User talk:Spurzem/Archive 30

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:
Cemetery cross in Waldorf (Rhineland-Palatinate) from 1705.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:29, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 18 April 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:
So called Läufkreuz in Andernach with corpus from 14th century.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Best lighting. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Earth 2022 - Deutschland

Hallo Spurzem,

bald ist es soweit: Vom 1. Mai bis zum 31. Mai 2022 findet zum zehnten Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Earth statt. Deutschland ist bereits zum neunten Mal dabei. Dabei können unter anderem Nationalparks, Naturschutzgebiete, Geotope und Naturdenkmäler fotografiert und die Fotos hochgeladen werden. Du hast an einem der vergangenen Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen. Deshalb laden wir dich ein, auch dieses Jahr wieder mitzumachen. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos!

• Sieger WLE 2021 – Landschaft
• 
  Halde Jägersfreude
• 
  Naturschutzgebiet Wacholderhänge bei Wallersberg
• 
  Landschaftsschutzgebiet Heseler Wald und Umgebung

• Sieger WLE 2021 – Detail
• 
  Schneebedeckte Pappel-Schüpplinge im FFH-Gebiet Regnitz, Stocksee und Sandgebiete von Neuses bis Hallstadt
• 
  Blüten des Gamander-Ehrenpreis im Naturpark Taunus
• 
  Striegeliger Schichtpilz im Bruderwald in Bamberg

Seit dem vergangenen Jahr ist der Wettbewerb zweigeteilt, das heißt wir unterscheiden zwischen den beiden Bereichen Landschaft und Detail/Makro. Zu Landschaft zählen auch geschützte Einzelbäume. Im Bereich Detail/Makro werden Pflanzen, Tiere und Pilze bewertet.

Es sind wie immer viele spannende Motive überall in Deutschland zu finden. Neben Naturdenkmälern wie alten Bäumen oder Naturparks im Gebirge und am Meer können Geotope wie Findlinge, Quellen und Aufschlüsse oder FFH-Gebiete fotografiert werden, um sie unter anderem in der Wikipedia zu dokumentieren. Auch im vergangenen Jahr sind zahlreiche neue Listen und Artikel in diesen Bereichen entstanden, für die wir uns über Fotos freuen - zum Beispiel in Bayern Liste der Naturdenkmäler im Landkreis Würzburg oder in Sachsen Liste der Naturdenkmale in Stollberg/Erzgeb.

Als Einstieg für die Suche nach Motiven hilft diese Übersichtsseite. Weitere Informationen erhältst du bei WLE 2022 – Deutschland und unter dieser Anleitung.

In diesem Jahr feiert die FFH-Richtlinie ihren 30. Geburtstag. Aus diesem Grund vergeben wir fünf Sonderpreise für die Fotografen, die die meisten FFH-Gebiete fotografieren.

Außerdem laden wir Dich ein, vom 1. Mai bis 30. Juni 2022 an der Vorjury teilzunehmen. Damit bewertest du die hochgeladenen Bilder und ermittelst so gemeinsam mit der Jury, die im Juli tagen wird, die Sieger von Wiki Loves Earth 2022 in Deutschland. Das Vorjurytool ist bald hier freigeschaltet. Du benötigst dafür nur deinen Benutzernamen und das Passwort.

Für Fragen steht das Organisationsteam gerne auf der Support-Seite zur Verfügung.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg beim Fotowettbewerb wünscht dir im Namen des Organisationsteams --Z ^thomas 12:07, 20 April 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:
Painting of Christ True vine from 1717 in St. Georg (Urmitz), unknown artist.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 20 April 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:
Cultural heritage monuments in Mülheim-Kärlich: votive cross from 1702.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:45, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

File:BMW-M1 Piquet 1980-05-24.jpg

Stark, dass du dich noch um deine alten Schätze kümmerst. Bei der letzten Version ist ganz links am Rand eine schmale, helle Stelle zum Vorschein gekommen. Meinst du, du könntest die noch evtl. wegstempeln? --Smial (talk) 21:47, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Lieber Smial, es freut mich, nach längerer Zeit von Dir zu hören. Danke für den Hinweis; da kann ich bestimmt noch was verbessern. Herzliche Grüße -- Spurzem (talk) 08:00, 22 April 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:
Detail of Joseph-Görres-Denkmal in Koblenz, 1928 by Richard Langer, view from northeast.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:39, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 23 April 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 Apollinariskirche (Remagen): crypt with sarcophagus from the 14th century.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope and used. --Tagooty (talk) 13:46, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
  
•  Oppose Scope is too wordy and descriptive to meet the COM:VIS requirement that at VI nomination represent “a generic field or category within which your image is the most valuable example”. The image does not show the interior nave of the church; it shows the crypt. And there are several religious elements in this crypt of which the sarcophagus is just one, and not particularly well seen. A scope closer to "Crypt of Apollinariskirche (Remagen)" might work here for a VI nomination. --GRDN711 (talk) 05:50, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Scope OK for me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
• @GRDN711: Your hair-splitting and vicious criticism disgusts me. You act like you're the boss here and the only one who knows what's right and what's wrong. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:49, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
  
•  Comment Spurzem – please assume good faith. I would like to support a VI rating for your image nomination. It just requires a small modification of the scope so that it is in keeping with COM:VIS requirements that a scope be not overly descriptive but "defines a generic field or category within which your image is the most valuable example.”
  

As listed above, the scope of your image is not the interior nave of the church; it does not really show the sarcophagus well; it cannot represent the entire 14th century.

The image is of good quality. The scope link is fine. My scope suggestion was "Crypt of Apollinariskirche (Remagen)" but if you have something else that is short, sweet and represents a generic field or category, that might work too. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 12:28, 23 April 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:
Sebastian-Kneipp-Museum Wörishofen: original of the Madonna and Child from Sebastian Kneipp's "Wandelhalle" from 1890.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 23 April 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:
Detail of side altar in Statues of St. Potentinus (Wehr): saint Norbert of Xanten fighting with Tanchelm, Statue by Michael Pirosson (1645–1724).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:54, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 12:31, 23 April 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:
Statues of St. Potentinus (Wehr): saint Potentinus, Statue of the 15th century.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:59, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 12:31, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 24 April 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:
Sculptures of Klosterkirche Wörishofen: Antoninus of Florence, early 18th century.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:24, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:45, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Gare (Mutzig).jpg & File:20220425070734!Gare (Mutzig) bearb Sp.jpg

Hello, thank you for your edit. With perspective correction and cutting, the lamp can no longer be seen. I did this on the original file. no need to duplicate the file, if necessary you can modify my image directly. Gzen92 ^[discuter] 13:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

File:20220425070734!Gare (Mutzig) bearb Sp.jpg

File:20220425070734!Gare (Mutzig) bearb Sp.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!

Gzen92 ^[discuter] 13:06, 26 April 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:
Max von Schenkendorf-Denkmal in Koblenz, total view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:48, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 27 April 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:
Locomotive E 40 128 of Deutsche Bundesbahn, front and left side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:09, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:54, 27 April 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:
Bad Wörishofen train station with DB 642 series railcar.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:36, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:33, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment I'd support but the scope linked to a particular train type seems much too narrow. Shouldn't the scope be "Bad Wörishofen train station - railway side"? --ELEKHH^T 08:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 27 April 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:
Porsche 910 driven by Sepp Greger at 1000 km Nürburgring 1972 (50° 19′ 56,94″ N, 6° 56′ 34,05″ O).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Can you add geocode info to image? --GRDN711 (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Okay, GRDN711, I will do it tomorrow. But if I had mentioned the geo code, you would surely say that it is not necessary for this picture. In any case, you show who is the master here. -- Spurzem (talk) 20:11, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Assume good intentions, Spurzem. Per COM:VICR (5), geo-coding is expected in general and supports your sub-scope which mentions a location. It is just a good thing to do and I usually see it on your race images. --GRDN711 (talk) 21:55, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:33, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 28 April 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:
Bergkapelle Kärlich, view from northeast.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope, useful. --Domob (talk) 16:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 30 April 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:
Cultural heritage monuments in Mülheim-Kärlich, half-timbered house at Kolpingplatz, 17th century, view from west.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Useful, so I'll certainly support, but maybe we could tweak the phrasing just a bit. I'd say if this house has a name, we should include it, and otherwise, I think we can call it "17th-century house" or something similar. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: I added that the image shows a house. It has no official name, but the locals say "Marie mach Platz"; that's a joke and meant the owner should give his old house to pull it down for building a new one. But he did not and so we have the beautiful old building. -- Spurzem (talk) 07:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

•  Support I like the scope (and the building). Thanks. Useful. -- Ikan Kekek ( talk) 21:24, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

•  Support Good image and funny local color background. --Palauenc05 ( talk) 08:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:43, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 1 May 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:
Opel Blitz fire engine (built from 1952 to 1960) in motion, front and left side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Oppose Overall a good image and valuable but per COM:VIS, "in motion" is overly descriptive and is not relevant as a sub-scope. The rest of the scope, making the claim that this is the most valued image of this model of Opel Blitz fire engine model, built from 1952 to 1960, with a further front and left side sub-scope, is fine. --GRDN711 (talk) 14:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

•  Support I have given some further thought to this and will support the nomination with the current scope given that the "view" and being "in motion" correspond to elements “visible in the nominated image” per COM:VIS.

I still think having an automotive scope of model and year with two further sub-scopes is one too many. Further, that overly descriptive scopes or layered sub-scopes do not add value to the nomination, nor do they guarantee longevity of the VI rating in the future. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@GRDN711: That's enough! I'm sick of your harassment! I believed that a harmonious coexistence would gradually develop. But that was a mistake.-- Spurzem (talk) 06:30, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

 Comment Spurzem While this one IMHO, was close to the edge of overly descriptive to give me pause, your recent choice of VI scopes has improved considerably. --GRDN711 (talk) 18:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@GRDN711: Thank you, teacher. Like I said above, it is enough. But nevertheless I have included an image again, although it would probably make more sense to save myself the hassle in the short lifetime I have ahead of me. -- Spurzem (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope "In motion" is acceptable and has been a valid criterion many times before. --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Ok for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 3 May 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:
Iveco Magirus EuroFire LF 8/6, built in 2000, front and right side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:26, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 4 May 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:
DKW SS 350 from 1939 at Nürburgring, driven by Christian Krackowizer in 1977.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Trier, St. Paulin - innen, Chorschranke (2012-05-20 Sp).jpg

Copyright status: File:Trier, St. Paulin - innen, Chorschranke (2012-05-20 Sp).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Trier, St. Paulin - innen, Chorschranke (2012-05-20 Sp).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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hallo Bot, ich weiß nicht, ob ich hier jemanden ansprechen kann, und das sogar auf Deutsch. Ich habe in den letzten 15 Jahren Hunderte, wenn nicht gar schon Tausende Bilder hochgeladen – meist von guter Qualität und/oder historischem Wert – und sollte namentlich bekannt sein. Dass ich nun einmal durch irgendein Missgeschick die Lizenz nicht eingetragen hatte, ist ein Fehler, der nicht vorkommen sollte. Allerdings hätte ich in Anbetracht meiner langjährigen Mitarbeit erwartet, auf freundlichere Art darauf hingewiesen zu werden. Aber wenn Ihr meint, gleich löschen zu müssen, tut, was Ihr nicht unterlassen könnt. Gruß -- Spurzem (talk) 17:30, 6 May 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:
Niches of the former beehives in the garden of parish church St. Potentinus (Wehr).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 21:59, 6 May 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:
Passage from the church tower to the Propstei (Wehr) from 1730.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 6 May 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:
Propstei (Wehr), built in 1730, southwest side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 6 May 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:
Propstei (Wehr), built in 1730, northwest side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Tony Brooks at the Cuban Grand Prix.jpg

File:Tony Brooks at the Cuban Grand Prix.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!

Halmyre (talk) 10:07, 8 May 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:
Cultural heritage monuments in Mülheim-Kärlich: votive cross from 1722.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 9 May 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:
Part of the Schlossplatz (palace square) in Mülheim-Kärlich with a historical column by Paul Milles.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope *  Commentas the focus of the frame is on "Historienstein" and not much to see of 'Schlossplatz' at least for someone who is not familiar with the area it may be worth to crop the image e.g. to a 1:1 format to emphasize the main feature. --Virtual-Pano (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Virtual-Pano: Thank you for your vote. Your suggestion is well intentioned, but then the objection would immediately come from elsewhere that we already have a picture of the historical stone from 36 years ago at its first location. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 14:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 10 May 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:
Cockpit of Austin-Healy Mk 4, built from 1989 to 2000.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Perfect image,  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment I thought "cockpit" was used only for planes, with "driver's seat" (British: driving seat) and "dashboard" (for the instrumentation panel) being used for cars, but I'm not an expert. Am I wrong? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 11 May 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:
Main statue on the Petrusbrunnen in Trier, view from southwest.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 16:08, 11 May 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:
Detail of the portal from 1732 of St. Gangolf in Trier with statue of the saint.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 11 May 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:
Opel Grand-Prix-Rennwagen, built in 1913, front and left side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 16:07, 11 May 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:
Buildings in Liebfrauenstraße (Trier): archway from 1909/10 with Sculptures of Crucifixion group.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 12 May 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:
Gothic statue of virgin Mary in St.-Martins-Kirche, Oberwesel, about 1450.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 14 May 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:
Evangelist Luke, sculpture at the choir screene in the Liebfrauenkirche Oberwesel,.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 14 May 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:
Detail of the choir screene in the Liebfrauenkirche in Oberwesel with statues of the evangelists Luke and John.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 12:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 15 May 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:
Immaculata, baroque statue in St. Irminen (Trier), unknown artist, probably late 18th century.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. --Virtual-Pano (talk) 20:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment Nice picture. I feel like "Baroque" should be capitalized, though, because "baroque" as a lowercase word can have a different meaning. This is a minor point, of course, but if no-one disagrees, I will make that change. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:01, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello Ikan Kekek, I don't understand the point, but if you think the change is useful, I don't mind. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 12:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

This dictionary definition (particularly definition 2) will explain my thinking, but I note that they don't suggest capitalizing "baroque" as an adjective, so I'll leave this alone. Thanks! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chancel

Trier, St. Paulin - innen, Chorschranke (2012-05-20 Sp)

Archaeodontosaurus closed the nomination for this image before I had time for further comment. MVR would be a logical place if competing with current VI image with scope - "Interior of St. Paulin (Trier)". Another option is a sub-scope that is sufficiently different and given that your image is just the front of the church, one suggestion is to renominate your image with scope - “Interior of St. Paulin (Trier) – chancel”. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@GRDN711: Be glad that the nomination ended. You won; congratulations! And I know the photo is worthless because you didn't like the description. I don't know if you get satisfaction from beating someone else up or why you do it. -- Spurzem (talk) 20:42, 16 May 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:
Timber framed house in Hauptstraße 128, Sinzig-Bad Bodendorf, view from southeast.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 17 May 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:
Volkswagen Polo V, special model Allstar from 2016, rear and left side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 18 May 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:
Dreifaltigkeitskapelle Kärlich, view from southeast.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:18, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:25, 19 May 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:
Walpotplatz (Walpot square), town hall and church tower from St. Martin in Bassenheim, view from northwest.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 10:36, 19 May 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:
Cultural heritage monuments in Bassenheim: rectory on Walpotplatz, built around 1780, view from the east.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 20 May 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:
Coffee cup, Indian blue by Porzellanfabrik Johann Kronester.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful. Google translates Kaffeebecher to "coffee mug," but this simply looks like a cup to me. Either way, I suggest simplifying the scope somewhat (in other words, choose "Coffee cup" or "Mug"; don't use both) and will then be happy to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done. @Ikan Kekek: Good now? Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 13:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

•  Support Yes, thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 21 May 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:
Alfa Romeo 2000 (1971), front and left side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --GRDN711 (talk) 19:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)