User talk:Alvesgaspar/archive32

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anthidium May 2014-1.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 quality --D-Kuru 15:16, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo June 2104-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support looks ok --Christian Ferrer 10:51, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Canon FT alvesgaspar new.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 19:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anthidium April 2014-1.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 Rather small, but QI imo. --Kadellar 12:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grijó July 2014-6a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:27, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grijó July 2014-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 15:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seagull July 2014-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice --Poco a poco 12:27, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer software feature

yes, i do; less than the editor insulted the foundation. it is one thing to question the actions and product of the foundation, or of an editor; it is quite another to question the motivation of the foundation, speculating on financial ones. it is outrageous, and if i were an admin, i would have blocked him for failure to Commons:Assume good faith. people are being sued for less. when i say someone is a troll, it is for this behavior:

"3. Demand complete, fool-proof and guaranteed solutions to the problems being discussed.

4. Suggest extreme, over-the-top, counter-productive solutions ...

11. Become incredulous and indignant.

14. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias." [1]

the foundation has to be polite to this editor, i do not. Slowking4 ♡ Farmbrough's revenge 00:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• Looks like you have a strong case. Maybe you can appeal directly to WMF Deputy Director for a punishment block, instead of going through the boring AN/U process. Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto July 2014-16b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 05:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

identity

Hi Alves - sorry, but File:Acer July 2013-1.jpg is absolutely not Acer tataricum! Compare e.g. File:Acer tataricum (fruits).jpg, hugely different leaf shape. I have narrowed it down to a choice between A. argutum, A. caudatum or A. ukurunduense, but not certain which of those three it is. - MPF (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lisboa April 2014-18a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Very good IMO, but slight dust spot (see note)--Lmbuga 23:44, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto July 2014-11a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 23:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pinus July 2014-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality but slight dust spot, see note and then delete it please--Lmbuga 20:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seagull July 2014-3.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 good --Christian Ferrer 17:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Peter Lorvão July 2014-1a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lorvão July 2014-3b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 08:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Porto Covo January 2014-10a.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porto Covo January 2014-10a.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Seagull July 2014-2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Seagull July 2014-2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto July 2014-31a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think there is an editing error at the left upper sky. Can be easily cloned out. I have made an annotation. --Joydeep 13:26, 20 July 2014 (UTC)  Done Thanks! Alvesgaspar 13:52, 20 July 2014 (UTC) Good now. --Joydeep 15:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grilos Porto July 2014-34a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Stegop 23:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto July 2014-33a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me --Σπάρτακος 07:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Santo Tirso July 2014-6b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I find the lack of sharpness "forgivable" considering the light situation, but I am not sure if everyone agrees with me. Otherwise it looks ok for me. --Stegop 23:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC) Main subject is nice and sharp. Mattbuck 18:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grijó July 2014-5a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 18:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grilos Porto July 2014-9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. (Please add geo location.) --XRay 07:10, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	You got some serious shit over here. Great job, man. Keep it up. Dibyendutwipzbiswas (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

identity

Hi Alves - could you check this one please?. I'm thinking it is Spartium junceum, not Cytisus scoparius. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 21:41, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you, MPF. I trust your judgement! Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:27, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Ooops, forgot to say, Thanks! ;-) MPF (talk) 19:47, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Possible copyright infringement

Please have a look at this post on Google+. It explains everything. https://plus.google.com/116284399000926297178/posts/QzNRS1ECY8e

(I'm a moderator of this page)

Best regards,

Karl Louis

• Thank you for your message and information, a complaint has been presented. Please notice that the sins of others do not excuse the fault of Josef Koudelka, when has presented this image as his own! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:41, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi dad!

I've been checking out your work around here! I'm very proud of your work! Keep going ♥ Mleonorgaspar (talk) 22:46, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Mleonorgaspar, thank you! But you have failed to sign your nice message! Do it with four of these: ~ . Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-7a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Livioandronico2013 19:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-8a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well exposed, I would apply some selective NR on the sky. --Tuxyso 21:26, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-2a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-3a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 13:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-1a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo August 2014-6a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Wasp July 2012-2.jpg and File:Wasp July 2012-3.jpg

I think this is Sceliphron spirifex - the petiole is too long for S. destillatorium.--Keith Edkins (talk) 15:22, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Porto Covo August 2014-5b.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porto Covo August 2014-5b.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Ines August 2014-2a.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ines August 2014-2a.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 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Falcon September 2014-3.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 QI --undefined 20:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bubo September 2014-5a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments DoF could be a little better, but it's still a QI imo --Lewis Hulbert 13:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bubo September 2014-3.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.-ArildV 14:33, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parabuteo September 2014-1.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.-ArildV 14:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Valada September 2014-1a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 22:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madrid May 2014-70a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Focus problem, but its ok --The Photographer 13:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madrid May 2014-3a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments jpg artifacts in light but its ok --The Photographer 13:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madrid May 2014-42a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments right tower cut on top and some distortion there, but its ok --The Photographer 13:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madrid May 2014-8a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 11:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madrid May 2014-16a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Uoaei1 10:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tejo September 2014-6a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 08:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Falcon September 2014-1b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Attribution for image

Dear Sir,

I would like to use your image of the house fly, available at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AMusca_domestica_September_2007-1.jpg, in an extension-outreach publication related to pests in community environments. This publication is purely for educational purposes and has no commercial interests whatsoever.

However, the suggested attribution format, "By Alvesgaspar (Own work) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons", is very different from the style I will be following for other pictures in my publication, which will most likely be much shorter and in the format:

"Photo by Abc Defghijk", or "Photo by Abc Defghijk, Lmnopqr.org".

Therefore for the sake of consistency, kindly let me know whether I may cite the images in the above formats, and if so, what name/affiliation should I use.

Thank you! Sincerely, Shaku

Shaku Nair, Ph.D. Assistant in Extension, Community IPM University of Arizona - Maricopa Ag. Center 37860 W. Smith-Enke Road Maricopa, AZ 85138-3010 Cell: (520) 840-9429 Office: (520) 374-6299 nairs@email.arizona.edu

• Thank you for your message. I thing "Photo be Joaquim Alves Gaspar, Wikimedia Commons" will do perfectly. Regards, Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:00, 23 September 2014 (UTC)