RODRIGO TETSUO ARGENTON

+55 11 9 55 55 77 99

rodrigo@foto.wiki.br

instagram.com/rtargenton

Clique aqui para deixar uma mensagem 

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Torre de Belém por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (1).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments
Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 03:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Edifício Altino Arantes por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (5).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

  Support Good quality. --Isiwal 08:20, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mosteiro dos Jerónimos por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (12).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. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 01:37, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Palácio de Monserrate por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (5).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

  Support Detailed, composed well, and well exposed. --Bobulous 20:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Igreja dos Congregados por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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

  Support Good quality. --Ermell 21:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mosteiro dos Jerónimos por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 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. --Chenspec 22:11, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Torre de Belém por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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

A good photo, again, but here it is the opposite: the vertical lines are leaning in (like in /…\), we usually require require them to be vertical for this kind of photos. This is also called ‘perspective correction’. --Aristeas 08:35, 20 November 2019 (UTC) Aristeas, in this case, is a aesthetic choice, making the tower look more important. And I do not see as a problem to not include as QI. --Rodrigo.Argenton 00:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
  Support Good quality. IMHO it is a valid choice not to correct the perspective completely but to keep a little bit of leaning in. --Aristeas 09:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Igreja de São Francisco de Assis (Ouro Preto, MG).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

A good photo, but the vertical lines are leaning out. Probably a bit too much perspective correction. I would suggest to fix that, i.e. get the vertical lines vertical. --Aristeas 19:07, 16 November 2019 (UTC) Aristeas, could pleas check it now? Thank you Rodrigo.Argenton 18:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! But IMHO the vertical lines are still leaning out (a bit). What I mean is that the vertical lines (at the side, espec. at the towers) should be more or less vertical or maybe even leaning in a tiny little bit, but they are still leaning out a little bit like in \…/. No offence, I just want to help. --Aristeas 08:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC) I know that, but, I tried to fix it, however, the sharpness of the main area rapidly decreases. If you want to try edit, pleas feel free, I'm unable to fix, without loosing sharpness. --Rodrigo.Argenton 00:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Well, I have made an attempt to edit your photo. Please check it! If you like it, I am glad, else just revert to the previous version! – Have you got a RAW image file (*.CRW, *CR2 or so) for this photo? If yes, I could edit it with better quality … Best, --Aristeas 09:43, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
  Support So I think it’s OK now. --Aristeas 10:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 06:28, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Torre de Belém por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (6).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

  Support Good quality. --Aristeas 07:21, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ponte de Dom Luís por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (3).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

  Support Good quality. --Steindy 10:34, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Centro Português de Fotografía (6).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

  Oppose The dome window is completely outblown in some areas. In the dark area, no structures are recognizable. --Steindy 09:46, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Steindy, pleas check it now. --Rodrigo.Argenton 22:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  Support Okay now, good quality. --Steindy 00:12, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ateliê Murilo Sá Toledo (8).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. --Cvmontuy 01:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ateliê Murilo Sá Toledo (5).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments

  Support Good quality (considering the difficult – dark – situation). --Aristeas 09:57, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ateliê Murilo Sá Toledo (6).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments
Good quality, but I miss a description -- Spurzem 21:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ateliê Murilo Sá Toledo (7).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Comments
Good quality, but I miss a description of the image -- Spurzem 21:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Padrão dos Descobrimentos por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton.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 21:56, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Igreja Matriz de Sant'ana de Iporanga por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton.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
Really pretty! -- Ikan Kekek 05:10, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Caverna Santana por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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 null --Alexander Leisser 09:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Candelária por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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
Beautiful and good quality -- Spurzem 20:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cine-Theatro Central por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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. -- Ikan Kekek 21:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cine-Theatro Central por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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 scene, plenty of detail, well exposed. Some converging verticals, but I reckon that fits nicely alongside the curves of the gallery. --Bobulous 21:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cine-Theatro Central por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (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
Good quality. --A.Savin 14:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cine-Theatro Central por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (06).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 --Pandakekok9 12:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Spilotes pullatus por Luan Alves Chaves 24 (retouched).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.--Horst J. Meuter 18:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Uma cabra para si!Edit

Uma cabra para si!

Leonardopgentile (talk) 23:20, 1 June 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 20:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Obrigado por ajudar a criar as recomendações do Movimento de Estratégia da Wikimedia 2030Edit

  Wikimedia 2030
Obrigado por fazer parte das conversas da comunidade sobre o Movimento de Estratégia da Wikimedia 2030! Sua participaçãp, opiniões e ideias ajudaram a moldar as recomendações para o futuro do nosso movimento.

--LTeles (WMF) (talk), usando o MassMessage.22:35, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Requesting permissionEdit

Hey Rodrigo.Argenton, Thank you for uploading wonderful pictures. With your permission, I'd like to use your picture(s) on the social media accounts of Wikimedia Commons from time to time. Do you consent to the use of your photo(s) on social media including Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, Vkontakte etc.? If you agree then how would you like to be attributed (username/real name)? You can also add your information yourself on this list if you wish to do so. Thank you. ~ Nahid Talk, Thursday 17:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

NahidSultan, done.
Let me know if you need any help in other social media. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 18:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Rodrigo. I've also added clarification on the list regarding the confusion of the "self taken" ones. Nice catch :) Thank you for managing the fb page and of course need helping hands on the other ones. Let me consult with the WMF's social media team. Best. ~ Nahid Talk 19:04, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Matthias Walkner Action (132319763).jpegEdit

Hi, I don't see in the source page the free license, could you tell me where is it? Bye, Elisardojm (talk) 20:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Elisardojm,
here
500 px removed from their system the creative commons license.
So Wikimedia Commons community decided to do a massive import of creative commons photos from there.
All described here:Commons:500px licensing data, link that I send in the first reversion summary:[1]
If they did not changed the code, you can see for yourself the license inside the page code, the steps are also described at Commons:500px licensing data, if they removed, is better trust on volunteers that made this effort.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 20:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, you're right, I didn't check the links correctly. Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 20:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Study shows Wiki Love Africa recruitment makes a differenceEdit

Hello Rodrigo.Argenton

We are writing because you have participated in the Wiki Loves Africa (WLA) photo competition in the past. Results have been published and winning pictures may be seen here !

This year WLA partnered with the research organization CAT Lab (previously CivilServant) to help us evaluate the effectiveness of one of our recruitment efforts. You may or may not have received a message on your user talk page encouraging you to participate again in this year's competition.

We are excited to share with you their study found our recruitment message was a success and may have resulted in as many as 2,000 additional contributed photos. We hope you agree this is great news for Africa and its representation across Wikimedia. You can read more about the study and the results in this blog post.

If you have any questions about the study, we encourage you to ask CAT Lab's research manager Juliakamin(cs).

Anthere, for the Wiki Loves Africa Team

File:Japanese Iris シャガ (208835599).jpegEdit

 
File:Japanese Iris シャガ (208835599).jpeg 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 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!

Ytoyoda (talk) 12:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

WLEEdit

Hi,it looks you cared about the results, I saw your message on Paulo's talk page. FYI, I have fixed the bottleneck in the process and started the final round yesterday.

Two jurors fully voted, two are probably on the way. I can start to prepare a temporary ranking tonight or tomorrow morning in my sandbox, if you want I can link it to you.

We have no specific limit to the deadline, I have no clue if we got more days. It's 16 potential jurors but we will end when/if necessary. All average above 8 jurors is quite stable and rarely changes too much, especially if there is a clear outliner. Probably if Paulo had voted and we have more than 8 jurors, I think results can be declared at that point. let's hope it will be as fast as possible. bye.--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

current sandbox--Alexmar983 (talk) 12:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC) It's still quite meaningless, we will reach 5 jurors and that's when it will be more clear if there is an outliner.--Alexmar983 (talk) 12:35, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Alexmar983,
Not much the result, as Portugal did not announce on time, seems not possible to participate at the international phase, that is quite a pity, as they are away superior than ours (Brazilians) this year.
And also to announce the winners at the Main Page pt.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 15:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I think they have a delay to give the result. And well, it was possible to be kinda on time even starting on Sept. 1st, IMHO. And after last time we voted twice one round of WLM, I hope someone has learned a valuable lesson... :D--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:37, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, they have more time. So far changes in the ranking are minimal, but there at least 30 files right below 8/10 which can enter the top 10.--Alexmar983 (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
update, the results are getting more and more smooth.--Alexmar983 (talk) 14:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Alexmar983, nice!
I did not even noticed that WLM already start also in Portugal! Crazy!
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 19:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Alcedo atthis - Riserve naturali e aree contigue della fascia fluviale del Po.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Alcedo atthis - Riserve naturali e aree contigue della fascia fluviale del Po.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 28 September 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:48, 1 October 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, DCB (talk) 22:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)