Thegreenj~commonswiki

Welcome to commons Thegreenj. What better way than starting off with a Quality Image promotion could there be? :-) --QICbot 12:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Darkcupid.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maypurpleflower.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flowingtap.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}}}

Image:ChildLabor1910.png

The version you uploaded was too big to display as a PNG or GIF by WikiMedia policy (over 12 megapixels). It would be better to upload a huge version as a JPEG. AnonMoos 09:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Better to upload larger JPEG version under new name ending in ".jpg" ... AnonMoos 16:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eumecesfasciatus.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Viola tricoloryellow.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}}}

Your Edit

I talked to the author about your recent edit to the pink twinged daisy picture. She tells me that the inside of the petals appears pure white, so your changes went a little too far past reality. They appear to have a slightly cool cast, but the end result should still be white petals with pink tips. Just wanted to let you know. -- Ram-Man 17:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Bayo/Newpages CVG Commons

Hello, all image coming on the category « Video games » or a subcategory are listed on this image. Now it exists a lot of category without link with VG (Sony cameras, Image take by Sony camera, handled phones...) I must add a filer on my bot, but will i use an user page, maybe there are no problems, although some images dont have any link with VG. I will work on it soon :) ~ bayo or talk 06:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Compactcassette.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F717.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}}}

Speaking of shadows, you might be interested in something like this. Regards, Ben Aveling 05:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• I actually am doing something somewhat similar. I hold a tissue (yes, a tissue) in front of the camera when shooting with flash. Not the most elegant, but it works. Thegreenj 00:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solebrick.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}}}

Thanks for the critique

Hi Thegreenj. Thank you for commenting on my moody, slight over-exposed flower image. It is highly appreciated. I have replied to your comment on Commons:Photography critiques. Just had a look on your own photos. Very nice photography for a 14 year old! Slaunger 13:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Thank you for your note on my discussion page. It is the first time I've tried to postprocess an image, so I'm glad to hear that you like what I've done. I think you are right about QI. But I think I'll try anyway... Slaunger 01:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know: I have nominated the image for QI a few days ago. It is currently being discussed - however it is the sharpness and not the exposure, which is being debated. -- Slaunger 13:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

QI running total updates

Thanks for the help updating running totals [1], but could you sign&date the change (ie replace the signature of the running total with your own). It makes it easier to check if new votes have been made since the total was entered. Thanks :-) --Tony Wills 12:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stretcherbond2.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stretcherbond.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Masterpadlock.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brickcloseup.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Threeunripetomatoes.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}}}

QI

Look at some QI picture! I think "Feather of a male Indian Peafowl" has a correct detail to QI. This really sharp, and if had more detail this can be not too far from featured. There is some worse guality image. Think again about standards! --Beyond silence 19:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Canon EF 28-105mm F3.5-4.5 II USM.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}}}

Image:Ignition between seats.JPG

I have uploaded an edit with the image rotated 90° CW. Feel free to tell me if I made a mistake. Thegreenj 22:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

You perhaps shouldn't have uploaded it with the same file name (just in case it breaks existing use). I have now uploaded it as Image:Ignition between seats rotated.JPG instead. // Liftarn

I figured that since it was just fixing a minor technical issue (nothing that could be controversial to any extent) it would be easier to upload it under the same name, which means that I don't have to replace it in every wiki usage. By the way, you haven't replaced wikipedia's usage of Image:Ignition between seats.JPG with the rotated version. Should I do so, or would you prefer to keep the original? Thegreenj 15:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess what version of the image to use can be determined on a case by case basis. // Liftarn

I am somewhat confused - what advantage does an image in incorrect orientation hold? Should all instances of the old image not be replaced by the new one? Thegreenj 21:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

What is incorrect is (in this case) a matter of taste. // Liftarn

I really am confused now. I'm just not getting your point of view. I see this in black-and-white, right-and-wrong - there's the real-life orientation and the incorrect one captured by the camera, rather that a matter of taste. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but I really don't see any way a tilted picture is better than a correct one. Perhaps I'm missing something. Thegreenj 23:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Since it a photo from above the orientation is entierly dependent on how you hold the camera. The horizontal orientation is more like the view you get from the driver's seat and the vertical orientation is more like you get from the back seat. // Liftarn

I have to agree with Thegreenj, the sideways view is very confusing the rotated view is how one perceives it when sitting upright in the front or back seats! --Tony Wills 23:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Skeletonkeyhole.jpg

I am very confused about the naming of this image. I understand a skeleton key is basically a lock picking key to open a number of locks, locks are not designed to accept 'skeleton' keys, therefore there is no such thing as a 'skeleton key hole', I think they are correctly called "bit key locks" - a skeleton key is a modified form of bit key designed to avoid the 'wards' in these locks so one key fits many locks. I see a number of websites including wikipedia and some locksmith sites have confusing information about this. --Tony Wills 06:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Review

Sorry but your old review don't standing at the new picture, so I must delete it. Don't feeling bad by it! Thanks for understanding --Beyond silence 04:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wardedlock.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Canon EF 50mm Compact Macro.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}}}

CR

Please when you take voting to Consensual review change it to discuss and take a voting tag to the original review. Thanks --Beyond silence 03:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing the tags. I didn't even notice that it had been closed. Mbz1 is a pain in the ass. Cheers -Fcb981 02:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

QIC Image:Oie_14082.jpg

"Yes, but a panorama's size is made up of "unique" (can't find the right word) but connected areas, somewhat equatable to a large photo, whereas this is 90% the same picture and not at all like a single picture."

But my point is we are not evaluating "photographs" or individual frames, we are evaluating an image as presented. The nomination is a "single image", so points about the framing are relevant, but Lycaons point about 'images to small' is irrelevant (he might have said the image (made up of two frames) lacked detail which would be relevant) :-) --Tony Wills 00:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Image-Canon Rebel XT with 50mm 2.5.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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Canon XT with 28-105.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jeansfabric.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}}}

Signac

Thank you for your help, I had the same feelings, but I couldn't strike the right balance.Could you put your version into the right place, as our common work? Thanks in advance.--Szilas 04:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ceuthophiluscricket.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rearbikegears.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hen chicken.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}}}

Image:Artur Rojek Off Festival p 068 crop.jpg

Thx very much :). On the right (background) is a poster of Off Festival and Artur Rojek is director of that festival. That building in the background is museum of fire-fighting, when this man and his band Myslovitz play concerts (have played) - this is importent place for his biography. But sure it is not "very nice" place, like MTV studio. I've taken photo rather for Wikinews than Wikipedia. Regards. Przykuta 10:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Beating a dead horse

Sorry, not to beat a dead horse, but I finally found what I referenced here at w:Angle of view#calculating a camera's angle of view. I know, it has been two months...

By the way, I really like your Chicago shots on your user page. The glass windows are very cool, pattern-like. Although, are you using much noise reduction? They seem somewhat soft. Thegreenj 02:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the reference on the angle of view. Yes, I did use noise reduction in the Chicago shots because they were too noisy. The result is far from perfect but the local light (or lack of it) is to be blamed... -- Alvesgaspar 10:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: CA and chroma noise

Thank you very much! I have Elements, so I'll try out your technique and let you know if it works. That particular photo was one of my first with that camera and the quality is kind of crappy, but for some reason I've just always liked the composition. So thanks again. -- RedCoat 16:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for a similar alteration to my candidate. I had to compare with the original to see the change but then it was quite obvious. Now I know what to look for I'll see if I can fix the next one myself! --WikiWookie 03:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good! Thegreenj 22:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bicentennial Capitol Mall Park Railroad Trestle.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pylonbolt.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fishingoldhickorydam.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brick pile.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}}}

Thank you

For your comments about my image at QI.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Not a problem. Thegreenj 00:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bicentenial Capitol Mall Park.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}}}

COM:QIC#Pseudorasbora_parva

I have re-opened discussion of both versions, if you and Carol vote the same way we can get one promoted and the other not. --Tony Wills 10:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SelectivelyeditedTricycle.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}}}

There seems to be an error in your {{Thegreenj}} template, an extra "{" perhaps, that results in everything after your userbox being included in that box --Tony Wills 04:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Aagh! I can't find it... oh, well... Thegreenj 19:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh well!? Oh, all is well, I've fixed it :-) (I think :-) --Tony Wills 07:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks. Thegreenj 18:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skull sutures.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}}}

Quality Image Nomination

I was taking a little recess and found myself almost promoting Image:Plastic basketball.jpg based on the description alone :)

It made a little recess into a complete respite (I used a thesaurus in the writing of this user_talk entry -- can you tell?) and I thank you for the authoring! -- carol 03:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nissan maxima.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}}}

3D

Its very simple. Just make 2 pictures for every eye and copy the red channel of the left picture over the red channel of right picture. The only difficulty is the gap when making the pictures which can cause "ghost artefacts" and dont look nice.

Cheers, --Richard Bartz 23:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pink tulip flower.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}}}

-- congrats! carol 10:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Frozen droplet.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Strawberryflowers.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 This is great composition/color that: if it was Super-Realistic painting of still-life, it may would be also value as contemporary art. Nice work. _Fukutaro 08:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dogviolet6.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erigeron annuus profile.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}}}

Lycaon 20:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erigeron annuus thegreenj.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 Sharp, detailed, meets QI requirements, even if I wouldn't vote it FP --LC-de 17:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Japanese maple leaves.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 High quality and very well composed. --AngMoKio 22:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Dupe

Sorry, deleted the right image. CommonsDelinker will replace all the image with the old file name with the right one. Bye, --Filnik^{\b[Rr]ock\b!?} 10:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

EXIF Information

Do you have one of the original images that needs the exif information? -- carol (tomes) 07:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Upload here with a different name, upload here into the old namespace (I didn't touch it other than to put the info in it) or to my web site and you can manage it here completely? -- carol (tomes) 18:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mammothterracetrees.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 Seems OK. EXIF and geocoding would be appreciated.--Nevit 07:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC) EXIF is in a template; I've added geocoding. Thegreenj 14:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC), that homebrew template is a pretty bad idea (introducing non-standard dataformats when an accepted standard already exists always is). the information that is contained cannot be used automatically. --Dschwen 22:51, 8 June 2008 (UTC) I have no way of preserving EXIF; I use an old version of Photoshop that does not support EXIF, plus this was stitched with Canon's Photostitch, which strips EXIF. Thegreenj 01:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC), Stitched?! The image is tiny! What am I missing here? --Dschwen 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC) Uh... downsample... It's 11.2 MP full size. Carol has kindly offered to re-attach EXIF, so it should be on soon. Thegreenj 00:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC) Thats done. -- carol 10:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Libertycap.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 Look nice, but it seems to be digital altered (merging two layers and handcleaned part of one layer). Is it so? #!George Shuklin 14:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC) There are four pictures actually (a 2 by 2 panorama), and the stitching isn't quite perfect, but it's pretty good, IMO. The stitching hasn't been manually altered at all. Thegreenj 20:12, 8 June 2008 (UTC),Acceptable quality, but you should really use a different stitching program, Autostich produces blurry seams, and it shows in the upper vertical seam. It is a bit of a waste of good picture material. --Dschwen 16:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Mammothterracetrees.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Mammothterracetrees.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cat mg 3738.jpg

Thank you for the denoising on Image:Cat mg 3738.jpg! Cheers! Rama (talk) 09:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Review Image:Konya archeological museum - sarcophagus1.jpg

Hi,

I didn't do the cut out myself, but tried to take out the shadow, as you suggested on the quality images review. Can you take a look at the new version ? Thanks. Fabienkhan (talk) 08:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks, that looks better. Thegreenj (talk) 20:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toothpasteonbrush.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}}}

Image:Japanese maple leaves.jp

Hi I have seen your beautiful maple leaves! The really spread an autumn atmosphere. We would love to print them in our Paracelsus magazine. Paracelsus magazine is a product of global cooperation, with people from Europe, North and South America, and India volunteering their time and working without pay. The objective of the magazine is to blend ancient and modern wisdom of medicine and holistic healing. The magazine is published monthly in three different languages: German, Spanish, and English; it is read all on every continent of the world. It reaches physicians, alternative practitioners and ordinary people. Although we sell the magazine, we are a non profit organisation and the printing coasts are hardly covered. Would you be so generous and give us your permission to print this photograph? I We thank you in advance for your consideration and reply and send you our very best wishes. Anna Beutler

Paracelsus.magazine (talk) 20:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

PS: For more information please visit our homepage: www.paracelsus-center.ch

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! American Queen Eads Bridge.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 bit tight crop, but quality good enough for QI. Lycaon 05:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

What kind of toothpaste is on the brush?

Could you please add to File:Toothpasteonbrush.jpg a mention of what kind of toothpaste is being used? I am particularly interested in its fluoride content, but a brand name and type would be fine. I need this info to write a good caption for en:Water fluoridation #Alternative methods; I'd like to say that it's an image of fluoride toothpaste but can't do that with the information given. Eubulides (talk) 09:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info; I updated the description of the photo. Eubulides (talk) 01:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dynastes neptunus f mounted.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 bit of noise in the background but very good details on the main subject --Mbdortmund 10:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Thegreenj~commonswiki!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 03:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Dogviolet5.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Dogviolet.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Image-Pink twinged daisy on table thegreenj.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Impatiens walleriana thegreenj.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Dogviolet2.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Dogviolet4.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Dogviolet3.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Bridge pillars.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Columbia Heights metro station.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

File:EXIF_for_Mammothterracetrees.jpg

File:EXIF_for_Mammothterracetrees.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!

Amada44 (talk) 14:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Template

The template for your camera does not support camera subcategories, please change.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry for the delayed reply. I'm not active on Wiki right now, but if you'd like to change/edit my template in any way, please feel free to modify it (although preferably in a way that won't break the way the template is currently used in my photos). Thegreenj (talk) 20:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Thegreenjsphotostudio.jpg

---

Hello, Thegreenj~commonswiki!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

Honza chodec, earlier known as Slfi (talk) 20:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Ceuthophiluscricket

Dear Green J., My publishing house wishes to use your picture of the cricket for the cover of a collection of poetry. Please let me know if you would grant permission to use the image for such use and under what terms.

You can email me at laurens@cossee.com.

With thanks and best wishes, Laurens Molegraaf Cossee Publishers The Netherlands

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Thegreenj. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Thegreenj~commonswiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

23:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Hotwheelferrari.jpg

File:Hotwheelferrari.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!

Taivo (talk) 21:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

05:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)