 001.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 QI for me --Christian Ferrer 17:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Objekte - Klangschiff Im Augenblick 002.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. --Pyb 10:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Deutschordenschloss - Wappen 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Moleturm - Signalisierung & Lichter 011.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 12:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Buchhornbrunnen 013.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. --Jean11 08:49, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Schild Radfahren verboten 001.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 --A.Savin 11:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Boje vor dem Hafen 001.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 Main subject in the center is blurred, please remember separate nominations with space line --The Photographer 06:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)  Done I tried to sharpen the main object. Thank you for the comment. --Mummelgrummel 07:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC) It’s rather a beacon than a buoy. Composition is a bit static (rule of thirds or golden ratio would have done fine here) but acceptable --Kreuzschnabel 04:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)  Done Hello Kreuzschnabel. Thank you for your comments. I do so and have an new version (rules of third). And a adapted description. Is this o.K. also? --Mummelgrummel 07:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Looks much better now. --Kreuzschnabel 10:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Palmenhaus - Lichtanlage 001.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 --Christian Ferrer 11:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Schloss 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good to me. --Julian Herzog 07:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Schiffe - Konstanz (Katamaran) 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. Heuschrecke 13:27, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Kulturzentrum K 42 001.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. --Mattbuck 18:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Schiffe - Polizeischiff 003.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--Lmbuga 11:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Objekte - Promenade Altstadt 004.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--Lmbuga 08:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obermenzing - Schloss Blutenburg - Kapelle - Details 008.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. --JLPC 17:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mainau - Ausstellungen Zauberer und Feen - Skulpturen 002.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 OK for me --Rjcastillo 16:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrichshafen - Buchhornbrunnen 018.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and well done IMO. --Myrabella 21:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obermenzing - Schloss Blutenburg - Kapelle - Opferstock 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:15, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obermenzing - Schloss Blutenburg - Kapelle - Taufbecken 003.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 ok --Christian Ferrer 05:43, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obermenzing - Schloss Blutenburg - Innenhof - Fenster 002.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 It looks like a little bit unsharp. And it needs perspective correction (horizontal lines).--XRay 16:49, 10 October 2013 (UTC) // Done I have corrected the perspective an a little bit another crop. Is it o.K.? --Mummelgrummel 09:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC) Good quality. --XRay 14:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obermenzing - Schloss Blutenburg - Schild 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I like it. --Bahnfrend 09:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Immenstaad - Bootssteg und Boot 001.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 17:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obermenzing - Schloss Blutenburg - Agnes Bernauer Denkmal 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 18:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flughafen München - Gebäude - Andreas Kuhnlein 007.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 QI --Rjcastillo 13:42, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Achenkirch - Urlaub 2013 - Abspannmasten 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 16:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

---

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey. Dear Mummelgrummel/Archive, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place. You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help. To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Achenkirch - Urlaub 2013 - Wagenrad im Holzstoss 002.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 QI --P e z i 19:17, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Achenkirch - Urlaub 2013 - Abspannmasten 007.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. --Mattbuck 21:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Achenkirch - Urlaub 2013 - Dinge - Gießkanne 003.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 22:02, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zur erfolgreiche Teilnahme am Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in Deutschland

Hallo Mummelgrummel,

etwas spät, aber noch nicht zu spät, möchte ich dir hiermit, pünktlich zum Nikolaus, im Namen der Juroren das Goldene Gummibärchen für deine erfolgreiche Teilnahme am Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments überreichen.

• Dein Preisträgerfoto ist...
• 
  Platz 22

Die Preise werden durch das Team Communitys von Wikimedia Deutschland verschickt. Bei Fragen kannst du dich jederzeit per mail an community@wikimedia.de wenden.

Ich hoffe dir hat der Wettbewerb mindestens ebenso viel Freude bereitet wie uns. Sehen wir dich 2014 wieder?

Ein besinnliches Adventswochenende und viel Erfolg im nächsten Jahr wünscht dir,
Anika (talk) 13:31, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Anika - das ist aber eine Überraschung. Vielen Dank dafür. Das beflügelt für den nächsten Wettbewerb ;-). --Mummelgrummel (talk) 04:32, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flughafen München - Gebäude - Andreas Kuhnlein 005.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kloster Fürstenfeld - Maria Himmelfahrt - Beichtstühle 008.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 10:57, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kloster Fürstenfeld - Maria Himmelfahrt - Beichtstühle 001.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 ok --Christian Ferrer 12:23, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

---

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey! Dear Mummelgrummel/Archive, Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests! In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days. And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy! Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kloster Fürstenfeld - Maria Himmelfahrt - Schild außen 001.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 tilted ccw --Cccefalon 06:13, 16 December 2013 (UTC)  Done I uploaded a new version with tilt correction cw. Thank you for commenting. --Mummelgrummel 05:29, 20 December 2013 (UTC) You are welcome.  Support Good quality. --Cccefalon 12:20, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Meersburg - Magische Säule 010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:33, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Achenkirch - Urlaub 2013 - Dinge - Wetterhahn 002.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 08:55, 29 December 2013 (UTC)