User talk:Chainwit./Archive 1

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Chainwit.!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 04:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:TCDC logo Thailand.jpg

Copyright status: File:TCDC logo Thailand.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:St Louis Hospital Bangkok Logo.jpg

Copyright status: File:St Louis Hospital Bangkok Logo.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

File:คุณไข่มุกด์-ชูโต.jpg

File:คุณไข่มุกด์-ชูโต.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.facebook.com/494806147299340/photos/pcb.1318771071569506/1318770984902848/?type=3&theater Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:56, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Ahimsa Jainism PNG.png

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

大诺史 (talk) 15:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Waheguru.jpg

Re. File:Waheguru.jpg that you have uploaded, I hope you realise that it has a spelling error. I have deleted it from all articles. — kashmīrī 10:56, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Kashmiri: Oh, thanks! But I'm not sure what that spelling error you mentioned is, could you specifically tell me? I'm just an amateur enthusiast in Indian culture, I might get something wrong. It would be great that you let know and I could fix it respectively. 😓 Thank you for your kindness! 😁

Jain Prateek Chihna

Hi. Thank You for SVG version. There is a issue with font at the bottom. The half-alphabets are not rendered properly. Compare it to 6 January version or File:Jain Prateek Chihna.jpg. Please fix it. Regards,-Nizil Shah (talk) 14:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Source for File:Joachim Grassi โจอาคิม แกรซี 02.jpg

Hi. Thanks for uploading the portrait of Joachim Grassi. Since it's a photo of a photo, could you please provide detail on the original source of the image? --Paul_012 (talk) 11:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Kiyoshi Kimura Sushi Zanmai cropped.jpg

And also:

• File:Kiyoshi Kimura Statue at Sushi Zanmai Dotonbori 02.jpg

Yours sincerely, Patrick Rogel (talk) 10:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:ศาสตราจารย์เกียรติคุณ นายแพทย์ ประเวศ วะสี.jpg

Paul_012 (talk) 17:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Shangri-la Hotel Bangkok 2019.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 imo. --ArildV 09:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sri Maha Mariamman Koyil Bangkok (Wat Khaek Silom) 2019 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --MB-one 13:14, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wat Udom Thani วัดอุดมธานี นครนายก 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --MB-one 13:21, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Please do not remove problem tags

---

Hi! It has come to my attention that you have removed a warning which says that a file doesn't have enough information about the source or license conditions. Nevertheless, it seems to me that this information is still missing and I have restored the tag. You may either add the required information or, if you think that required information is already given, put the image up for a deletion request so that it won't automatically be deleted. Thank you.

File:Sirindhorn.jpg--Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:04, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

If you have a source please add it on the Source field in the file description page. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:05, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@Patrick Rogel: That was my false, I am pretty new to this. Thank you for your kind advice. ❤️

—Chainwit. (talk) 16:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Licensing tutorial

สวัสดีครับ ผมได้เห็น File:Licensing tutorial th.jpg ซึ่งเข้าใจว่าเป็นโปสเตอร์ที่คุณ Chainwit. สร้างขึ้นหลังจากการสอบถามที่หน้าคุยของผมในวิกิพีเดียภาษาไทย แต่ขณะนี้ยังไม่แสดงผลใน Special:UploadWizard เท่าที่ตรวจในภาษาอื่น คาดว่าอาจเป็นเพราะทางหน้าดึงโปสเตอร์ที่ใช้นามสกุล SVG จึงแนะนำให้คุณ Chainwit. อัปโหลดโปสเตอร์อีกไฟล์หนึ่งโดยใช้นามสกุล SVG (File:Licensing tutorial th.svg) เผื่อจะสามารถแสดงผลได้ครับ --Geonuch (talk) 10:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

ชิ้นนี้ผมใช้แอพชื่อ Vectornator ทำในไอแพดน่ะครับ ซึ่งคอมมอนส์ไม่ให้อัปโหลดไฟล์ตระกูล .svg ที่ส่งออกจากแอพนี้ (ขึ้นคำเตือนว่า This SVG file contains an illegal namespace "http://vectornator.io".) แล้วพอผมลองไปแก้ใน txt ของมันโดยลบคำว่า vectornator ออกทั้งหมด ก็จะเป็นว่าไฟล์ไม่แสดงผลแทนน่ะครับ เดาว่าเดี๋ยวผมน่าจะต้องหาเวลาไปทำในคอมแล้วอัปใหม่อีกรอบนึงครับ ขอบคุณมาก ๆ นะครับ —Chainwit. (talk) 12:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

ถ้าทำผ่านคอมไม่น่ามีปัญหาอะไร เพราะวันสองวันก่อนหน้านี้ผมอัปโหลดไฟล์ SVG ได้ตามปกติ ไว้สะดวกเมื่อไรค่อยทำก็ได้ ในทางกลับกันต้องขอขอบคุณคุณ Chainwit. ที่ให้ความช่วยเหลือผู้ใช้ด้วยซ้ำไปครับ --Geonuch (talk) 12:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wat Suan Phlu Gingerbread House Monk Cells 2020 January วัดสวนพลู หมู่กุฏิขนมปังขิง 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --MB-one 14:43, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haroon Mosque มัสยิดฮารูณ May8 2020.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Podzemnik 21:22, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

File:2556 นายแพทย์ประดิษฐ สินธวณรงค์.jpg

File:2556 นายแพทย์ประดิษฐ สินธวณรงค์.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: The licence provided is not applicable, and the source website clearly says "Copyright 2016 Department of Health " Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Bitterschoko (talk) 16:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Seal of Bang Kapi District (Bangkok).jpg

And also:

• File:Seal of Bang Na District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Bang Rak District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Bangkok Yai District (Bangkok) 07.png
• File:Seal of Chatuchak District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Chom Thong District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Din Daeng District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of District Phra Nakhon (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of District Pom Prap Sattru Phai (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Don Mueang District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Dusit District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Khan Na Yao District (Bangkok) 01.jpg
• File:Seal of Khlong Sam Wa District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Khlong San District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Khlong Toei District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Lat Krabang District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Pathum Wan District (Bangkok).gif
• File:Seal of Phaya Thai District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Phra Khanong District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Prawet District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Ratchathewi District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Samphanthawong District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Saphan Sung District (Bangkok).png
• File:Seal of Sathon District (Bangkok) 01.png
• File:Seal of Thawi Watthana District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Thon Buri District (Bangkok).jpg
• File:Seal of Thung Khru District (Bangkok) 07.png
• File:Seal of Watthana District (Bangkok).png Paul_012 (talk) 14:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

File:อาจารย์ อิทธิพล ตั้งโฉลก.jpg

File:อาจารย์ อิทธิพล ตั้งโฉลก.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in :Category:Dinhin Rakpong-Asoke Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Paul 012.

And also:

• File:อาจารย์ ถวัลย์ ดัชนี.jpg ( Nominator : Paul 012 - Reason : Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in :Category:Dinhin Rakpong-Asoke )
• File:อาจารย์ ระพี สาคริก - 39716797804.jpg ( Nominator : Paul 012 - Reason : Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in :Category:Dinhin Rakpong-Asoke )
• File:อาจินต์ ปัญจพรรค์.jpg ( Nominator : Paul 012 - Reason : Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in :Category:Dinhin Rakpong-Asoke )
• File:Fua Haripitak.jpg ( Nominator : Paul 012 - Reason : Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in :Category:Dinhin Rakpong-Asoke )
• File:Sane Chamarik.jpg ( Nominator : Paul 012 - Reason : Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in :Category:Dinhin Rakpong-Asoke )

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 10:10, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! อนุสรณ์สถาน 14 ตุลา ถ่ายเมื่อกันยายน 2563 14 October 1973 Memorial 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 01:42, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chinese looking buildings in Yaowarat 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --KaiBorgeest 21:41, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ถนนอโศกมนตรี ( สุขุมวิท 21 ) Asok Montri Road (aka Sukhumwit 21 Alley).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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) 05:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sala Daeng BTS Station - Si Lom MRT Station Connection 2021.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --George Chernilevsky 05:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! วัดพระมหาไถ่ April2021 Holy Redeemer Church Bangkok 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 building and good enough quality. -- Ikan Kekek 22:59, 17 May 2021 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --PsamatheM 22:41, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! วัดพระมหาไถ่ April2021 Holy Redeemer Church Bangkok 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 building and good enough quality. -- Ikan Kekek 22:59, 17 May 2021 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --PsamatheM 22:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
MahaNakhon, Bangkok.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I will support this per "reason" above, but "the second tallest skyscraper in Bangkok" is explanatory, not part of the scope, and subject to change (and we don't want to need to change the scope whenever it becomes the third-tallest skyscraper in Bangkok). Also, the name is spelled MahaNakhon at the category, so should we not go with that spelling? would "MahaNakhon Building, Bangkok" make sense as a scope? I don't know Thai, so I don't know what if anything MahaNakhon means in Thai, though I suppose "maha" means "big" and comes from Sanskrit, and I know that Nakhon Si Thammarat is a translation of Negara Sri Dharma Raja, so based on my knowledge of Malay, I suppose Nakhon means "country" or "state". If that's the case, "MahaNakhon Building" wouldn't be a redundant phrase. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Info Most people just call it MahaNakhon, although the current official name is King Power MahaNakhon. I would support "MahaNakhon, Bangkok" as the scope. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:34, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I'd be fine with that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• Chainwit., would you like to change the scope according to this request or would you like to discuss the scope? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Done Chainwit. (talk) 06:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2021May สถานีเซนต์หลุยส์ Saint Louis Station BTS 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Imehling 15:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:เทศบาลตำบลป่าแงะ จังหวัดเชียงราย.jpg

Paul_012 (talk) 15:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Iconsiam, Bangkok.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Nice photo. I hate the buildings themselves though, they look terrible for being Thailand's tallest. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 23:55, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 3 September 2021 (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:
Sathorn Unique Tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Should the scope mention that it is unfinished? That way if it's ever finished, the main scope can be for the completed building. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 23:56, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Kestreltail: Construction has been permanently ceded as a legal result since early 2000s. It is also put in a perpetual cycle of not being able to continue construction and not being to get destroyed (legal stuffs). So, I think it will last in this form unless demolished. --Chainwit. (talk) 19:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

• Okay,  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 3 September 2021 (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:
Main Building of Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment look at the modification of the scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Kanchanaburi montages.jpg

Paul_012 (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Ubosot of Wat Hong Rattanaram.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support I agree. Seems most useful in that respect, though perhaps someone may object to the perspective. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! อนุสาวรีย์ทหารอาสาสงครามโลกครั้งที่ 1 Bangkok Thai WWI Monument to The Expeditionary Force 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 14:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! สะพานหก Saphan Hok Bridge (October 2021) - img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 14:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! อนุสาวรีย์หมู (สหชาติ) - Pig Monument, Bangkok (October 2021) - img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Steindy 14:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! สะพานปีกุน - Pi Kun Bridge (October 2021) - img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ercé 07:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

File: Waheguru.jpg - spelling error . It should be ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ . Please correct

File: Waheguru.jpg - spelling error . It should be ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ . Please correct 2405:201:5009:3162:D8F7:712F:9009:2C9B 23:46, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

File: Waheguru.jpg

Please correct spellings. It should be ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ 2405:201:5009:3162:D8F7:712F:9009:2C9B 23:49, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Avalokiteshvara of Chaiya statue.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:59, 1 January 2022 (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:
Facade of Wat Bhoman Khunaram Temple.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support OK now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:59, 1 January 2022 (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:
Nakhon Lampang railway station.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chiang Rai Wat Chet Yot วัดเจ็ดยอด เชียงราย (October 2021) - Ubosot อุโบสถ.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 22:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Southwestern facade of Wat Phra That Doi Wao Chedi.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It would be good to add to the scope: the orientation of the shot. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus:  Done Done --Chainwit. (talk) 17:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 17 February 2022 (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:
Apple Central World (at night).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, but I'd take "at night" out of parentheses to leave room for a "by day" scope when there's a good image for it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 17 February 2022 (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:
Western facade of the Rosewood Bangkok.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It would be good to add to the scope: the orientation of the shot.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus:  Done done --Chainwit. (talk) 17:35, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:38, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Interior of the main cave of Wat Tham Phra, Chiang Rai.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It would be good to add to the scope: view of the sanctuary. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Kahoot in a classroom.jpg

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

Aasim (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daido Life Osaka Head Office Building, Osaka (Jan 2020).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mike Peel 06:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oriental Building, KL (2022-05) - img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 09:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Waterfront facade of Nativity of Our Lady Cathedral, Samut Songkhram Province.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:24, 9 June 2022 (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:
Southern facade of National Museum Malaysia.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Minami-za Theatre, Kyoto (Jan 2020).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 10:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Medan Pasar (2022-05).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me. --C messier 13:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gopuram door panels of Sri Mahamariamman Koyil Bangkok.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ermell 21:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wat Bhodijñāna Phitsanulok วัดโพธิญาณ พิษณุโลก - IMG 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ezarate 21:20, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chedi Yot Duan, Khao Samo Khleang เจดีย์ยอดด้วน เขาสมอแคลง - IMG 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ezarate 21:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galta Ji Mandir (14-07-2022) img 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --MB-one 19:00, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chhavi Niwas, City Palace Jaipur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jmh2o 18:23, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hawa Mahal east facade (14-07-2022).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. -- Ikan Kekek 02:31, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galta Ji Mandir (14-07-2022) img 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. -- Ikan Kekek 02:32, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patrika Gate Jawahar Circle Jaipur 2022-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --N. Johannes 19:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! East facade Hawa Mahal Jaipur from ground level (July 2022) - img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 10:31, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galta Ji Mandir (14-07-2022) img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 10:31, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jaipur Raj Mandir Cinema 15-07-2022 (img1).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --MB-one 11:34, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Riddhi-Siddhi Pol, City Palace Jaipur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 06:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galta Ji Mandir (14-07-2022) img 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 06:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rambagh Palace hotel Jaipur lobby courtyard.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mike Peel 17:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wat Chedi Yot Thong วัดเจดีย์ยอดทอง (March 2022) - IMG 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 06:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Leheriya Gate, City Palace Jaipur 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 19:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! City Palace Jaipur "Peacock Gate" 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tagooty 03:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wat Amphawan Chetiyaram (2022-06) - img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Kritzolina 19:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)