Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Bob Collowân!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | تۆرکجه | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | भोजपुरी | Bahasa Banjar | বাংলা | català | нохчийн | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | euskara | estremeñu | فارسی | suomi | français | Frysk | galego | עברית | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk | occitan | Ирон | polski | português | português do Brasil | rumantsch | română | русский | sicilianu | Scots | سنڌي | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | українська | اردو | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 粵語 | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−


CategoriesEdit

Hi Bob, Categories like Category:Category:Tranebjerg Kirke don't work. Remove one "Category:" to solve the problem. Greetings, -- Ies (talk) 18:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I became aware of the problem myself just after I had uploaded six new pictures of which only two had gone into the proper category :-) --Bob Collowân (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Now it is fixed. --Bob Collowân (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Perspective correctionEdit

Hi, as for perspective correction of pictures, it depends on the software youre already using. Theres a standalone software for Windows: http://shiftn.de/. Theres a plugin for Photoshop: "Perspective Transformations", and one for GIMP: "EZ Perspective" (a bit tricky since there is no preview, you have to apply the filter and undo until it fits). I develop all my photographs from the RAW files using RawTherapee, which does a very good job in perspective correction itself. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:37, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I have to admit that I haven't used editing software before, but perhaps I should learn how it works :-) --Bob Collowân (talk) 09:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alter i Tranebjerg Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 23:34, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Swan pair with offspring.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments

  Support OK, would be better with the location --Christian Ferrer 17:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
  Done I have added coordinates and location description, thank you. --Bob Collowân 17:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Danish_wind_turbineEdit

Hi Bob ! I applied some modifications on your file, because it was simpler to do them than to explain them. I agree with Kreuzschnabel : Rawtherapee is a very useful tool, but not only for raw files ; it does very well with jpeg too. -- I corrected the tilt on your picture with Gimp, using two plugins : "Perspective correction" and "Interactive deformation". They both need some learning but they're not too difficult to use (imo)... even though I'm sometimes absent minded ! -- I'm sure your picture will be assessed by someone else : as I've corrected it, I'm not allowed to promote it (the rules are so severe on Commons !). Nevertheless, I'll have an eye on it...-- Sorry for my English. -- Best regards. --JLPC (talk) 12:55, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi JLPC, thank you for balancing the horizon in the picture. I removed the blue artifacts you had left in the corners and uploaded a new version. --Bob Collowân (talk) 14:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Issehoved (Samsø, Danmark).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support OK --A.Savin 12:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Danish wind turbine.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 Horizon tilted imo. Easy to fix. --JLPC 16:56, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  Question You're right, but I'm not very good at editing programs. Can you please help me balancing it? --Bob Collowân 20:08, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  New version uploaded --Bob Collowân 13:17, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
QI now. --JLPC 09:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moat of Kastellet in Copenhagen.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments

  Support --Christian Ferrer 11:57, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alter og døbefont i Besser Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 17:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tranebjerg Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality--Lmbuga 21:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Onsbjerg Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 imo. --ArildV 19:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Orgel i Tranebjerg Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --JLPC 17:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sankt Nicolai Kirke (Køge Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Sky could be bluer. Mattbuck 17:42, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  Done --Bob Collowân 21:42, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
OK. Mattbuck 22:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Klokketårn i Nordby (Samsø, Danmark).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 to me, left and top crop can be improved but QI level --Poco a poco 08:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Langør Kirke (Samsø Kommune) 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
Quality is good, but I would crop a bit wider on all sides. Possible? --Tuxyso 12:09, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, the original is tight too, and this one is the result of a perspective correction. --Bob Collowân 17:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
For me it is QI anyway. --Tuxyso 17:41, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rigets Flag (Marinestation København).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 12:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skib i Besser Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --JLPC 18:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nordby Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Need perspective correction, please see the left side.--ArildV 19:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Are you sure? The left side seems quite well-balanced to me. --Bob Collowân 10:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC) Undskyld! The right side, not the left.--ArildV 21:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
  Done Helt i orden. It was tilted, but I've corrected it now. --Bob Collowân 10:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC) Ok now.--ArildV 11:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Knippelsbro (København).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments

  Comment It need perspective corrections --Christian Ferrer 20:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  Done I think this will do. --Bob Collowân 21:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  Comment It's tilted on right, look at the bulding at right --Christian Ferrer 04:48, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether Commons had finished loading the new version when you wrote your comment. Please look at it again. --Bob Collowân 10:00, 16 June 2013 (UTC))
  Comment I have look again, it's tilted on right, look at the bulding at right, it need more corrections --Christian Ferrer 18:16, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
  OK, I've applied some corrections. I hope it's better now. --Bob Collowân 21:17, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
  Support OK now --Christian Ferrer 17:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bust and statue of Princess Marie of Orléans.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 18:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Exterior of Asnæs Power Station.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
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:
Exterior of Frederiksberg Palace.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Magleby Kirke (Stevns Kommune) 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
Tight crop, otherwise good quality.--ArildV 21:16, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Magleby Kirke (Stevns Kommune).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 -- George Chernilevsky 14:50, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skib i Tranebjerg Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 -- George Chernilevsky 14:54, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Besser Kirke (Samsø Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 Could do with some perspective correction, and seems tilted CCW to me (see window in horizontal center) --Kreuzschnabel 19:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  Done Tilt and perspective corrected. --Bob Collowân 21:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Very close framing now (next time leave some space for correction) but QI for me --Kreuzschnabel 11:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks for your advice. --Bob Collowân 11:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dannebrog ved Rødvig Strand.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:02, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Exterior of Amager Power Station (Amagerværket) in Copenhagen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Autopatrol givenEdit

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 20:10, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Object location vs camera locationEdit

Hi, you changed some of the camera locations to object location for some of my pictures. E.g. here. Take a look at where the location is placed, and you will see that it is outside the church. It is in fact within a couple of meters from where I took the picture. Haros (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, sorry about that. --Bob Collowân (talk) 20:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Good. Haros (talk) 18:50, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark) 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. --Mattbuck 21:39, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Night photographs of Rødovre.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --JLPC 17:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Børsen (Copenhagen).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 14:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Viola tricolor in a tub.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 IMO bad centring, if you want to take a tub of Viola tricolor you must take the entire pot --Christian Ferrer 18:15 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Good point, I will change the nomination subject then. --Bob Collowân 11:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  Comment Can you tilt it on the left to make the background horizontal please --Christian Ferrer 19:42, 01 July 2013 (UTC)
  Tilted counterclockwise --Bob Collowân 20:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  Support OK --Christian Ferrer 19:42, 01 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Windmill of Kastellet (Copenhagen).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 11:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Saint Alban's English Church (Copenhagen).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Smial 11:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Aerial photographs of Nordhavnen in Copenhagen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mount Rainier (Washington state, USA).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Smial 11:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Diablo Lake (Washington State).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jastrow 10:00, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :-) --Bob Collowân 15:25, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Diablo Lake (Washington state, USA)..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Exterior of the Panum Institute in Copenhagen..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Windmill of Kastellet, Copenhagen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! All Souls College, Oxford.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 12:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tower of London viewed from the River Thames.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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, but it's leaning clockwise a bit, please correct --A.Savin 18:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
  Done --Bob Collowân 21:06, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
  Support --A.Savin 22:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tower Bridge (north side view).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --JLPC 17:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

If you would like to nominate another 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 15:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tower Bridge (aerial view).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 corrections, esp. at the left --A.Savin 12:35, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
  New version uploaded, acceptable? --Bob Collowân 13:06, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes, imo QI now.   Support --A.Savin 16:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gemini Residence, Islands Brygge, Copenhagen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support nice --A.Savin 10:37, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :-) --Bob Collowân 16:46, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 10:17, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Exterior of Metropolis, Copenhagen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Møns Klint 2 (Nylands Nakke).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Dirtsc 18:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Københavns Havn (Copenhagen Port).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. -- Felix Koenig 13:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bridge of Sighs, Oxford.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. -- Felix Koenig 13:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Eryngium giganteum, Thames Barrier Park, London.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support OK --A.Savin 11:27, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tower of University Church of St Mary the Virgin, Oxford.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 11:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Bridge of Sighs (Oxford).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lion with a mooring ring.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 19:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tom Tower of Christ Church, Oxford.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 and sharp.--ArildV 19:50, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Aller Media, Havneholmen, Copenhagen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Sputniktilt 07:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! London Eye at sunset 2013-07-19.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 wonderfull --Rolf H. 13:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! War Memorial Garden of Christ Church, Oxford.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 QI for me, but very big dust spot (See note)--Lmbuga 21:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, I wasn't aware of it. I have removed it now. --Bob Collowân 11:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 14:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wheeler Hall, University of California, Berkeley.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Onsbjerg Kirke (Samsø Kommune) 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
Very good. -- Felix Koenig 14:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :-) --Bob Collowân 16:32, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Mattbuck 19:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

If you would like to nominate another 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.-ArildV 19:37, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sankt Stefans Kirke, andelslandsbyen Nyvang.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 09:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Prins Wilhelms Palæ (Københavns Kommune).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support --A.Savin 14:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sankt Stefans Kirke, andelslandsbyen Nyvang 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
  QI --A.Savin 17:38, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Panum-instituttet (Copenhagen).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Sky a bi overexposed but ok --Poco a poco 19:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Tower of London seen from the South.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Exterior of Svanemølleværket.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Valued Image Set PromotionEdit

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Møns Klint (the Cliffs of Møn).

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Møns Klint (the Cliffs of Møn).
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Smial 10:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Smial 10:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

If you would like to nominate another 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 --A.Savin 08:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

If you would like to nominate another 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. Blue Elf 14:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

If you would like to nominate another 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 16:10, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

FP promotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark).JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark).JPG/2 has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/JKadavoor Jee 06:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ny Vor Frue Kirke.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support QI --Rjcastillo 13:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

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

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality.--ArildV 08:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Traktørstedet, Stevns, Denmark 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.--ArildV 08:20, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Fiskbæk_Kirke_(Viborg_Kommune)Edit

Beethoven9 (talk) 09:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Buddinge Kirke (Gladsaxe Kommune, Denmark).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Cccefalon 22:25, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

RequestEdit

Hello Bob,

I would like to request use of the photo you put out in Wikipedia of the Tower of London for my scrapbook (for personal use only). I will credit it to you when printing it (personal use single book). I think that is what you are requesting in the "license" part of the posting, and hope that is ok with you.

Thank you!

Jo Lee

Hi Jo, that is okay with me. --Bob Collowan (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Vissing Kirke og andre tre farvet kirkerEdit

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Vissing_Kirke denne kirke er vel trefarvet rød, hvi og grå! Der er flere af den slags hvad gør vi ved det? --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:07, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Det gælder også https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Skallerup_Kirke --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Jeg har lavet en trikolore-kategori til grå, hvide og røde kirker. Den hedder Category:Gray, white, and red churches in Denmark. --Bob Collowan (talk) 16:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 AnnouncementEdit

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!Edit

 
2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Ønsker at bruge et af dine foto i en bogEdit

Hello Bob, I'm not member of Wikimedia Commons, therefor I can't e-mail you for permission. But I will be you most pleased, if you could give me permission to use your image from Møns Klint. I want to use it in a travel book in Danish. Will you please contact me at e-mail: cm@legind.dk.

Best regards Conny Mikkelsen

Picture of the Year 2013 Results AnnouncementEdit

Picture of the Year 2013 ResultsEdit

 
The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Bob Collowân,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Usage of picture in genealogical siteEdit

Hi Bob

I am intending to use your picture of the church in Magleby Stevns at http://www.myerichsen.net/p70.html#i2079

Best rgds Michael Erichsen

Hi, feel free to do so, as long as you credit me. --Bob Collowan (talk) 20:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nødebo Kirke, Hillerød Kommune, Denmark, 2014-05-16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support QI --Rjcastillo 18:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Metropolis, Sluseholmen, Copenhagen.jpgEdit

Hi Bob My name is Marie Flensborg Im working at the University Copenhagen, may i use the photo "Metropolis, Sluseholmen, Copenhagen.jpg" for a poster ? Have a nice day

Metropolis, Sluseholmen, Copenhagen.jpgEdit

Hi Bob My name is Marie Flensborg Im working at the University Copenhagen, may i use the photo "Metropolis, Sluseholmen, Copenhagen.jpg" for a poster ? Have a nice day

Hi Marie, could you please e-mail me at bob.collowan@gmail.com? Best regards, --Bob Collowan (talk) 11:24, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tranekær Kirke, Langeland Kommune, Danmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 12:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Keldsnor Fyr, Langeland, Danmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 19:35, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lindelse Kirke, Langeland Kommune, Danmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Overall good quality, but needs a perspective correction. --Cccefalon 15:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Yes, there is a slight vertical distortion, but as the church is situated on a hill, I think that's what the eye naturally expects. Making the vertical edges perfectly vertical would create an undesirable effect. --Bob Collowân 20:36, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
ok, as it is only a small incline, I won't be more catholic than the pope. --Cccefalon 13:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rise Kirke, Ærø Kommune, Danmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 slight perspective correction. Also, there is a fine magenta CA at the left trees trunks. --Cccefalon 12:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I don't think I can solve the perspective issues altogether (the stepped gable is quite delicate), but I've made a new version which I find acceptable, with the CA repaired too. --Bob Collowân 20:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Nice. Mattbuck 10:41, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tranderup Kirke, Ærø Kommune, Danmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Perspective yet to be done. --Cccefalon 10:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
  Done Thank you. It should be better now. --Bob Collowân 09:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Good quality. --Cccefalon 07:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Valued image set: Naica Mine diagramsEdit

 
Valued image set: Naica Mine diagrams 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 gallery, 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.

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

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

89.117.239.79 14:55, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality images ...Edit

Hej Bob

Jeg har lagt lidt af dine billeder i forskellige kategorier for Quality images bla. i "Quality images of region Sjælland", håber på at du vil lægge resten i rette kategorier. Det er et arbejde som Slaunger startede og som jeg forsatte med mine egne billeder og så nogle få af dine. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Så skulle det vist være klaret. Venligst, --Bob Collowan (talk) 17:29, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Dejligt og tak! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:30, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Kategorisering af museer i DanmarkEdit

Hej Bob, Måske vil du give en hånd med ved kategorisering af museer? Start måske her https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Museums_in_Denmark_by_Region .

Med venlig hilsen Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Eller start her https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Museer_i_Danmark_efter_region Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Using Your Image of the Tower of LondonEdit

Hi Bob. We (my aunt Claudie an author and I, a small time publisher) love your photo of the Tower of London. We are going to use it in my Aunt's book that I helped illustrate, The ABC's book about William Pen. There will be an attribution page at the end of the book which I'm making up now to include a reference to you and the Wikimedia Commons phot page where your photo is: [[1]]. The book will be available on Amazon and all the usual channels. We do not expect high sales although the book is well written and the cover, is I think, attractive.

OK, thanks for letting me know. --Bob Collowan (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:London Eye at sunset 2013-07-19.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:London Eye at sunset 2013-07-19.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

--Σπάρτακος (talk) 07:44, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for nominating. -- Bob Collowan (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

tower of London PictureEdit

Hi Bob i used you image to create a sketch of the tower of London for an experimental illustration project for college you can see it here: http://imgur.com/gallery/dtCjwyl and you are credited as the photographer. i will take it down if you ask. Just comment on the site linked

Very nice sketch! Thanks for the link, and good luck with your project. --Bob Collowan (talk) 10:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Use of Tower of London photoEdit

Hi Bob,

I'm a secondary school teacher in UK and would really like to use your image of the Tower of London for a display I'm making about our GCSE course which includes a site study of the Tower. Would this be ok?

Many thanks, Tom —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 46.60.253.178 (talk) 14:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that is ok. Thanks for contacting me. -- Bob Collowan (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brøndbyvester Windmill, Denmark, 2017-02-11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:51, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brøndby Middelalderlandsby, Denmark, 2017-02-11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 19:19, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brøndby Strand Church, Denmark, 2017-02-11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Basotxerri 19:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Agger Kirke, Thisted Kommune, Denmark, 2015-07-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 --Halavar 18:59, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

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:
Vandtårnet på Randersvej - The water tower on Randersvej, Aarhus, Denmark..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Palads, Copenhagen, 2017-02-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 23:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View of Brøndby Strandpark with hooded crow in tree.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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) 05:12, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! House at Marina Boulevard, San Francisco.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 17:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Farm and fields on Nekselø, Denmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

Comments
Good quality. --Berthold Werner 18:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Molbechs Hus, Sorø Akademi, Danmark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 13:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Science Competition 2017 has startedEdit

 
Hi, "Wiki Science Competition" 2017 has started

This year is a world event.
The upload phase in many European countries ends on November 30th.
Here you can find more details in many languages.

This is a manually inserted message for the uploaders of the 2015 edition.

  #WSC2017 #WikiScience #WikiScience2017

  Wiki Science Competition

--Alexmar983 (talk) 06:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Arentsminde_KirkeEdit

Beethoven9 (talk) 08:09, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Science Competition 2019Edit

Dear uploader of European Science Photo Competition 2015 and Wiki Science Competition 2017, we would like to remind you that Wiki Science Competition 2019 has started in the whole world. It is now completed in Russia (active in May), Ukraine and France (active during November), but it's still open in all the other countries.

If you want to take part where WSC2019 is still open, please consult this page. Only some national categories are associated to competitions with local prizes.

If you are an expert user, please consider that images uploaded within the deadline can be included in any case in their national category even if not uploaded with the main interface.

Please keep in mind that there is a new category this year, i.e. "nature and wildlife".

If you already took part in a country that has completed its upload phase, please consider improving the description in English of your files (click on the edit button), since such description is what the international jury will use to evaluate them. World finalists will be finalized after March 2020.

Sorry for bothering you and have a nice wiki.


Message discussed here. If you do not want to receive these messages in the future, please unsuscribe from this list


Social media:   Science&Wiki   Science&Wiki   Wiki Science Competition
Hashtag: #WSC2019 #WikiScience #WikiScience2019


Alexmar983 (promotion team and academic committee) using MediaWiki message delivery--21:32, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alcatraz Island with sailboat.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tuxyso 19:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! The Embarcadero, San Francisco.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 17:52, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletionEdit

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

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

Affected:

And also:

I believe there is a copyright problem with files containing the lyrics to the song "tre små kinesere". Please see the deletion request, and you are very welcome to comment there. Yours sincerely, Peter Alberti (talk) 12:02, 30 July 2020 (UTC)