User talk:Poco a poco/2012-02

Archives 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

File:Roman Catholic church of Shepherds Field Chapel, Bethlehem, Palestine1.jpg

Hallo, kann es sein, dass dem Foto eine falsche Kategorie zugewiesen wurde? Category:Shepherds Field Chapel, Roman Catholic (Beit Sahour) passt hier wohl nicht? Jedenfalls ist es nicht die Kapelle die ich kenne. --Berthold Werner (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gatehouse Auschwitz II (Birkenau), Poland.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Need perspective correction IMO.--ArildV 22:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Yes, there was some perspective distortion on the right side, is it better now? Poco a poco 22:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC) Ok now IMO.--ArildV 10:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Imagen nueva, archivo viejo

¡Hola! ¿Qué tal vas? Oye, tengo un pequeño problema con una imagen, a lo mejor sabes qué puedo hacer. Primero me equivoqué al poner el nombre de archivo de una foto, pero pedí que lo cambiaran y ya está. Lo que pasa es que quería usar el antiguo nombre del archivo para subir una imagen nueva, y no me deja. Cuando trasladaron la primera imagen se convirtió en redirección, pero pedí que la borraran porque también me daba problemas, y ni siquiera así se ha solucionado. ¿Sería una solución si la subiera con un nombre extraño y pudieras luego trasladarla al nombre de archivo correcto? ¡Muchísimas gracias! Kadellar (talk) 20:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Nada, no te preocupes. La solución era dejar de utilizar UploadWizard... Ya me quedo más tranquilo jejeje. Muchas gracias de todas maneras! Kadellar (talk) 20:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Jajaja pues sí que estoy fino. Lo reintento, aunque ya esté solucionado. Subí una imagen como "Enrique Bunbury - 11", pero no era él sino otro músico. Cuando pedí el traslado, el título antiguo quedó como redirección al título correcto (y a la foto) hasta que lo borraron, pero ni así podía usar el título de archivo "Enrique Bunbury - 11" para otra foto distinta. Y la culpa hasta donde yo sé era del Upload Wizard.
Yo también muy liado, pero tirando; me alegro de que tú todo bien ;) ¡Hasta luego! Kadellar (talk) 11:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monumento a Fryderyk Chopin, Parque Łazienki, Varsovia, Polonia3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Kitschy monumento, but good image quality. --NorbertNagel 18:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Sídney-Australia25.JPG

Habe eine neue Version hochgeladen. 2 Hauptprobleme mit deinem Bild/deinen Bearbeitungen: 1) Weißabgleich (erfolgreich korrigiert, glaube ich) 2) Unschärfe: Das originalbild ist recht unscharf, die Bearbeitungen wohl überschärft. Ich habe das Originalbild leicht nachgeschärft. Das Bild ist jetzt etwas schärfer, aber nicht perfekt scharf. Wenn man weiter nachschärft erzeugt das Artefakte und die Bildqualität wird insgesamt nicht besser. Man kann nicht alles nachträglich korrigieren. Vielleicht reicht es für QI. Viel Glück. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 22:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Gertrud,Munich, Alemania1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Chromatic aberration on the roof? --T137 00:46, 8 February 2012 (UTC) Is it better now? Poco a poco 21:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)  Support Now tecnically it's ok IMHO. only a negligible prospective distrosion. --T137 22:52, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barracones en Auschwitz II-Birkenau, Polonia5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and illustrative. --ArildV 10:17, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw, Poland1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 a crop to portrait IMO - left hand side is somewhat overexposed and has random bits of foliage creeping in. Mattbuck 07:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC) I just uploaded a new version with a portrait format. I agree, it looks better Poco a poco 21:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 16:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Münchner Stadtentwässerung Fröttmaning, Múnich, Alemania09.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 21:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Allianz Arena, Múnich, Alemania21.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not perfect, but I like the composition. Please add some information about the the yellow building (church?).--ArildV 11:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC) AnRo002 took care of revealing the name of the church, thanks, Poco a poco 19:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great Sphinx of Giza, Giza, Egypt6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 18:21, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:El Taj Mahal-Agra India0023.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:El Taj Mahal-Agra India0023.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

File:El Taj Mahal-Agra India0023.JPG

Hello, Diego! It is glad that your image has been approved by community and has received an award ;). Los suertes, --Aleks G 10:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oval Forum, Jerash, Jordan4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 20:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Bogus deletion request

These are Greenpeace photos.

It is very clear what Greenpeace's policy is.

[1]

I contacted Greenpeace also, anmd they agreed.

Wallie (talk) 18:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I did get hold of Greenpeace both in NZ and the UK. They are quite frankly annoyed that you are taking sides with Shell, as am I. I guess in the end big business wins. Wallie (talk) 09:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Greenpeace images

I rang Greenpeace and they said that their images can be used for Wikipedia. Their Copyright rules are very clear. How dare someone delete images from Greenpeace based on a bogus copyright agreement which does not even exist!! I am very upset that these images have been deleted for no reason. They are Greenpeace1.jpg and Greenpeace2.jpg. Please restore them and the pages that they were used on. I don't want a debate about this. There is no debate. Thank you.

By the way, Greenpeace will write officially to Wikipedia and inform Wikipedia that can use all Greenpeace images. So I do not expect this sort of treatment again against Greenpeace or me. Wallie (talk) 15:55, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

No. You have already done the damage. You have plenty of supporters too. I guess you don't like Greenpeace activities. Wallie (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

If Greenpeace gets in touch with... Really! You have hurt me so much over this. Wallie (talk) 19:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plaza del Castillo, Varsovia, Polonia6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. (I think so it will be more interesting ;) (the file is updated)). --Aleks G 23:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)