User talk:Uberprutser/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Foto's voor WLM

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Beste Gebruiker,

Bij de foto's die u ingediend heeft als fotodocumentaire heeft u geen monumentnummer vermeld. Ook staan deze momenteel niet in de juiste categorie, waardoor het niet duidelijk is dat deze meedoen aan Wiki Loves Monuments. Wilt u bij de volgende uploads gebruik maken van dit uploadformulier? Hierin wordt ook om het monumentnummer gevraagd en komen de foto's in de Wiki Loves Monuments categorie. Ik zal ervoor zorgen dat de foto's die u al geüpload heeft goed terechtkomen.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 09:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hoi Basvb,

Bedankt voor het rechtzetten van mijn foutjes.

Ik moet zeggen e.e.a. is niet geheel duidelijk uitgelegd. Zo was het mij niet geheel duidelijk hoe ik een foto moest invoegen en was ik verrast dat ik de voorbeeld documentaire pagina aanpaste i.p.v. een nieuwe pagina aanmaakte. Ik heb wat foto's geupload en op de gok de toegevoegde naam gebruikt binnen het wiki markup taal en dat werkte. Ook het upload formulier is niet echt handig voor het uploaden van monumenten die al een foto hebben. Ik heb een aantal bestanden geupload door op de upload button van een ander monument te drukken en vervolgende het monument nummer aangepast en de gps locatie verwijdert.

Maar ik moet zeggen dat ik het erg leuk vind om eens wat toe te voegen aan mijn favoriete internet site :)

Groet, WB

беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ русский ∙ slovenčina ∙ српски (ћирилица) ∙ srpski (latinica) ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Dear Uberprutser,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world!

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 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 2012.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 11:34, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Goliath Poldermolen.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Goliath Poldermolen.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lorentzsluizen, spui- en schutsluizen.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 21:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Polder molen de Goliath.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 sky is too dark (due to polarization?). --Iifar 10:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
A bit dark, but generally good I think. Mattbuck 08:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Delete 2.jpg

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Delete 2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Steinsplitter (talk) 13:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

A big problem with your images...

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

... because nearly each of them should be a "quality image", but commons lacks a feature to automate the promotions. I'm happy you joined us :-) -- Smial (talk) 21:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Thx for the compliment. I try to please, but not everything is that good. :) --Uberprutser (talk) 01:39, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Problem with Your QI candidates

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Uberprutser!
QI Guidelines:
Image page requirements: Quality images must be categorized, have a meaningful title and description. This should include the Taxa naming for organisms.
So, your QI candidates must be declined by rules as without Taxa naming and not categorized, sorry.
Very friendly, George -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:57, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I see. Then I will remove my images from nomination. --Uberprutser (talk) 14:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nested cup weight.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 --Poco a poco 23:03, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Praktica MTL-3.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. --Smial 14:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Agfamatic 200 sensor plus hardcase 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 OK to me --A.Savin 10:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Douwe Egberts zilveren tabak bus.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 20:05, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! FTTR RTT56B Telephone 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. --Berthold Werner 09:31, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fujica AX-1 35mm film SLR.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 Yes! --Smial 21:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC) Allerdings wäre es mit einer niedrigern ISO Einstellung wahrscheinlich noch besser geworden. --Berthold Werner 12:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Praktica MTL-3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Praktica MTL-3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus OM10 and 50mm Zuiko lens.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. Did you use focus stacking? --Tuxyso 08:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes about 5 images were stacked together. --Uberprutser 11:31, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus OM10 with winder and manual adapter.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 12:45, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

QI Discussions

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, regarding this image, and your upload of a new version in particular: Would be clearer if you’d add your most recent comments (even "new version uploaded") at the end of the comments block. I didn’t realise before now that most of the errors have been fixed. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep this in mind for next. --Uberprutser (talk) 20:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jachthaven Nieuwe Statenzijl.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. Geocoding and english description would be nice. --Smial 12:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Info I've added an English description. But before I start geotagging pictures wikipedia should really simplify the whole process. Link to a map, zoom in, put a marker on the map and hit ok.

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Spui sluis Nieuwe Statenzijl.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for me --Rjcastillo 16:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Revueflex AC2 on user manual.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
NEW Version uploaded. Still not perfect but it is as good as it gets with my limited PS talent. --Uberprutser 17:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC) CommentEven nicer composition than the other one, but still many single blur errors from focus stacking. See annotations. Single blurred letters between sharp ones look a bit distracting :-) --Kreuzschnabel 20:18, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately the CS5 autostacking feature makes a lot of mistakes and I don't know how to correct them. For a photoshop noob it gets rather complicated with all those layers and masks and so far I haven't found a good tutorial. --Uberprutser 21:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC) Take look at tufuse for the focus stacking. Simple and with manual --Ximeg 00:14, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Still not perfect but surely QI now :-) --Kreuzschnabel 20:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, aan de vaart.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Gedemptevaart en de havenstraat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de kolk zo'n beetje ter hoogte van de Feanster toer.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Ned. hervormde kerk.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de door storm vernielde molen aan de molenweg.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, Het zembad.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de gedempte vaart.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de openbare lage school (links) en de openbare mavo.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, het groenekruis gebouw.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de landbouwhuishoudschool aan de Dellen.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Nederlands hervormde kerk.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Fossemastraat gezien vanaf de Burmaniastraat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, De flats aan de Jan-Binneslaan.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de (M)ULO en lateer MAVO school.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, Lagere Technische School (LTS).jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Kolkstraat ter hoogte van de Groningerstaat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, Begin van de Groningerstraat vanaf de Kolk.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Kolkstraat. rechts is nu het torenplein.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kolkstraat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Avek aan de Groningerstraat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Kolk ter hoogte van de Groningerstaat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Feanster toer.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kerkje (gesloopt) aan de Dellen.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, het kanaal.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, Lijk huisje op de algemene begraafplaats.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Oude Jirden.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Dubbel wissen.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, openbare lagere school (gesloopt).jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstraat en Taeke-Schuilengalaan.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, Groningerstraat met in de verte de Kolk.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, Groningerstraat met in de verte de Kolkstraat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, bejaarden centrum het Suyderhuys.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de spaar en voorschotbank aan de Jan Binneslaan.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstaat en de Koop Kuipersweg.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstraat en Taeke Schuilengalaan.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de oude vaart.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Kolkstraat.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, buurt en vaartgezicht.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, het Zetveld.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Wissen is dubbel.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Dellen.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstraat en de Wareboslaan.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, de Gedempte vaart.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstraat en de Wareboslaan en Molenweg.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstraat en de Kolk 1.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Surhuisterveen, kruising Groningerstraat en de Kolk 2.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 17:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! American style windmotor.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
Done, but at the time the picture was taken the sun was about to set. --Uberprutser 23:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Good quality. --JLPC 11:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Electric Lighting & Jaguar (Cape Town, South Africa, 2002).jpg

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for your comment. I was using a Mamiya 645 Pro medium format camera. The film (Velvia50) I remember stocking up before the trip. I haven't used a 645 in a number of years and can't remember which lens I was shooting. Pretty sure I shot a roll (15 frames) of the plane and car from different angles hoping one would turn out... Thanks. -- Godot13 (talk) 00:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vintage Köhler sewing machine.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 11:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Detail succes vintage sewing machine.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. --Mattbuck 15:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Succes vintage sewing machine.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 think it might be a Brother but so far I'm not sure. "Success" would probably be the model name. --Uberprutser 10:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Charron Freres Accordion.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. --A.Savin 11:07, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kohler sewing machine.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. --Mattbuck 17:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tonka race car.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 20:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Played with Tonka toys.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Played with Tonka toys.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 18:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Fiat 880 DT tractor.jpg

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Fiat 880 DT tractor.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

-mattbuck (Talk) 14:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tonka cherry picker.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. --Mattbuck 08:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Britains tractors.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains tractors.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 17:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Charron Freres Accordion.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Charron Freres Accordion.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

File:Britains - Massey Furguson 2680 with Cultivator.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - Massey Furguson 2680 with Cultivator.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 too. --JLPC 18:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Britains - Deutz Fahr DX92 with Crop sprayer.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - Deutz Fahr DX92 with Crop sprayer.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 15:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Britains - Fiat 880DT and a hay baler.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - Fiat 880DT and a hay baler.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 15:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

File:Fiat 880 DT tractor.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fiat 880 DT tractor.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 Probably copyright violating derivate. COM:TOYS.--V-wolf 19:59, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't know who deleted my picture, but please be so kind and put it back! How can a self made picture of a toy be a copyright infringement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs)
I've restored, let's go to DR. Mattbuck 14:07, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
QI btw. Mattbuck 11:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! RMC Tokina 135mm lens for Olympus OM.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 --Rjcastillo 15:30, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matra Murena 1.6 Weber 36 DCNVA carburetor.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 --Rjcastillo 03:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

File:Britains - Deatz Fahr DX92 with Manure Spreader.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - Deatz Fahr DX92 with Manure Spreader.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 14:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Britains - Fiat 880DT with spreader.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - Fiat 880DT with spreader.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 21:12, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus E620 DSLR.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 16:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Werkspoor diesel valve train.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. Would be nice to have more depth of field but it is OK as is. --Purpy Pupple 03:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Station Marrum-Westernijkerk.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 fantastic sky, QI for me. --Indeedous 02:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Murena 2.2 Solex 34CIC carburettor.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 18:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! RMC Tokina 28mm lens for Olympus OM.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 Well done --The Photographer 13:54, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Waldhuske.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. --Martin Falbisoner 20:00, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Britains - MF 2680 Tractor.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - MF 2680 Tractor.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 22:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Britains - Deutz Fahr DX110 with mower.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Britains - Deutz Fahr DX110 with mower.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 22:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bunkers radar stelling Löwe in de winter 11.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 --Rjcastillo 01:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bunkers radar stelling Löwe in de winter 9.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 --Rjcastillo 01:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hitachi zaxis 210 lc.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 --Rjcastillo 01:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Narcissus flowers.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 06:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Bunker Nes 4.jpg

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello!

Can you please add location coordinates of this bunker? Thank you in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 19:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

When Wikipedia makes it easier to geotag images I will start doing so. (Open a map, zoom in, pin the location and save) --212.123.168.11 23:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI --High Contrast (talk) 23:19, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Veerboot "Sier¨.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--Lmbuga 21:46, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bunker Nes 4.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--Lmbuga 21:44, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bunkers radar stelling Löwe in de winter 5.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 --A.Savin 09:13, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bunker Nes 3.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 --Rjcastillo 23:24, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! New born Frisian red white calf.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice --High Contrast 23:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:New born Frisian red white calf.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:New born Frisian red white calf.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 1 day old chick hatchling 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice --The Photographer 22:46, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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) 21:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kruiend ijs Stavoren.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice.--ArildV 07:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Water'pumping station Vissering.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. --Nino Verde 07:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Toren in het geel.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 17:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Roodpootschildwants.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 for an encyclopedic purpose I wish a deeper DoF (in particular as you set your cam to "aperture priority"), nevertheless it is a pretty good portrait of an ugly face. --Sputniktilt 10:51, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nieuwe statenzijl.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 00:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! HDR sunset.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 IMO. Certainly beautiful--Lmbuga 14:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Parhelion in summertime 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Main subject has good quality. --Dirtsc 17:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

QIC comments

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I saw your reply to a comment on your go-kart picture at QIC. In future, please make sure you reply to comments in the same field as the comment, as the nomination template can only handle 2 parameters. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Distelvlinder (Vanessa cardui).jpg

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Beste Uberprutser, De foto laat geen Distelvlinder maar een Atalanta (Vanessa atalanta). Omdat je de foto als QI hebt voorgedragen heb ik hem maar niet meteen bot hernoemd. Maar kijk er even naar. Groet, Lymantria (talk) 05:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Woudagemaal 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 14:15, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Windmill Zeldenrust in Dokkum.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. --Martin Falbisoner 21:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hervormde kerk van Aalsum 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 Support QI --Rjcastillo 00:34, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Waterwolf 9.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 00:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vuurtoren De Ven.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 00:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Strokartonfabriek de Toekomst II C.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 01:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Strokartonfabriek de Toekomst II A.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. --XRay 07:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Schitterende foto's

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Wauw, deze foto van de Mariakerk in Wierum is echt prachtig en ook deze foto is zo lief. Dank je wel voor al die schitterende foto's! Trijnstel_talk 15:57, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

En jij bedankt voor je leuke reactie --Uberprutser (talk) 14:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Felicitado

Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Vaardige Uberprutser, Gefeliciteerd met je verdiende prijzen in de WikiLovesMonumentsNL 2013. Als je ooit in Appingedam, Nieuw Balinge of Zevenaar bent, zou het prachtig zijn als je met je camera hierheen zou willen kijken: de Turmacfabriek, of de Molukse kerk EbenHaezer in Appingedam, of het munitiedepot in Nieuw Balinge. Ze staan op deze lijsten: 90 topmonumenten uit de periode 1959-1965 en Top 100 Nederlandse monumenten 1940-1958, maar foto’s ontbreken. Vysotsky (talk) 11:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Aanvulling: excuses, vanwege je beheersing van het Fries is woonhuis Bonnema in Hardegarijp misschien dichterbij. Vysotsky (talk) 12:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Dank je. Hardegarijp is idd wat dichter bij en het huis van Bonnema ken ik. Toen ik in Leeuwarden op school zat kwam ik er vaak langs met de bus. Niet mijn smaak die blokken doos :) Maar als ik tijd heb en het weer zit een beetje mee zal ik een paar foto's schieten. --Uberprutser (talk) 14:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Bij voorbaat bedankt. Ik kijk er naar uit! Vysotsky (talk) 22:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
  - Het heeft even geduurd maar er staan nu 2 plaatjes van de Bonnema villa op Wikipedia commons. --Uberprutser (talk) 14:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sint-Hippolytuskerk, Hervormde kerk.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. --Alberto-g-rovi 17:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! De Maria kerk in Wierum 3.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 13:31, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Havenlicht Stavoren.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. --Mattbuck 21:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zwartendijksterschans.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}}}

العربية ∙ català ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ română ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey.

Dear Uberprutser,
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

File:Introduction euro coins in the Netherlands (outside).JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Introduction euro coins in the Netherlands (outside).JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Eleassar ^(t/p) 13:35, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear Uberprutser,

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

FP Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:De Maria kerk in Wierum 3 edited.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:De Maria kerk in Wierum 3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/--Ivar (talk) 07:00, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I think the 2013 vote was rigged

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Picture #12 should have won. It certainly is my favourite - I forwarded to my grandchildren with the title "A new life" since "A Frisian red-white cow . . . . " would have been over the heads of of a four and a two year old. Many thanks for your beautiful contribution. — Ineuw 00:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. All pictures eligible for picture of the year are very beautifully and it's hard to pick a favorite :)--Uberprutser (talk) 14:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Selected picture on Wikipedia's Renewable Energy Portal

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A picture that you uploaded entitled Goliath Poldermolen.jpg has became a Selected Picture on the Portal Renewable energy.
Thank you for your contribution to promote images of renewable energy. ELEKHH^T 08:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zwaan in de Ezumakeeg speelt voor ijsbreker.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. --Bgag 17:33, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Würzburg Reize radar

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi,

You have inputted two images of a Würzburg Reize radar with categories "Radars" and Würzburg radars". The first one is redundant with the second as "Wüzrburg radars" is a sub-categoy of it. On top of that the "Würzburg Reize radar" in a FuMG.65, which is a further subcategory. I had to change all your categories to simply Category:FuMG.65.

Pierre cb (talk) 00:43, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Würzburg Reize radar at the Planetron in Dwingeloo (NL).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. --Lewis Hulbert 20:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sheep on old sea dike.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 A few birds could do with cloning out, but QI imo --Lewis Hulbert 20:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Veluwse Papiermolen, Openluchtmuseum Arnhem.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 11:08, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Panorama van de Ezumakeeg genomen vanaf de oude Lauwerszeedijk.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. Nice details. :-) --XRay 12:43, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Voor al je goede foto's geüpload op Wikimedia Commons, en met name in het kader van Wiki Loves Earth. JurgenNL (talk) 10:18, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schotse hooglanders in het Lauwersmeer gebied.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 nice --A.Savin 12:09, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Koeien grazen op de oude lauwerzeedijk.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 Mooooo! --Cccefalon 06:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zonsondergang bij de Krusdobbe in de Alde Feanen.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. --Cccefalon 04:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Spinnekop molen "De Wicher" in de Weerribben 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality, QI to me. --Crisco 1492 13:12, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fishing ships in the Lauwersoog harbor.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 16:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lamb drinking.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 06:07, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tjasker in de Weerribben 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. --Joydeep 07:11, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Veerboot in de haven van Schiermonnikoog.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. --Cccefalon 09:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bosmanmolentje in de Alde Feanen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality.--ArildV 08:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Panorama van het Lauwersmeer genomen vanuit de vogel kijkhut aan de Strandweg.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 16:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Windmotor in de Alde Feanen.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 but sky could be enhanced by cleaning up the small bird spots. --Cccefalon 08:42, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schapen in de Alde Feanen 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. --Cccefalon 09:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schapen in de Alde Feanen 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support QI for me --Halavar 13:14, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nieuwe Amerikaanse windmotor.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. --Cccefalon 10:13, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zadelzwam (Polyporus squamosus).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. --JurgenNL 13:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Spinnekop molen "De Wicher" in de Weerribben 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Spinnekop molen "De Wicher" in de Weerribben 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Veluwse Papiermolen in het Openluchtmuseum van Arnhem.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. --Cccefalon 22:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Overkapte uitkijktoren "Romsicht" in de Alde Feanen.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. Though I think, you should upload your files in a higher resolution, if possible. --Cccefalon 07:20, 7 July 2014 (UTC) * I don’t see why I should upload larger than 4mpix files, since Wikipedia articles mostly use thumbs. I’m not producing fine art to be printed large. People who want fine art should consider hiring a real photographer. Also 4mpix keeps the files manageable and the upload times fast. And it also prevents the pixel peeper from complaining about noise and other irrelevant pixel peeper obsessions. In time when 4K screens have become the new standard, and I’ve got a new camera a better computer and a faster internet connection, I might consider moving to 8mpix. You see, lots of reasons to keep it small. But thank you very much for QI approving my picture.--Uberprutser 08:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Quoting the guidline: ... reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media. I didn't expected, that your photos have so much issues in high resolution, that you are afraid of reviewers which take a closer look ... :) cheers, --Cccefalon 09:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC) If people need more resolution for a large print they can ask me for a higher res upload, but for now I'm sticking with my 4mpix workflow since I don't see the need for more megapixels. 16 or 4mpix it looks the same on my 1920x1200 monitor when viewed full screen. Actually the best results I get when exporting to 1200p so the o.s. doesn't need to do any scaling and thats about 2mpix :) --Uberprutser 12:08, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Commons is a free repository of media files. Its not for wikis only. So QI should be usable for more purposes than just adding to a wiki. So, if somebody wants to use your QI he/she wants to be sure that there is no noise and dustspots, and not checking it later after you provided a higher resolution image on request.-- DerFussi 17:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kampereiland, hoogspanningsmasten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Overall good quality. Will be QI after perspective correction. --Cccefalon 12:41, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Done Corrected (since nominator hasn’t done anything yet). I won’t vote now as co-author. A bit oversharpened IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel 07:26, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
The issue is resolved properly. Thanks. --Cccefalon 20:43, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tall Ship races Harlingen 2014 - Alexander von Humboldt II and Sorlandet in the back Stad Amsterdam.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 Although you choosed to offer only a small sized photo, it cannot hide the facts, that the quality is not sufficient: Strong magenta CA and colour noise in the darker parts. Call me pixel peeper, but you cannot downsize it small enough to escape my sharp eyes. :) --Cccefalon 09:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I checked and it turns out I didn't do any sharpening, noise reduction or c.a. correction. Hope this new version meets your pixel peeping stamp of approval. And if you ask nicely I'm willing to upload a higher resolution especially for you :) One more thing; the top of the masts are not that sharp because I was rather close to the ships and therefor I applied some perspective correction. --Uberprutser 11:37, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I was well aware of the mast tops and considered the fact, that they lost sharpness during untilting. However, the effect is still acceptable. A higher resolution is not necessary for me, but for people, who love to use your nice photo. I have my own possibilites, to evaluate smaller images. My promotion includes, that you remove the tiny pixel disturbance in the sky (see my annotation). The other enhancements tackled my concerns. --Cccefalon 21:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
You really make me work for my promotion :) But I agree that bird was looking to much like a flying dead pixel. --Uberprutser 22:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in the categorization of QI

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Dear Uberprutser! Your images were reviewed and have been promoted to Quality Image status. Congratulations! I invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. All new images with this status are automatically placed to the page Commons:Quality_images/Recently_promoted. They have to be manually tagged with relevant categories using the QI categorization tool (see link at the top of the page, the author of this tool is User:Dschwen). Very few users do this job now, so a large number of uncategorizated photos accumulates on this page time to time… --Bff (talk) 12:25, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

That looks easy enough. For every QI image I submit I will try to tag at least two newly promoted pictures. --Uberprutser (talk) 13:15, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Koeien in de Alde Feanen 3.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 11:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Landgeit in hoog gras.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 15:46, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Konikpaard veulen in het Lauwersmeer gebied.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 11:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ruthemeyer diesel powered roller 3.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 --Cccefalon 19:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! De leijen net voor de zonsopkomst.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 16:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zeilbootje in het kanaal tussen de Headammen en de Krusdobbe.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, very impressive--DKrieger 20:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jong eendje aan de rand van de Berkenplas op Schiermonnikoog.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments It looks evil. --Mattbuck 21:36, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Old transport ship in the smallest sea going harbour of the Netherlands.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice QI. --JLPC 16:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! De 'Klief' in de Warffumermaar.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 To be categorized as QI in Commons:Quality images/Recently promoted it needs description in another language--Lmbuga 09:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC) Comment done. --Uberprutser 18:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Support Thanks. Good quality--Lmbuga 22:50, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cows on German sleeper dike.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 16:08, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schotse hooglander op het Fochteloërveen.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 Can you give the exact taxa name as well? Pity the nose is a bit unsharp, but still QI for me. --Kreuzschnabel 21:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment I've already added the category Bos taurus and I don't think this is a subspecies. Focusing on the nose would probably been better since the eyes are rather hard to see. --Uberprutser 21:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I see. Added to description. QI for me. --Kreuzschnabel 05:04, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pilot ships in Vlissingen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --ArildV 08:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Uitnodiging prijsuitreiking Wiki Loves Earth op zondag 5 oktober in Naturalis

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Geachte meneer/mevrouw,

Hierbij nodig ik u namens Wikimedia Nederland u graag uit voor de prijsuitreiking van Wiki Loves Earth op zondag 5 oktober in Naturalis. Deze wedstrijd leverde maar liefst 1.395 foto’s en geluidfragmenten op, allemaal gemaakt in de Nederlandse Nationale Parken. Verder zal Wikimedia Nederland informatie geven over het ‘Project Natuur’. De komende jaren willen we de informatie over de natuur op Wikipedia aanvullen en verbeteren.

Het programma voor de dag

15:00 - 15:15 Ontvangst
15:30 - 16:20 Museum bezoek
16:30 - 17:00 Prijsuitreiking Wiki Loves Earth en informatie over het Project Natuur
17:00 - 17:30 Afsluitend drankje

Adres Naturalis

Pesthuislaan 7, Leiden
Telefoonnummer: 071 568 76 00

Vindt u het leuk om deze prijsuitreiking bij te wonen? Dan kunt u zich hier inschrijven! Deelname is gratis. Plaatsen voor deze prijsuitreiking zijn beperkt, geen inschrijving en bevestiging betekent geen toegang tot het museum!

Als u vragen heeft, kunt u deze e-mailen naar info wikimedia.nl

Alvast bedankt en wij kijken ernaar uit u te ontmoeten op zondag 5 oktober in Naturalis.

Met vriendelijke groet, Namens het Project Natuur team,

JurgenNL (talk) 11:55, 4 September 2014 (UTC)