User talk:Alvesgaspar/archive8

Hi!

Welcome back, Joaquim! --Simonizer (talk) 12:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you Simon, but that will be just for a couple of days. I need my vacations by the sea. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I wish you funny and relaxing days! ;-) --Simonizer (talk) 19:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Disney !

Hi,

I can see you went to Disneyland Paris :) you should have stopped by Torcy (a few train stations before Disney), where I live, and I'd have shared a drink with you ;) Benh (talk) 07:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• Merci bien, Benh! Oui, je le ferais la prochaine fois. Du fromage et du rouge? C'est ce que je préfère en France... Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:16, 3 July 2008 (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:
Phoretic commensalism (or Phoresy).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Info - Juvenile phoretic mites on a fly of the Hypoboscidae family (Pseudolynchia canariensis)

•  Oppose Sorry - should be geocoded, and according to criteria 6 also categorized in some way which relates to the claimed scope. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

---

•  Info -- All fixed -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support now. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2008 (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:
Missing square puzzle.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Info A personnal version of the missing square puzzle, made some time ago. Probably it was already invented and sleeps in some 19th century book, but I'm not aware of it

•  Oppose Once again, a great animation, but fails #4: there is no description. Will gladly support once the animation is adequately described. – flamurai 08:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually, I have changed my mind (but not my vote). While it's not as pretty, Image:Missing Square Animation.gif does a better job illustrating the concept. However I think this image could be improved by shading the area of the larger square so the user can clearly see that the "solid" square is smaller than the square with the hole in it. – flamurai 08:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Since you have indicated that you prefer an alternative, I have moved this candidate to MVR to let it compete with the alternative you suggest. -- Slaunger 20:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I have added a simple explanation to the picture file. But I disagree with the suggestion of inserting a shade, that would spoil the puzzling effect of the animation and ruin most of the fun. It is enough to look carefully at two adjacent quadrangles in different positions to notice that the outer limits don't match -- Alvesgaspar 11:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Now seems OK, including criterion 4. --MichaelMaggs 15:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment - let me defend my dame. The geometric concept in this puzzle is much more elegant, and elegance is (almost) everytinhg in math and geometry... In this picture we have two squares of slightly different areas; in the ohter picture one of the figures is not even a triangle -- Alvesgaspar 10:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support after nominator's comment. – flamurai 23:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

MVR scores:
Missing square edit.gif: +2 <--
Missing Square Animation.gif: 0
=>
Image:Missing square edit.gif: Promoted <--
Image:Missing Square Animation.gif: Declined

-- Slaunger (talk) 14:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

review

 Info This tablecloth was made by my mother a long time ago and I still use it in special days

•  Support It satisfies all the criteria 1 to 6. There are a fair number of competing images, but none I think that are as good as this. --MichaelMaggs 08:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  •  Comment Crochet work can be many things and I think it is hard to say which of the images in, e.g., Category:Crochet lace is the most valuable. There are different styles belonging to different time periods and regions. The image nominated is probably the one in the selection of the best photographic quality, it is also convincing in illustrating some of the matehmatical symmetries often found in crouchet work. However (and with all due respect to yuour mothers work) it does not show the full potential of what crouchet work can be. On inspection I think only 2-3 different types of "stitches" (do not know if that is the correct English term) is used, quite typical for the crouchet boom in the 60-70's to which this work belogs. A more refined work concerning stitches is perhaps Image:Irish crochet.jpg, which is typical of Irish crochet and, e.g. Image:Crochet sweden.jpg. What I am trying to say with all this is that the current scope is perhaps too general for the image, so I would suggest that you narrow down the scope to a slightly more specific one, for instance, "Crochet table cloth". You can also try and keep the scope in which case I will let it complete with the two mentioned images in an MVR. -- Slaunger 20:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I think you are right, the scope is probably too broad. The problem is I know nothing about crochet and all its different techniques and "stitches" (?). Yes, I could narrow the scope to something like "crochet tablecloth" but I don't like it. A narrower scope should be based on the different styles or techniques, not the applications. Conclusion: please go ahead with the MVR, I think this pic has a fair chance! -- Alvesgaspar 22:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
    • And I think you are right in your reasoning that a narrower scope should not be based on the application. Maybe other users have better ideas. Anyway, I have gone ahead with the MVR. Let the best candidate win! -- Slaunger 22:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I saw the other two images and concluded that this one was a better illustration of the general scope. The others may be better at illustrating specific stitches or styles. --MichaelMaggs 06:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

MVR results:
Table-cloth 2008-1.jpg: +1 <--
Irish crochet.jpg: 0
Crochet sweden.jpg: 0
=>
Image:Table-cloth 2008-1.jpg: Promoted <--
Image:Irish crochet.jpg: Declined
Image:Crochet sweden.jpg: Declined

-- Slaunger (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

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

review

 Info Panel of glazed tiles by Jorge Colaço (1922), representing Henry the Navigator at the Sagres Promonory. Lisbon, Pavilhão Carlos Lopes

•  Comment Could you geocode please? --MichaelMaggs 18:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Done -- Alvesgaspar 19:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support It comes down to a matter of opinion. To me, this one has the edge, but it is very close. --MichaelMaggs 21:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I prefer this one because of the vibrancy of the colors. – flamurai 21:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment . -- Describtion lacks of information: Why is the image not a copyvio: it is a derivative work and Jorge Colaço died 1942. Syrcro 06:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Info - No copyvio, the pannel is in an outside wall and there is the right of panorama in Portugal -- Alvesgaspar 07:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

MVR Scores:
Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg: +1
Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-1.jpg: +2 <--
=>
Image:Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg: Declined
Image:Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-1.jpg: Promoted <--

-- Slaunger (talk) 22:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Disneyland June 2008-7.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Disneyland June 2008-7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments --Is it perspective or is there a slight CW tilt? Dori 04:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Nothing too disturbing, well done. --Dilaudid 21:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

File:Disneyland June 2008-6.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Disneyland June 2008-6.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 Balanced handling of challenging weather & light. --Dilaudid 21:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Mila

Look at Mila. Is she going to leave us? Greetings, Simon --Simonizer (talk) 22:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré May 2008-1.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 Solid quality. --Dschwen 00:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Longhorn beetle June 2008-1.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 Would be nice to see a liitle bit more, but Quality is good --Mbdortmund 13:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Where to find classification help?

Hi Alvesgaspar, with Image:Leeds Temple Newsam01 2008-05-11.jpg I tried my luck on an opening flower bud, but I wonder where I could get some classification help, short of knowing that there is lots of Rododendron around in that park I visited. -- Klaus with K (talk) 15:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Like to buy a card?

You can choose one with your own photo, or one of mine. Only £1 each! [1]. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spider July 2008-3.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 super --Pudelek 10:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spider July 2008-1.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 nice --Mbdortmund 14:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly July 2008-2.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 details, sharp --Mbdortmund 16:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasp July 2008-1.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 Nice photo. Meets QI requirements! Bidgee 00:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly June 2008-7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Mbdortmund 00:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pigs July 2008-1.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 Sweet --Sfu 18:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Giraffe July 2008-1.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 A little underexposed, but solid quality otherwise. Thegreenj 16:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Spider and fly July 2008-1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Spider and fly July 2008-1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Congrats Joaquim ! -- Benh (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Surf August 2008-1.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 --Mbdortmund 20:22, 19 August 2008 (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:
Sand Wasp (Bembix rostrata).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info - A female sand wasp (Bembix rostrata) in its sandy habitat. Notice the comb in the front legs, used to dig and cover the holes in the ground
• Geocode please. --Sfu (talk) 06:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Done Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• I think there is some mess in cateogries. There is Bembix rostrata article, but no category. This image is in Category:Sphecidae, artcile in Category:Crabronidae. --Sfu (talk) 11:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• You are right, thanks for noticing. Acording to the en:WP (which I assume is correct) the Sphecidae family no longer applies to this genus. I have changed the category of this picture (all the other images of mine will take some more time) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• One more thing: description here is wider than this on image page. --Sfu (talk) 13:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I see it's done. Very descriptive image. --Sfu (talk) 11:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. --Sfu (talk) 05:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Pigs

Hi Joaquim, we can never tell, but looks like the pigs are going to earn a star. Everyone/thing is cute when sleeping, these round shaped pigs are not exception to this :) Benh (talk) 16:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Wasp July 2008-1.jpg

Hi, nominated this to FP. --Sfu (talk) 19:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot, Sfu. I have considered the nomination myself but somehow I didn't believe the image had the necessary wow factor. Well, let's wait and see! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:26, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2008-1.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 Nice composition, atmosphere & light, but two dust spots at the upper right corner. -- MJJR 20:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC) * Done Thank you, fixed -- Alvesgaspar 22:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC) -- O.K. for promotion now. -- MJJR 18:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zebra July 2008-1.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 portrait.--B.navez 02:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly June 2008-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly August 2008-1.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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris June 2008-4.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 nice --Mbdortmund 19:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zebra July 2008-3.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 --Mbdortmund 23:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC) But the poor thing has only three legs ;-). Lycaon 23:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vasco da Gama Jerónimos 2008-1.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 professionell traveller? *g* --Mbdortmund 20:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC) -- Vasco da Gama or I?... Well, Lisboa is my home town! -- Alvesgaspar 18:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rinoceros July 2008-1.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 one. --Lestath 20:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

FPC Closing

Hi Joaquim, i will be in Switzerland for a couple of days. Can you go on with the closing process? I will be back next wednesday --Simonizer (talk) 21:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry Simon, I'll be out of town for the whole next week. Maybe I can help during part of the weekend but that is not certain. Have a nice trip and don't forget the camera. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Ok no problem I ask Hans then. And btw the camera is always my companion on those trips ;-) --Simonizer (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

are you around now?

Some incredibly stupid, immature and not exactly sane things have happened to me in the last few months (in real life). Nothing eh, big or life shattering but things that seem to be connected with ideas by a chain of perhaps moralistic idiots. I would like to accomplish two tasks at once, if possible. Spew of the ignorance of these "chains of events" and mention that I miss you being more present at QI and elsewhere. -- carol (talk) 07:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Or, forget it and just let me say that occasionally I miss the presence of the character known to me as Alvesgaspar. -- carol (talk) 07:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you Carol, that was sweet of you. No, I'm not totally back to the virtual work of FPC and QIC, real work is now pressing -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Butterfly August 2008-3.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 Excellent sharpness for a macro shot, a bit of motion blur on one antenna, but it looks like a quality image to me. User:TimVickers 22:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seagull July 2008-7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 focus, nice composition. A bit of a tight crop at the bottom, but still OK for me. TimVickers 16:42, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Personal favour

I am just back from vacation, and saw your message. I have answered on my talk page. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Email received thanks. We have just had a long power-cut, and I haven't been able to look at it this evening but should be able to tomorrow. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Featured Picture

The image Image:Pigs July 2008-1.jpg, which you created and uploaded, has now been promoted to featured picture per Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pigs July 2008-1.jpg. Thanks a bunch for your hard work! naerii 08:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PortoCovo February 2008-1.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 maybe a painting of an old master? --Mbdortmund 23:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, there's a typo in Image:Syrphidae poster.jpg. The label in the upper right-hand corner says "blteatus" instead of "balteatus". —Angr 11:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly May 2008-6.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 Good separation, good picture. Ram-Man 21:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Featured Picture Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Butterfly August 2008-3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Butterfly August 2008-3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Sunset 2007-1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunset 2007-1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Benh (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bee April 2008-3.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 Dof and sharpness could be better, but good enough. Nice background. --Massimo Catarinella 15:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Seen this?

File:Palin with kitty.jpg

look familiar?

Not really sure you want to know, but... Regards, Ben Aveling 05:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I must say, I like the original much, much better ;-) and sorry about this... -- Slaunger (talk) 06:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• It's amazing how time flies, she was a little girl just a couple of years ago! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alvor September 2008-1.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 Nive pic, very sharp. You could add a geocoding tag, but this passes the QI requirements. TimVickers 19:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC) --  Done Alvesgaspar 19:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sonchus April 2008-2.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 --Mbdortmund 15:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Osteospermum September 2008-1.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 DOF, nice colours -- Stephanemartin 22:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

POTY 2008

Did you see this? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

• As I understand it, the whole process is now dependet on a series of tools I know nothing about. Probably, they can only be used by an admin. And returning to the old manual method makes little sense. Maybe our own bot-expert (Dschwen) can help. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spider and bee June 2008-1.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 Looks fine to me, interesting picture. --Eusebius 20:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aphids September 2008-1.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 nice suckers. --B.navez 13:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong FPC closing

Sorry Joaquim, I've been closing FPC a bit too soon for some time now... Thankfully you were vigilant. Tomorrow I'll have a look at all FPC I've closed recently. Benh (talk) 20:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Not serious, Benh. If you find there is any problematic case you can always put it back in the forum for some extra time-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

POTY

Ok, I may help with POTY, but say me what I may to do :-) --Lestat (talk) 18:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

• Well, you might start by giving your opinion on the questions under discussion here. It's also worth to read last year's discussion (here). Thank you for your offer! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia Photo-Workshop

Did you see this?. Would be nice to see you there --Simonizer (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, that would be a nice and quite different kind of workshop. But I doubt that my family will allow me to go, I'm already travelling that summer for work! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to try to make it. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

• Good. Though I'm probably not going I would like to participate in the writing of the tutorial. Let's wait and see. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris June 2008-5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good composition and details, completed contrast balance (very hard to manage with a black sculpture).--B.navez 02:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Featured Picture Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Spider and bee June 2008-1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Spider and bee June 2008-1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Massimo Catarinella (talk) 22:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Copying me, huh?

Bom dia Alves, I see my idea of using pagesincat and the Bar box template is spreading. Glad to see when others can reuse my ideas. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alves, I think you should use the {{User category}} for your specialized user categories. That makes the category hidden from the image page. I believe that is the recommended way to do this to avaoid user category spamming on the individual image pages. See Category:Valued images by User:Slaunger for an example. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

See also Commons talk:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy#Hidden user categories. OK?. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

• Bom dia Slaunger, bem disposto? Thank you for your info, in my candour I believed that hiding the individual categories was an automatism of the system. Now, I'll have to find a quicker way to fix it. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

  Sim, é um lindo dia de outono Dinamarca, com início no Outono cores(??) Ehm, not hard at all to fix, just a matter of changing the few user categories you have created, or am i misunderstanding you? -- Slaunger (talk) 10:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

  • O primeiro dia de Outono, não é? Ahh, I envy polyglots!... Yes, I finally got it right, it's simpler than I thought. If everything goes well (i.e. if my paper is accepted...), I'll be flying to Copenhagen in July next year (here) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
    • You are overestimating my polyglot capabilities. Besides the trivial "Bom dia" and "Sim" the small paragraphs were done with translate.google.com. I see on the growing green bar that you have discovered hotcat! Pretty nice, ehh?!? Copenhagen is unfortunately quite some distance from where I live (like four hours in train). Otherwise we should have had a beer... -- Slaunger (talk) 12:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Disneyland June 2008-30.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Composition is nice, quality is borderline (considering the size) --Dschwen 18:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Fotos de bicharada

Olá, depois de um pedido na Esplanada sem grande sucesso, a PatriciaR sugeriu-me vir aqui. Por acaso, não tem possibilidade de arranjar fotos de pt:Triturus pygmaeus, pt:Chioglossa lusitanica, pt:Alytes cysternasii e pt:Pelodytes ibericus? Seria uma mais valia para os artigos e para a pt:Lista de anfíbios de Portugal. GoEThe (talk) 10:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• Obrigado pela lembrança. Gostaria muito de poder ajudar, mas não tenho fotos de anfíbios nem nunva vi nenhuma destas bichezas. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Obrigado na mesma. Valeu a pena tentar. GoEThe (talk) 12:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sunset Porto Covo March 2008-1.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 atmosphere --Mbdortmund 20:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weevil September 2008-1.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 nice image, might be a future FP (I would nominate it.). The only slight fault is the unsharp back of the beetle, which is a shame. The background is really nice though. --Massimo Catarinella 15:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Greenwich clock 1

January 2008 -- I seem to remember you writing that you wanted to have proof that you were there. In November 2007 you were taking photographs of Hawkweed in Portugal. -- carol (talk) 21:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, I remember writing something about the purpose of that photograph being to prove that I was there exactly at such and such time. But I was in England in December, not November. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the date is included with that image. My mistake here and now is (within a few hours) is the "January".

Clocks are interesting things. My university was kind of cool because none of the clocks displayed the same time, including the belltower which dinged a few minutes later than all of the other clocks. Tardiness was difficult to prove. I had a clock in an older car ('74 I think) which still kept relatively accurate time and the people who sold it to me pointed that out during the sale -- that a dashboard clock, more than 10 years old, operating and being stored where the winters were very cold and the summers were very warm and plenty of moisture in the air almost all of the time -- that such a clock would still keep accurate time, I don't think that at that point in my life I would have understood enough to appreciate that fact. Here and now, where I am there is a similar clock on the oven except this is also associated with several timers and I think it comes from at least a decade before that clock in the car did, but from the same company. That clock doesn't work and I have no idea when it first failed, but the timers attached to it still do something. They can be like a combination lock for the oven working or not. They have lost their "0" point -- or drifted from it. So, to get the oven to work, they need to be set at some fuzzy not so defined point, all three of them. I wonder often if anyone who rented this home before I have been here was unable to use this appliance due to a lack of familiarity with aging devices and also the crazy contraptions that were invented in the name of convenience in the 1960s here.

Do you know what I like best about the previous paragraph? It has nothing to do with taxonomy and could not be written (yet) by Dschwens Exif bot.... -- carol (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2008 (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:
Hoverfly laying an egg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Oppose (for now) The category of the exact species should be fixed (I am unable to do that). The egg is out of focus, however I think it is still ok. Maybe the egg position should be pointed out in the description. --Eusebius (talk) 20:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   Done - A new category was created -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:46, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 08:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted

You want a VI race?!?;-) Anyway, did you know that you could help me, by having a look at Commons:Valued image candidates/tag galleries when you get a VI. Feel free to ask if you have any questions. Look at my contributions today when I edit that list to get more insight... -- Slaunger (talk) 12:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• A VI race? Wow, I've about one million of critter species ready to start! Yes, I'll be delighted to help, but were are the VI galleries? I can only see the list of VI's by scope. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

  Yeah I know I'd loose a VI race in a split second;-( Ahm, there are no VI galleries. The point is to try and find galleries in the real, ordinary category structure, which match the scope. Add the image if it is not there already with {{VI-tag}}. This is pretty easy for living organisms as there is often a matching species article. For others you have to look a little more around. Like I had a "Fire stations in Greenland" scope, so I added it to Greenland and Fire station. The whole point of this exercise is to let ordinary repository users looking for material see the VIs without actively looking for them. We are, by the way, also building up a set of genuine VI galleries, see recent discussions at Commons talk:Valued image candidates, but that is a different story. See my list of contributions from today around the time where I process images in the list. I think that will make it all clearer. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• OK, I got it. I suppose it thas to be done (I mean, the tiny VI logo) to all categories of all existing VI's? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• No, no, no. I think we misunderstand each other;-) The categories should not be tageed (there is no consensus for that). It is only galleries which relate directly to the scope, which should have the VI in them and that VI should be tagged with the logo and the scope be displayed such that users browsing the galleries automatically see the valued content. Do not add the logo to the categories. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Mikumi Pano

Hey Alvesgaspar,thanks for reviewing my image. Could you please upload your edited version as a separate file? Regards Muhammad 16:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• Sure, here it is. Congratulations, your photos are becoming better and better! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the compliment. What do you suggest I do with the current FPC nom? Muhammad 20:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
  • It's up to you, Muhamamd. I prefer the edited version but that is only my opinion and other might insist on the original, for being closer to reality (whatever "reality" is). For me (I repeat myself quite often...), Photography is an interpretation of reality, not a faithfull model of it. If you want to nominate the edited version together with the original, go ahead, that is your creation. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Misidentification of Image:Geranium_February_2008-3.jpg

Hi Alvesgaspar/archive8,

your beautiful image Image:Geranium_February_2008-3.jpg is certainly not Geranium pusillum. It might be Geranium rotundifolium. It might be moved to this species (if I guessed right) or to Category:Unidentified_Geranium. I added a note in the Image_talk:Geranium_February_2008-3.jpg and also on the index page Geranium_pusillum. Best regards, Robert Flogaus-Faust 62.134.80.5 23:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC).

• Thank you for your interest. Yes, you may be right though the two species are very much alike. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:38, 27 September 2008 (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:
Grey Silverfish (Ctenolepisma longicaudata).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 12:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

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

review

•  Comment In my opinion, the best competitor in the scope would be this one. For the moment I cannot decide which one is the best. Other criteria ok --Eusebius (talk) 07:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
• I agree but only in aesthetical terms. It doesn't show the whole abdomen and the cerci, at the tip of it. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I guess you have a point here. --Eusebius (talk) 07:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#September_27.2C_2008

I've fixed the horizon in Image:Praia da Rocha, Portimão fisherman.jpg, could you review it again please? Thanks. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Polistes April 2008-2.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 recognizable subject, vivid colors and classy macro view --Twdragon 18:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moth September 2008-3.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 --Twdragon 18:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Contre-jour SMP May 2008-1BW.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Per your own explanation --Massimo Catarinella 15:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Article at pt.wikipedia which is a typo from delta-key

I just don't know enough pt (y/or any, actually) to see about getting the article pt:Turberaria deleted. I am quite certain that it is a typo copied from http://delta-intkey.com/angio/www/cistacea.htm and it should be Category:Tuberaria. See http://botany.si.edu/ing/INGsearch.cfm?searchword=Turberaria and http://botany.si.edu/ing/INGsearch.cfm?searchword=Tuberaria

Some time if you are bored or needing to perhaps do something productive or whatever the motivation, perhaps you could look into the deletion of this article? -- carol (talk) 19:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

• But the article is a minimal stub! All it says is that "Turberaria is a botannical genus of the Cistaceae family"... Maybe you wanted to check if I can reaaly read Portuguese?... Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

No. What I think is that it is a paste error. That a list of names was pasted and articles were created from that list and one of the genera in the list was mispelled (and I showed a web site that has such a list with that particular genus misspelled). So, I think that the article should be moved (I guess not deleted) to pt:Tuberaria.

That web site has a few mispellings that I know of and probably some that I don't know of also. -- carol (talk) 23:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)