User talk:Villy Fink Isaksen/Archive 2

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! To køer på en åben mark.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 whitebalance adjusted. --Villy Fink Isaksen 07:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)  Support QI for me. --Halavar 11:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hønsestrik i snedækket have.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. --Hubertl 21:53, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skagens jægere (p. s. kRØYER).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 --Halavar 16:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fodboldspillere. Sofus header..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 Thanks. Mattbuck 21:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Fra et romersk osteria

Hej Villy

Jeg sad og faldt over nogle af Google Project billederne fra Statens Museum for Kunst, og faldt over det fantastiske værk af Carl Blochs: 'Fra et romersk osteria'.

Så sad jeg og undrede mig over at dette billede ikke var brugt på da:Carl Bloch, indtil jeg indså, at der var benyttet en anden version,; nemlig en du har taget: File:Fra et romersk osteria.jpg. Også en fremragende reproduktion. Virkeligt veludført må jeg sige.

Jeg overvejer at nominere et af de to versioner til COM:FPC, men jeg i tvivl om hvilken. Begge billeder har samme pixel opløsninger, begge er virkeligt gode. Din version har næsten den dobbelte filstørrelse, hvilket vel må betyde at der er mindre jpg kompression i din version. Jeg kan dog ikke se artifacts i Google udgaven. Har du nogen holdning til hvilken version der er bedst?

Et andet spørgsmål: Maleriet har nogle ret kraftige krakeleringer. Jeg er i tvivl om man skulle få en "digital restorator" som f.eks. Adam Cuerden til at udbedre skaderne, men måske er det en så omfattende sag, og ikke bare noget man gør. Hvad tænker du?

Hilsen -- Slaunger (talk) 20:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Hov! Jeg ved ikke hvad jeg tænker på; det er vel et billede smfk har taget og ikke dig, men hvor du så bare har fundet en udgave med en større filstørrelse? -- Slaunger (talk) 20:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Ja, det og mange andre er hentet herfra: http://www.smk.dk/udforsk-kunsten/highlights/ --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Btw - så holder jeg mig altid til ukomprimerede udgaver. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Mange af billederne fra SMK's highlight-serie kunne sikkert klare sig fint i COM:FPC. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 22:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Det tror jeg faktisk også. Nu har jeg forsøgt mig med din version af osteriaet. Det er altså et skønt billede! -- Slaunger (talk) 08:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Vi er ikke alene om at synes det er godt. Allerede 8 supports! Ser lovende ud. -- Slaunger (talk) 08:34, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Ja, det går rigtig godt! Hvordan opdagede du billedet? Har du værte på museum eller læste du om Carl Bloch. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:12, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Nej, jeg har (pinligt nok) aldrig været på museet. En aften sad jeg og stenede foran tossen og så kunstquiz på DR, hvor der var lavet nogle 'mashups' af forskellige kunstværker fra SMK. I programmet blev også nævnt, at man selv kunne lege idet mange værker var stillet frit til rådighed via deres hjemmeside. I en af quizzerne indgik dette billede, som jeg tænkte at jeg måtte se nærmere på. Eckersbergs udsigt fra Colloseum blev også brugt mfl.-- Slaunger (talk) 13:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Åh - ja elsker at se disse kunstquizzer. Jeg har set nogle af disse 'mashups'. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monopteros at Gaalgebierg Luxenborg.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 --Villy Fink Isaksen 06:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)  Support QI for me--Lmbuga 13:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monaco Panorama 2015.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 high quality and EV. The left part of the images is leaning outwards.--ArildV 10:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC) Tilt corrected --~~~~  Support--ArildV 11:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Translating the interface in your language, we need your help

Hello Villy Fink Isaksen, thanks for working on this wiki in your language. We updated the list of priority translations and I write you to let you know. The language used by this wiki (or by you in your preferences) needs about 100 translations or less in the priority list. You're almost done!

To add or change translations for all wikis, please use translatewiki.net, the MediaWiki localisation project.

Please register on translatewiki.net if you didn't yet and then help complete priority translations (make sure to select your language in the language selector). With a couple hours' work or less, you can make sure that nearly all visitors see the wiki interface fully translated. Nemo 14:07, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Monaco Panorama 2015.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Monaco Panorama 2015.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anna ålekvase.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. --Hubertl 15:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC) Quality is good but the categories are strange. Is right to use "Photographs of pirate flags"? can you please add a category about the location? Poco a poco 16:07, 10 May 2015 (UTC) There is a "Pirate flag on the top of the mast. --Villy Fink Isaksen 16:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)  DoneNew categori added: "Århus Havn". --Villy Fink Isaksen 16:23, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Den genfundne jernbanebro 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. --Cayambe 20:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Transformatortårn ved Urup.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 19:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Den genfundne jernbanebro 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. --Moroder 17:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reflektion Langkær Gymnasium.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. --Hubertl 09:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Christiansfeld brødremenighedskirken fontaine 31 maj 2015.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. A bit too dark for me. You had no good lighting. -- Spurzem 18:30, 31 May 2015 (UTC)* Done more light --~~~~ OK. -- Spurzem 19:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Christiansfeld gadelygte 31 maj 2015.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 Very tight crop at the top and at the left. Further a bit dark. -- Spurzem 18:33, 31 May 2015 (UTC)*  Done Light and another crop. --Villy Fink Isaksen 18:55, 31 May 2015 (UTC) OK. -- Spurzem 19:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Christiansfeld brødremenighedskirken 31 maj 2015 crop.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. --Hubertl 18:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Randers Kunstmuseum 2.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Randers Kunstmuseum 2.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 12:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galloway kvæg i Kasted Mose.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. --Hubertl 05:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)  Comment May be tilted CCW?--XRay 05:53, 21 June 2015 (UTC)  Done tilt correceted (what does CCW mean?)--Villy Fink Isaksen 06:35, 21 June 2015 (UTC)  Comment Counterclockwise --XRay 12:05, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Enrique Simonet - La autopsia - 1890.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Enrique Simonet - La autopsia - 1890.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Storebæltsforbindelsen højbroen.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. --Xicotencatl 22:05, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kjællinghøl broen gitterkonstruktion.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. --Livioandronico2013 22:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gudenå nedstrøms ved Kjællinghøl.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 00:07, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kjællinghøl broen set fra sydsiden.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. But I would cut the blue man and the tent on the right side. --Hockei 17:54, 27 July 2015 (UTC) Done cropped. --Villy Fink Isaksen 18:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kjællinghøl broen og kanoplads.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 --A.Savin 17:28, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gudenå upstrøms ved Kjællinghøl.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The buildings at left are leaning out --Christian Ferrer 05:12, 1 August 2015 (UTC)  Done corrected the perspective --Villy Fink Isaksen 05:59, 1 August 2015 (UTC) Support I will say a bit more but acceptable as it is a landscape and the buildings are very far. --Christian Ferrer 04:10, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altaner på søndre ringgade.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. --Jacek Halicki 15:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lillering 2,3 km.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. --Isiwal 07:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bagside af et af langkær gymnasiums ovenlysvinduer.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 08:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 06:10, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altaner på søndre ringgade kvadratisk.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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Altaner på søndre ringgade.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Altaner på søndre ringgade.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gunnar Gunnarsson's house in Skriðuklaustur 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.--Famberhorst 04:52, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thingvallavatn panorama.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 see note --Jacek Halicki 11:52, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Geysir 2015-08-09.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. --Ralf Roletschek 07:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kvan på island.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 08:51, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skjálfandafljót at Route 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 Very good! --Pudelek 14:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krafla power plant - Kröflustöð.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. --Pudelek 14:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Isbjerge i Jökulsárlón 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. --Poco a poco 18:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church and rainbow in Akureyri.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 Woow, very nice! --Pudelek 14:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Topskarv på klippeø nord for Stykkisholmur.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 (Phalacrocorax carbo) --Villy Fink Isaksen 09:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC) Good quality. --Moroder 15:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skólavörðustígur and blue bike.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 15:31, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skjálfandafljót at Route 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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 15:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krafla power plant - Kröflustöð.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 15:31, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solfatara i Námafjall.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. --Hubertl 15:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Turf wall picture

Hi Villy, I've changed the scope of your turf wall picture so that it can be accepted. If you link the scope it to two different categories, it will be declined. Regards --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:58, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krafla power plant - Kröflustöð - alternative.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  SupportQI with no doubt, FP potential as already said. I like the shadow of the smoke, and the light in general--Jebulon 14:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Please connect the scope to a category. --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Langkær gymnasiums ovenlysvinduer.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Jarekt (talk) 15:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Lillering 2,3 km.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Lillering 2,3 km.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jarekt (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Landscape looking west from Skjálfandi version 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. --Poco a poco 20:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lunder på klippevæg på sydspidsen af Heimaey.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 --Christian Ferrer 14:46, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Skjálfandafljót at Route 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skjálfandafljót at Route 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, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brødremenighedens Kirke lysekrone.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 18:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tyrstrup Kirke bagfra.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. --Ralf Roletschek 18:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Milepæl mellem Christiansfeld og Kolding.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 20:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tyrstrup Kirke loft.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 Oh yes !--Jebulon 19:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brønd på kirkepladsen.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, still, could you add a more specific category? is it a fountain? --Poco a poco 20:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)  Done added two categories. --~~~~

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Hof, Zierbrunnen im Botanischen Garten.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hof, Zierbrunnen im Botanischen Garten.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Letbanebro over Egådalen.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. --Ralf Roletschek 19:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vejvisersten i Borum.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. --Ralf Roletschek 19:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Villa Kampen set fra Strandvejen.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 Shame about the shadow, but for me good quality.--Famberhorst 15:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dalgas Avenue 42.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. --Jacek Halicki 08:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Holar church.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. --C messier 08:13, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3wl7zNEQdp6z9Vb

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Den røde redningsbåd sejler ud.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 07:51, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

added "PD-old-80" --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 08:08, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CF Møllers gravsted.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.--Famberhorst 16:32, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Store kapel 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 GQ. --Palauenc05 16:13, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Store kapel.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. --Jacek Halicki 16:37, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Edvard Grieg ackompanjerande sin hustru.jpg

File:Edvard Grieg ackompanjerande sin hustru.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!

TommyG (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Camille Pissaro

Thank you for https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruger:Palnatoke/Autolister/Kultur/V%C3%A6rker_af_Camille_Pissarro and for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/listeria_test2Palamède (talk) 08:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Portræt af Henrik Nikolai Krøyer.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:P S Krøyer 1899 - Sommeraften ved Skagens strand. Kunstneren og hans hustru.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:P S Krøyer 1899 - Sommeraften ved Skagens strand. Kunstneren og hans hustru.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Ophavsret på Altertavle i Bregnet Kirke

Har vi ikke et ophavsretsproblem for File:Altertavle i Bregnet Kirke.jpg? — Fnielsen (talk) 09:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Måske, men det er jo ikke værket der er motivet, det er en uundgåelig del, hvis man vil tage et billede af alteret/den ende af kirken. Jeg ser det som når man fotograferer i det offentlige rum, og der kommer en skulptur med i billedet som ikke er selve motivet (det er jo tilladt). --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 09:58, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Portrait of the poet Ilarie Voronca.jpeg

File:Portrait of the poet Ilarie Voronca.jpeg 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!

Ww2censor (talk) 23:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Overwriting existing files

Please don't overwrite files with different files, just upload them under a new name. Multichill (talk) 10:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay - and I am sorry. But this will create a lot of files of the picture. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 10:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

yes, but interlink them in "other versions" field. the good images will be adopted, and old thumbnails decline, but File:The Yellow Milkmaid Syndrome.PNG will be solved by consensus and curation, not edit warring. Slowking4♡Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 11:57, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Girl Portrait (Marcel Janco).jpeg

File:Girl Portrait (Marcel Janco).jpeg 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!

Multichill (talk) 10:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Udsigt fra dragespiret på Børsen.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 Sharp photo, but please improve perspective (serious distortion at the right side) --Michielverbeek 15:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Done--Villy Fink Isaksen 17:42, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Perspective is not perfect, but it is good enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 18:28, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Sorry, but what is wrong? --Villy Fink Isaksen 18:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Comment Sorry, forgot to promote your photo - road at the right side leans a bit to the right, but a bit is not enough for a decline --Michielverbeek 22:44, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fra Københavns Børs.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 20:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Udsigt fra dragespiret på Børsen 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 Needs perspective correction --A.Savin 15:29, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Done--Villy Fink Isaksen 17:42, 15 May 2016 (UTC) OK. --A.Savin 14:11, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vindeltrappe i aarhus domkirke 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. --Poco a poco 10:21, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Abstract view from Børsen.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Abstract view from Børsen.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:05, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Pia Olsen Dyhr, pressefoto.jpg

File:Pia Olsen Dyhr, pressefoto.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!

Fnielsen (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ventilationsskatte Langkær Gymnasium.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 Beautiful detailed artistic photo, a good balance between sun and shadow --Michielverbeek 19:40, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stay in school grafitti.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 19:02, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Indgang til langkær gymnasium.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.--Famberhorst 16:12, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Possible FP?

I like this photo. I won't nominate it myself, but if you nominate it at FPC, I would vote for it. Very good composition. Congratulations! Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:02, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

P.S.: I would nominate this one, if you'd be willing to denoise it just a bit more. There will be complaints about the left crop, but I think it's a great photo of a striking futuristic building. If you have taken a similar photo with just a bit more room on the left side, even better. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:05, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks I agree about the crop I will therefor take another. Thanks! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 03:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aarhus City Tower set fra Europa Plads.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. --ElBute 15:01, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dokk1 set fra Europa Plads.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 19:20, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Europa Plads set fra Dokk1.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. --Johann Jaritz 03:18, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dokk1 version 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  Support Beautiful! Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 07:19, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Dokk1 version 3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dokk1 version 3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Deletions nominations

Hi, please only nominate a file for deletion with the 'Nominate for deletion' link from the left menu. Jcb (talk) 21:10, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Åen Immervad.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 Sharp enough for a Q1, good composition, but a bit overexposed --Michielverbeek 06:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC) Doneadjusted --Villy Fink Isaksen 15:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC) A small diffenece, but quality is now good enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 06:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plakatsøjle den gamle by.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 bit noisy but IMO acceptable. --Basotxerri 15:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Harders kasseapparat version 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. --Ermell 11:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tulstrup Kirke-6.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 Tower appears to be slightly askew, but good quality.--Famberhorst 16:18, 14 November 2016 (UTC) THX - I have corrected it. --Villy Fink Isaksen 16:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign for User:The Photographer

Please excuse me spamming you, which concerns Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign. My contributions cover the architecture and culture of Brazil and Venezuela. I has basic photographic equipment: an old D300 camera and 35mm lens, and it is very expensive for me to acquire this equipment. I has recently taken several images using the technique where multiple frames are stitched together to create a high-resolution panorama. However, many times frustrated with the stitching errors that result from trying to take such photos without a proper panoramic head for his tripod. This special equipment permits the camera to be rotated around the entrance pupil of the lens, and eliminates such errors. Having a panoramic head would greatly increase the potential for The Photographer to create sharp high-resolution images for Commons. In addition, the purchase of a camera with a fisheye lens would enable 180 × 360° panoramas to be taken, which are a great way to explore a scene as though one is really there.

Please see the discussion about the Crowd-funding campaign on User talk:The Photographer#Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign and visit the Generosity Crowd-funding Campaign page to consider donating. Even a modest donation will make a difference if many people contribute. Thanks. --The Photographer 13:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

SMK high res

Hi, I was wondering if you uploaded all the high-res versions of SMK works from http://www.smk.dk/en/use-of-images-and-text/free-download-of-artworks/ to Commons. As you might have noticed I created items on Wikidata for all SMK paintings. Quite a few are lacking an image so I'm considering uploading the missing paintings from the SMK site. Multichill (talk) 19:14, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I have uploaded them in april-may 2012, but there are added more pictures in high resolution. You are welcome to upload the missing paintings, right now I am busy with other projects on the danish wikipedia. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Constantin Hansen, Et selskab af danske kunstnere i Rom, 1837, KMS3236, SMK.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Constantin Hansen, Et selskab af danske kunstnere i Rom, 1837, KMS3236, SMK.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Tor hos Trym (17005).tif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Tor hos Trym (17005).tif. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:40, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bremsesko.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 Not quite as sharp as I would like for this sort of image, but I think it's adequate. Juliancolton 02:40, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statsbiblioteket læsesalen.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 With regret: Great view, but some noise and needs perspective correction --Daniel Case 03:41, 5 April 2017 (UTC) Done correction. --Villy Fink Isaksen 08:12, 5 April 2017 (UTC)  SupportO.K. for me --Ermell 18:23, 5 April 2017 (UTC)  Support I'm OK, now, too. Daniel Case 19:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statsbiblioteket læsesalen-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. --Ermell 18:22, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Udsigt fra bogtårnet Statsbiblioteket mod Nordre Ringgade.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 Some perspective and CA fix is necessary --A.Savin 14:23, 5 April 2017 (UTC)  Done corrections made --Villy Fink Isaksen 18:43, 5 April 2017 (UTC)  Support Much better. --A.Savin 05:36, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lysets tøven.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 really nice, but two big lens flares over the bridge on the right. Is it correctable? --Carschten 21:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)  Done removed flars. --Villy Fink Isaksen 22:29, 6 April 2017 (UTC) Very good! I like the lower perspective and accept the distortion, but it's a bit ccw tilted, isn't it? --Carschten 01:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)  Done perspective correction. --Villy Fink Isaksen 08:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)  Support thanks! --Carschten 23:26, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vestre Ringgade, Aarhus - set fra bogtårnet Statsbiblioteket.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Camille pissarro med mørk skygge.jpg

 

Pay attention to licensing

Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. File:Camille pissarro med mørk skygge.jpg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file. If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.

The reason given by the user who added this tag is: PD-Art is not applicable - the photo is not simply a 'faithful reproduction' of a 2D work, as the photograph includes the frame. We need a license from the uploader for the photograph itself, as well as the (current) statement that the pictured work is PD. The file should use {{Licensed-PD}}, or a similar template.

- Revent^talk 08:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Please see COM:PDART#When should the PD-Art tag not be used?. Thanks. - Revent^talk 08:06, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but that does not actually fix the issue... since the image depicts a 3D object (the frame, as well as the painting) it needs a license from you, as the photographer, as well as the PD tag for the depicted object. Please use {{Licensed-PD|1=PD-old-auto-1923|2=*insert photographer license here*|deathyear=1903}}, and license the photo. - Revent^talk 10:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay Revent- you are welcome to delete it - there is a copy without frame. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 11:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't think there is any particular reason to delete it, since you are the photographer you can just license it. I just noticed that you actually have "Villy Fink Isaksen CC BY-SA 4.0" in the EXIF, so I can just do the edit based on that if you agree. Otherwise it actually needs a DR. - Revent^talk 11:34, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay - go ahead. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 11:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I seriously doubt there is any copyright in the frame itself, it's just that the photographer themselves has to license any photo of a 3D object. - Revent^talk 11:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Statsbiblioteket læsesalen-2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Statsbiblioteket læsesalen-2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moesgård Strand i morgenlys 2.2.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 --Llez 18:14, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moesgård Strand i morgenlys.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. --Milseburg 12:14, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pæl der viser vej på Nordsøstien.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. --A.Savin 03:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hejseværk Bindselv Gl. Elværk.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. --Cvmontuy 15:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hejseværk Bindselv Gl. Elværk 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. --Ermell 09:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hejseværk Bindselv Gl. Elværk 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. --Cvmontuy 15:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bindselv Gl. Elværk.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 --Llez 10:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)  Done perspective correction --Villy Fink Isaksen 12:18, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stormvæltet træer i Tversted Plantage ved Skiveren.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  SupportGood quality.--Manfred Kuzel 05:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Kitesurfer at sunset, Workum, may 2017.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kitesurfer at sunset, Workum, may 2017.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Michael Ancher, P.S. Krøyer malende på Sønderstrand, 1907, HAF147, Anchers hus.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Ancher, P.S. Krøyer malende på Sønderstrand, 1907, HAF147, Anchers hus.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 21:16, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Holger Drachmann, Halifax, 1899, X0148, Skagens Museum.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Holger Drachmann, Halifax, 1899, X0148, Skagens Museum.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 20:42, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Request

Hello,

In File:Dubbing films in Europe1.png and File:Dubbing in Europe 1.png, could you translate this new legend into Danish?

 

Belgium: The Flemish speaking region occasionally produces its own dialect dubbing versions, otherwise solely subtitles. The French speaking region of Wallonia and the German speaking region of East Belgium use exclusively a full-cast dubbing, both for films and for TV series.

Yours sincerely, A2D2 (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Martinus Rørbye, Portræt af maleren C.A. Lorentzen, 1827, 0218NMK, Nivaagaards Malerisamling.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Martinus Rørbye, Portræt af maleren C.A. Lorentzen, 1827, 0218NMK, Nivaagaards Malerisamling.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

OTRS

Thanks for adding some amazing images to Commons!

I was curious as to whether you've ever been verified by OTRS? In some cases, like when you also share your photos on other websites or social media or the authorship might be disputed some day for other reasons, OTRS is needed to ensure your pictures can always stay on Commons. - Alexis Jazz 14:35, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

My pictures should stay on Commons for sure. I have not been connected with Orts. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I thought there was a link to an external website on image pages of yours, but now that I look again I don't see it. I may have been mistaken. If your pictures are only published on Commons, there is no need for OTRS. Sorry for the confusion. - Alexis Jazz 05:17, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis JazzI am a bit confused, but some of my pictures has been published in other media after after upload to Commons see: Category:Pictures by Villy Fink Isaksen that have been published. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:20, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

If they were published elsewhere after you uploaded them to Commons it shouldn't be a problem. Although around here, you never know. I have seen deletion requests with links like https://d3525k1ryd2155.cloudfront.net/h/347/866/308866347.0.x.1.jpg as "proof" something was a copyvio. But since you have no website or anything like that there is no way to get OTRS verification. I see you were already putting your name in the exif information, that should help to verify your images were originally published on Commons if anyone ever questions that. - Alexis Jazz 21:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok - I agree with it. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Krøyer

Hej Villy. Er fortsat i gang med at rydde op i Krøyer-billederne. Du har lagt dette billede op: File:Skagens jægere Studie.jpg. Problemet er, at det ikke svarer til nogen af beskrivelserne af studier hos Christensen. Det ligner mest et klip af det endelige billede, og din kilde giver ingen hjælp. Har du et bud på, hvor der kan findes yderligere oplysninger? Mvh --Rsteen (talk) 17:35, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Det er ikke et klip af det endelige billede, men ellers har jeg pt. ikke andet bud end det link der er som kilde/fotograf http://kunstnyt.dk/kroy2-6.htm . men kan evt. spørge via Skagens Museum hvor jeg har en bekendt. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:48, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Branduhre Mølle 756-5963-1.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. --Bgag 01:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Mere Krøyer

Hej Villy. Er stødt på et pudsigt problem vedrørende de billeder Krøyer udstillede på Charlottenborg. Både SMK og Hirschsprung hævder at eje udstillingsnummer 248 fra forårsudstilllingen i 1900. Hirschsprung har umiddelbart den bedste sag, idet nr 248 i kataloget hedder "Sommeraften ved Skagens Strand" - og det hedder deres billede også. SMK har imidlertid billedet "Badende drenge en sommeraften ved Skagens strand" (KMS 1658), som hævdes at være købt på udstillingen, også som nr 248. Har der været to billeder med samme katalognummer, eller er Hirschsprungs billede fra efterårsudstillingen (hvor jeg mangler katalog)? Har lige skrevet til SMK om sagen, og venter på en form for forklaring. Håber du har fået afsat dine hundehvalpe og igen er full-time her på projektet. Venlig hilsen Ebbe --Rsteen (talk) 15:50, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

I følge "Krøyer i international lys" side 308-309 er det Hirschsprung der ejer billedet og det har inventar nr. 234 og ganske rigtigt udstillet i 1900 på Charlottenborg som nr 248. SMK er nok forkert på den. Hvalpe er solgt, jeg er stadig i lidt flytterod men snart på fulde omdrejninger igen efter en tur på Skejbys hjerteafdeling. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Mere info! Udstillingskataloget fra Charlottenborg-udstillingen 1900 kan du se her: http://www.kunstbib.dk/samlinger/udstillingskataloger/samlingen/000218475 Heri er "Sommeraften ved Skagens Strand" nr. 248 og sammen med to andre Krøyer malerier, men "Badende drenge en sommeraften ved Skagens strand" er der ikke. Så SMK er forkert på den. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 20:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Tak for info. Afventer SMK's svar på min mail. Godt at høre, at din formkurve er stigende. --Rsteen (talk) 05:07, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Højris-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 Verticals should be fixed and noise reduced. --Ermell 20:08, 19 September 2018 (UTC) New version with fixed errors --Villy Fink Isaksen 20:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC) The verticals on the left side are correct but on the right side they should also be corrected. --Ermell 07:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)} It's an old building with partially oblique walls, look at the door and some of the windows on the right side they look right but the corner is not vertical due to the age. --Villy Fink Isaksen 07:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC) Okay - I made a small change may be it is better now. But it is stille an old house. --Villy Fink Isaksen 08:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Højris-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 Please correct the perspective, both sides are leaning in. --Basotxerri 18:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC) correction done --Villy Fink Isaksen 18:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Basotxerri 20:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Højris-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 Please correct the perspective, both sides are leaning in. --Basotxerri 18:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC) correction done --Villy Fink Isaksen 18:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Basotxerri 20:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brønd i søsterhusets gård, Christiansfeld.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, can you add an English description? --Trougnouf 15:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)  Done  Support Good quality. --Satdeep Gill 18:46, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Postbåden kommer. Christiansø.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. --Peulle 22:01, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2019! ;-)

			* Happy Holidays 2019, Villy Fink Isaksen! *
			Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:00, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:L.A. Ring, Road in the Village of Baldersbrønde (Winter Day), 1912, NG6658, National Gallery.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:L.A. Ring, Road in the Village of Baldersbrønde (Winter Day), 1912, NG6658, National Gallery.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Philippe Chaperon - Rigoletto.jpg

HEy, hate to be a pain, but you forgot to sign, and I think it only counts if you sign. I'll answer the question there. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Johannes Wilhjelm, Skagens gamle kirke. Nat, 1910. SKM1393, Skagens Kunstmuseer.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Johannes Wilhjelm, Skagens gamle kirke. Nat, 1910. SKM1393, Skagens Kunstmuseer.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mejsene fodres-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 Very good -- Spurzem 11:40, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mejsene fodres-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 Very good -- Spurzem 11:42, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Mejsene fodres-4.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mejsene fodres-4.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:P.S. Krøyer, Et møde i Videnskabernes Selskab, 1897, Det Kongelige Danske Videnskaberners Selskab.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:P.S. Krøyer, Et møde i Videnskabernes Selskab, 1897, Det Kongelige Danske Videnskaberners Selskab.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Acanthus mollis (Gottorfer Codex, bind 2, planche 9).jpg

File:Acanthus mollis (Gottorfer Codex, bind 2, planche 9).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!

Oursana (talk) 12:08, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:P.C. Skovgaard,Storkeegen, Jægerspris, 1842, 362, Skovgaard Museet.jpg

Copyright status: File:P.C. Skovgaard,Storkeegen, Jægerspris, 1842, 362, Skovgaard Museet.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:P.C. Skovgaard,Storkeegen, Jægerspris, 1842, 362, Skovgaard Museet.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 14:04, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:11, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Vestergade 7 OOA.jpg

Yours sincerely, C.Suthorn (talk) 15:50, 2 November 2019 (UTC)