User talk:Dschwen/Archive4

WikiMiniAtlas

I've been adding coordinates for a lot of images and am wondering how the work is proceeding to make the WikiMiniAtlas more up-to-date. I figure the current dump used for the application is from February, and the number of geotagged have increased since (there are now over 5000 images with coordinates). It would be interesting to know if you intend to update it yourself anytime soon, or if the application is to be associated with the Wikimedia servers. A great part of what is making Wikipedia popular is that you can see your edits instantly (if you've contributed to IMDb, for example, it may take weeks before your contributions are published). It gives instant satisfaction and encourages participation, something which is probably holding the geotagging back for the moment. Väsk 21:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently reworking my dump parser and ran into a few problems. I have an idea on how to speed up the update process independent of database dumps (involving javascript sending requests to my server for each edit that introduced or changed a coordinate). Stay tuned. --Dschwen 06:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I will :-) If you are waiting for something good, you can't wait too long. Väsk 12:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I cooked something up. You could help testing it. Check User:Dschwen/Coordinate-Updater for details. Note that the data gathering works, but the updates are not applied to the databases yet (needs more testing). --Dschwen 17:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am happy to help, but I do not know what to do... (and I usually use Wikipedia, so you can contact me at my userpage) Orthodoxi 23:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emden Rathaus.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! CH RHB Landwasser Viadukt.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:Male_tree_weta-orig.jpg cropped

Was the cropped version of the original good enough for QI? A final vote on the consensual review would be appreciated :-) --Tony Wills 01:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks

for fixing the focus thing (on Special:Upload). BTW you should push some more of your works to FPs. this one is awesome! --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

QICbot for consensual review?

Have you got any comments about whether my proposal for consensual review revamp[1] would work for assisting QICbot use for Consensual Review decisions. --Tony Wills 22:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Tram car and QICbot strangeness

Yes, I see the mistake, so tally 1 support, 1 oppose, one more to make a decision.

Here's something else for you to delve into :-), I came across this page User talk:80.39.180.97, apparently created by QICbot. The images appear to have been handled correctly, but the QI promotion on that page doesn't seem to have arrived on the uploaders talk page. I've seen QICBot tripped up by slight formatting changes (like an extra space, or a missing space within the templates), but I haven't had time to analyse what happened here. --Tony Wills 12:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I see that QICbot did copy those images correctly to Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted, and that the QI promotion on the bottom of the page was correct as the bot only had the nominators IP address, but the question remains why the duplicate copy of recently-promoted on that talk page, and has it happened before, will it happen again? :-) --Tony Wills 12:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you point be to the QICbot hick-ups caused by slight formatting changes. That should be easily fixable. --Dschwen 13:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Two examples I was thinking about was where someone had inserted a space before the " /Promotion", QICbot just ignored the promotion. The other was when someone accidentally edited the signature date from "2007 (UTC)" to "2007(UTC)" and the entry was promptly archived (presumably because QICbot parse that as year zero as it couldn't make it out). Have you worked out why QICbot copied the recently promoted entries to that users page (User talk:80.39.180.97)? --Tony Wills 12:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the promoted entries got copied to the userpage because it was empty and some script variable did not get overwritten with the userpage contents and still contained the promoted pictures :-). Fixed. People with empty talk pages now, as a bonus, get a friendly welcome by the bot. Entries without propper timestamps are now marked and kept on the page. --Dschwen 13:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

QI nomination procedure

Yes, sorry, I think I'm going to need explanation on that one... I'm reading again the top of the page also. Benh 17:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

It is in the How to ask for consensual review section just above the first nominations. And you still have to sign your Champs-sur-Marne nomination. This is important for the automatic processing of promotions and declines. Oh, you just did :-), thanks! --Dschwen 17:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Landwasser

I like the new ones a lot better than the one you nominated (in particular Image:CH Landwasser 2.jpg). The colors and lighting are a lot better. --Digon3 19:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Castillo de San Marcos

I have uploaded a new version which fixed the errors and is larger. I couldn't do anything about the soft walls because its a source picture and not a blending error. --Digon3 22:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

In defense of the honour of Porto Covo

I assure you Porto Covo is an exciting place to go. Plenty of sand, sea and sky, and plenty of time to experience the gastronomy and excellent whines of the region (and to practise the “siesta” between the meals). I guess there is also some nocturne life but I’m no longer an expert in that kind of excitement. If you intend to visit Portugal (and Alentejo, in particular, the region of Porto Covo) don’t forget the camera. Alvesgaspar 22:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

As a kid we once went on vacation to the Algarve, beautiful region, great coast (I hope there is no interprovince rivalery :o). I remember taking a trip to Lisboa, so we must have passed through Alentejo. Lost of cork trees, aren't there. Anywho, that city is pretty awesome to and I hope I'll get to go there sometime again (I'll make sure I pass trough Porto Covo). --Dschwen 13:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

QI changes

I've been fighting off edit conflicts with you and Alvesgaspar, give me half a chance and I'll clean up any errors. I will revert my changes if necessary :-) :-)

Whoops. Hehe. I suspected something like that afte looking at the history :-) --Dschwen 11:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahhhh, I think I've tidied up all the problems, thanks for fixing the template box widths. All the broken entries were either caused by references to diffs that contained an "=" in the url (changed to %3D) or my comments containing things like "=>", no one else seemed to do that ;-). I probably should have closed and archived old entries first, but wanted a good variety of reviews to test things (should have done it in a sandbox®  ;-). Let me know if you see other errors (but I'm off to bed so will check in in 8 hours :-) --Tony Wills 12:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! USA Mt Shasta pano CA alt.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}}}

--Tony Wills 21:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! USA Santa Monica Beach and pier CA.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! Berlin Hauptbahnhof pano 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 {{{3}}}

Eric Bana

You write there is considerable chronimance noise on the Eric Bana photo - but not Bana himself, who is the subject of the photo. The lens setting was for him, not passers-by in the background, who don't really count for the purpose of the photo and, if anything, would distract from the subject. --DavidShankbone 17:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bi Sparrenburg pano.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}}}

--Tony Wills 06:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! USA Cape Cod 2 MA.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! H Opera House PDRI.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! Bi Sparrenburg innen wide.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! Rapsfeld 2007.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! CH Furtschellas aerial tram.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! Externsteine pano.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! Goe Aula pano.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! Auditorium Göttingen.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}}}

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Goe Platz der Synagoge Detail 2 noCA.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Goe Platz der Synagoge Detail 2 noCA.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 07:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goe Sternwarte pano.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! HH Alsterarkaden pano1.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! Externsteine pano 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! HH Hygieia-Brunnen.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! Swan portrait.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}}}

Going on discussions

You might want to participate in the discussions going on here and here - Alvesgaspar 14:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

wikiminiatlas

wikiminiatlas on commons seems to be broken, it's causing a request for button_hide.png on the toolserver for very many page views, even pages that don't exist. do you think that could be trimmed down a little? Kate

Do you have the full URL of the button_hide.png requests at hand? I'll look into it. Puzzling it is not broadly activated yet. --Dschwen 16:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[15/May/2007:16:40:05 +0000] "GET /~dschwen/wikiminiatlas/tiles/button_hide.png HTTP/1.1" 200 249 "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Animal_cell_structure.svg"

Kate

I activated it a week ago. ... it's not broken.. but rather it loads the button for any page which is geocoded, not just when you pop it up. I'm changing it now to use a copy on commons. --Gmaxwell 20:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, fixed. It should also be noted that wikiminiatlas wasn't the cause of most of the previous traffic at the toolserver. The cause of most of the loads was my mediaplayer (a fork of the mapping tool) which used the same image. However, it only used the same image for a few minutes after my tool was put live on enwiki (er, resulting in 40k loads in a few minutes.. doh). I fixed the mediaplayer which is why it wasn't blamed for the loads, as the ongoing loads were all wikiminiatlas. --Gmaxwell 20:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, thanks guys. I'll include the recent translations tomorrow. --Dschwen 21:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Rapsfeld 2007.jpg, which was nominated by Thermos at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Rapsfeld 2007.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 09:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Google Earth/geocoding stuff

Hi Dschwen,

I'm planning to write a press release to promote some geocoding/google earth stuff with Commons. I know you've worked on stuff like this lately. Can you help me out? (Commons:Press releases/Wikimedia Commons and Google Earth mashup) cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 10:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Geo microformat in Coor dms

Hi, I have been noticing for a few weeks that some of my image summaries are not displaying correctly—specifically there is a large space after coordinates that was not there previously. For a while I just ignored this, but today I did some tests, and it turns out that it is the addition of the Geo microformat to the {{Coor dms}} template that is causing the problem. You can see an example of what I mean at Image:860-880 Lake Shore Drive.jpg. Is there a way to update this template such that the Geo microformat does not force a large space after the coordinates? Thanks, JeremyA 18:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that I fixed it. I changed 'visibility: hidden' to 'display: none'. Can you verify that the template function is unaffected by this change? Thanks, —JeremyA 21:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

You are completely right, display:none is what I intended. I just mixed up the two CSS properties. Thanks for fixing it. --Dschwen 08:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:CH Landwasser 2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:CH Landwasser 2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 20:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Gimp

Thanks. --Digon3 21:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Camera thoughts

And what do you suggest as a good optic solution for a Nikon D80 or a Canon 400D (I'm painfully discarding the Sony and its excellent anti-shake mechanism because the lens choice is small)? I would like to keep the macro possibility and have a decent telephoto (say, 300 mm in 24-36 format). Any chance of buying a single lens for all this for less than 400 euros? - Alvesgaspar 12:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Short Answer: Forget it. :-). Zoomlenses have to be expensive if you want decent optical performance. The felexibility does have a price. You can get good prime lenses in the 300Eur region though. I cannot comment on Nikon as I'm a Canon user. There seems to be some religious dispute about which ist best on the net ;-). I recently read that Weddin Photographers mainly buy Nikon and Press/Sports Pohotographers mainly buy Canon (completely unsourced, plus I guess that comment holds for the top of the line). Aaaanyways, I agree that discarding Sony is a sensible thing. I'd go for solid experience in optics (you'll get that with either Nikon or Canon). Both have a long tradtion and a big pile of glass to choose from. Both are here to stay (I hope). A lens is a long term investment. I'd treat them like that. You might want to buy a new camera body in 5-10 years, but keep the lens collection you built over those years.

When I got my 5D I bought it as a Kit with a 24-105mm zoom lens. This is a borderline lens. Excellent quality (except at very short focal lengths), reasonably compact, f/4 over the whole zoom range, and IS, but no serious macro capabilities (1:0.23). But that lens cost about 1kEUR! You want even more, 300mm (the 1.6x crop helps, so it would be 200mm for your cameras) AND Macro capabilities. For 400EUR. I'd suggest being patient and getting a medium zoom first, then a macro lens and then a strong telephoto lens. Spread it out over a year or so. You'll be much happier with it. --Dschwen 13:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Should you insist though, you best bet would most likely be the Sigma 18-200mm. But I can only reiterate that it is best to start with a rimited focal length range lens and build up a collection from there! --Dschwen 13:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I now understand that 2 lenses is an absolute minimum: one for macro and the other for zooming and all the rest. Just two more questions: 1. What is the meaning of x1 or x2 when applied to a macro lens? 2. In my "all purpose" lens, to be able to focus at short distance (enter macro mode), we must lock it in one of two possible positions (near the maximum zoom and near the minimum). Why is that, i.e., what is the difference bewteen the macro mode and the normal one? - Alvesgaspar 22:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

The x1 x2 etc. the the the magnification factor determining the size the pictured object will have on the sensor. If you know it, abd you know the sensor size you can estimate what size objects will fill your frame. --Dschwen 04:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Plus Macro lenses have a different lens design than ordinary lenses with the same focal length, optimized for short focus distances. I guess the macro button moves a lens group, altering the basic lens design. Prime macro lenses often have a so called floating lens group which continuously alters the lens design over the whole focus range (allowing to take high quality pictures even at infinity focus), but I guess with zoom lenses that would be way more complicated. --Dschwen 05:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

FP comments

It seems like a comedy of errors to me, but when you wrote that flowers were way overrepresented and that other types of photos were not well represented as featured pictures. So I decided to introduce some other types of images, including those steps that you don't like. Phew. I can't even begin to understand the expectations of this process. I think I'll go back to flowers, as they're easier. (Don't worry, I don't take the FP process personally, despite my tone. I like or hate my work regardless of what others think. I just wish I could make sense of the process....) -- Ram-Man 18:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the diversity and I can assure you that I currently have problems making sense of that process too. My oppose on the steps was not about the genre, and I thought I had made myself clear. Both the flowers and teh stairs are simple no wow pics. Now that doesn't mean that they are crap. Au contraire, quite pleasing to the eye. I just don't think they are among the best on commons. --Dschwen 20:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright, well said. I certainly don't have a problem with high standards. I suppose I don't rely on the "wow factor" quite as much as some people do. Either that or it's just applied differently. I agree that there are plenty of really high quality pictures that will not become FPs. -- Ram-Man 22:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Which incidently I find a bit disheartening. When a shot which I spent at least an hour on, including panorama stitching, is barely commented on, while the three pretty flower noms snapped on a morning walk get tons of raving support votes. Sigh, I guess I'm becoming bitter now :-(. I should have listened to Gregory who keeps telling everybody that FP is a huge waste of time anyways... --Dschwen 05:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. It may be a waste of time, but I enjoy looking at all these pictures. I think it gives me techniques and ideas for my own photography. I discount the totally crazy comments, but there is a lot of useful stuff. But when I get comments like this, I don't know what to say. It's ironic, because I spent a bit of time setting up the shot, making sure the composition was right, and that it had maximum sharpness, but it gets an oppose vote despite being higher quality than many other flower pictures. Many of the shots they do like were taken with barely a consideration. Oh, and I vote on every image, so that's at least 2 votes on every image that I have not nominated. For what its worth. -- Ram-Man 12:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It's images like this that really kill me. 5 support votes, no opposition. It deserved more votes than that. -- Ram-Man 12:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:HH Alsterarkaden pano1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:HH Alsterarkaden pano1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

- Alvesgaspar 22:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

FP promotion

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

- Alvesgaspar 11:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

My contributions

Dschwen, I'm running into an issue with a couple of IP trolls, one in Washington, one in Germany. Since they edit the same pages and say the same things, they are perhaps friends...I don't know. But the Germany IP, User:84.178.254.52, is starting to take all of my portraits and rename them. They have done so with Michael Apted, Patricia Neal, Woody Harrelson, Brett Ratner, et. al. In their Commons descriptions, they mention that they are "removing the self-promotion of the editor." They also aren't giving the required attribution that is stipulated in the licensing. I spent 60-80 hours at Tribeca photographing, uploading and editing these photographs, that to have my work undone by someone with some kind of anti-me agenda is very frustrating and I could use some help. I have also been frustrated with Wikipedia in general lately, and some of the things I have witnessed happening on here, and have contemplated leaving. This kind of effort when I have spent so much time, money and patience to make improvements and provide some of the most difficult images to obtain will seal the deal. I won't even finish the projects I have started. I'm simply getting too burned out. I'm asking for some help. --DavidShankbone 20:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll look into it. The renaming is uncalled for and removing proper attribution is completely unacceptable. --Dschwen 20:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

84.178.254.52 has no edits except the little wig/hair revert. Can you give me some concrete pointers (files which have been renamed and attribution removed)? --Dschwen 20:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

They are editing and Wikistalking my work under this user: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Frauleinwunder --DavidShankbone 21:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you for your help; much appreciated. --DavidShankbone 03:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

coordinates.js

Hey Dschwen, I just imported your nice coordinates-script to no-wp, and as I use it I came up with a feature that would be nice. If when the "Insert as (coord_templatename)" is pressed, the editsummary could be changed (or appended) to "+(coord_templatename)". Great work here on commons, keep it up. :) -- Atluxity 21:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I managed to fix it myself], just thought I'll let you know. -- Atluxity 12:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Clean-up cropped images?

Dschwen, I re-uploaded the images that were cropped by the IP with a strange vendetta against my work, with the correct licensing information under which I originally released the work. Could you please delete these images (parenthesis indicates new uploaded image):

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Cassie_cropped.jpg

• (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Cassie_cropped_by_David_Shankbone.jpg)

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jeffrey_Wright_cropped.jpg

• (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jeffrey_Wright_cropped_by_David_Shankbone.jpg)

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Brett_Ratner_cropped.jpg

• (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Brett_Ratner_cropped_by_David_Shankbone.jpg)

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Woody_Harrelson_cropped.jpg

• (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Woody_Harrelson_cropped_by_David_Shankbone.jpg)

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Michael_Apted_cropped.jpg

• (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Michael_Apted_cropped_by_David_Shankbone.jpg)

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Patricia_Neal_cropped.jpg

• (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Patricia_Neal_cropped_by_David_Shankbone.jpg)

Thank you for your help. I will do all the further clean up work required on the foreign projects. --DavidShankbone 04:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

• Two more things: the attribution thing goes both ways. You'll have to include a note cropped by User:Frauleinwunder (yeah I know, not easy after how it went down ;-) ). And you can help with the deletion. I cannot just delete the pictures, that would be against policy. They'll have to be tagged first. I suggest {{Duplicate}}. But please note that if the correct attribution is added to Frauleinwunders crops there is nothing that would prevent the deletion of your copies either. Tricky situation, but there is no policy that would grant you the right to choose a filename. --Dschwen 08:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I made all the changes. Thanks again for your help. --DavidShankbone 15:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
    • The question also remains as to the Wikistalking of a User (with no original Commons images of their own) against an accomplished editor. It's problematic to adopt the stalker's mentality of, "Thanks for the free images, Sucker!" because if people feel that a personal vendetta against them and their work will be fruitful, they simply won't contribute. Why go through all the hard work? There's a natural progressing of editing and cropping to media I expect. To have one user decide they are going to nix my file names with that intention in mind, as this User has done, brings it to another level. If I am putting 20-40 hours a week into the Commons and Wikipedia to improve the website in ways that, frankly, few people can, then a stalker shouldn't be successful in their stalking. Otherwise, there is little reason for me to be here. --DavidShankbone 20:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
      • I sympathize with you. As of now Frauleinwunder seems to have stopped. Please notify me if the annoying behaviour continues and I have to resort to further measures. --Dschwen 08:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dragonfly 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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parus caeruleus chick.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! Parus caeruleus feeding.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}}}

Have a look at this

This image has undeclared edits all over it. It looks like editing around the left birds head and neck and between the birds heads which suggests that the left bird (or part of it) is inserted from one of the other versions (guesswork) as well as what I have mentioned here. Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cygnus olor flirt.jpg

The counter argument would be that the wave structure is consistent across the alledged seams. This would be very hard to achieve with a composite, as the water surface is constantly changing. What do you think? --Dschwen 09:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, considering the two lower errors it would be inconsistent to think that he did the rest seamlessly, so it's not a comp. But I definitely think something was removed there, Makro freak has refuted my claim that it is editing so it doesn't matter what I think now.--Benjamint 09:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nymphaea macro BG Bi.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}}}

Indonesian translation for subpage link

Hi Dschwen, I see on MediaWiki:Common.js that you are the maintainer of subPagesLink script. Could you please add 'id': 'Subhalaman' for Indonesian translation? Thanks! •• ivanlanin ♫ 10:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:SongTaizong1.jpg

Hallo Daniel! Frank Schulenburg hat mich gerade darauf hingewiesen, dass dieses Bild gelöscht wurde. Da wir zwei uns nicht mit den Gepflogenheiten auf Commons auskennen und ich im Log nur "In category Unknown as of 20 May 2007; not edited for 9 days" gefunden habe, wüsste ich gern von Dir: a) Was genau der Löschgrund war und b) was man dagegen hätte tun können. Gruß, .:. Sarazyn 13:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Sigma 150!!

Hi Dschwen,
I see you've got a sigma now too! :-) --Fir0002 www 00:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Auguste Rodin signature.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}}}

FP Promotion

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

--Simonizer 13:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

--Simonizer 13:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Drew Barrymore

Can you find out why "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Drew_Barrymore_by_David_Shankbone.jpg" was deleted, who deleted it, and why? I was also never notified of any problems with the photograph. Thank you. --DavidShankbone 19:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Weird, I see nothing in the deletion log, and Google doesn't find anything either. This is agains protocol, as the pic is/was used in many wikipedias. Would you mind reuploading it? --Dschwen 20:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem, it will have to be later tonight. It's odd. I only noticed it because it was removed from w:Celebrity as a dead link. Any ideas what might have happened? --DavidShankbone 20:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

QICbot blip?

Did QICbot die on the 3rd & 4th? Nothing listed in the history for the 4th, but on the 5th it archived a lot of stuff that was already archived from the 3rd. Not an exact duplication of the archiving, so I'll sort it out manually. Do you know what went wrong, do I need to double check all promotions were handled properly ? --Tony Wills 11:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Commons had server trouble. My logs show timeouts on several page requests, and manual checking yielded a Wikimedia Error page. I'll see if I can make the bot a little more error proof. Nothing should have been lost. --Dschwen 16:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Alternative?

Re my wikipedia FP candidate, do you think this version is significantly better (uploaded by someone else) [2] ? --Tony Wills 10:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the color a little skewed towards violet? And the framing is too tight at the bottom. It is a nice picture, just in comparison with many other excellent bird pics it does not quite strike me as one of the best. --Dschwen 12:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

QI guidelines

As a regular contributor to QI and FP discussions you might be interested in the merging of the FP/QI guidelines being discussed at Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates --Tony Wills 12:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

QICbot

Hi! Could you tell your bot ;) "Your image has been reviewed and promoted" that these images are not my images ;). Maybe better will be send info to authors (if it is possible)? Przykuta 16:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you tell it to the bot yourself :-). When nominating a picture just add by user User:exampleuser to the description. --Dschwen 17:20, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thx :) Przykuta 22:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

ImageBoxes

Hi, ich sehe, Du hast Dich der lobenswerten Aufgabe der verobjektivierung angenommen :-) War als nächstes auf meiner to-do-Liste, kann ich mir aber jetzt sparen. Wollte Dich nur auf einen kleinen Hack hinweisen, damit "add new box" auch im IE funktioniert. Grüße, --Magnus Manske 20:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Mich treibt hier vor allem die Transparenz im Konqueror gerade auf die Palme! :-) Von wegen KhtmlOpacity... Ich versuch morgen mal die Boxgroessen per Mausdraging einstellbar zu machen (das ganze dann im edit mode so dass die imagebox templates im Wikitext automatisch geupdated werden. Mal schauen ob das klappt.... --Dschwen 22:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barley fruit.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}}}

Soap bubble image

Hello,Dschwen, I really do not care what category the image is under. I copied categories from Soap Bubble article. It was, when I believed, I took a picture of a soap bubble. Now I believe you are probably right and the image does not look as a soap bubble and because of that cannot represent a soap bubble. On the other hand it does not represent Golden Gate Bridge either. So what the picture does represent? Nothing. Why in the world to keep the picture that represents nothing? Wikipedia is not a free host to hold pictures. I'll take your name off the reason for deletion. Ill put category "Confusing image". Please leave the deletion request alone. Thanks.--14:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

I will certainly not leave a deletion request alone that goes against policy. If you want the image deleted, ask for deletion per out of project scope and courtesey removal request from uploader if you want it taken under consideration. Secondly you have to properly list it on the Deletion Requests page. Adding a template does not suffice to get the process started. I can only recommend this procedure if you have carefully thought about this, and this doesn't just happen out of spite... --Dschwen 14:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

SQL

Do you mind running a updated sql query through Featured Pictures Natural phenomena, Places, Astronomy, and Plants and Objects categories to check for aspect ratios of 4:3 or 5:4 with a tolerance of ±1% and 16:10, 8:5, and 16:9 for widescreens with a tolerance of ±5%? Also, can you exclude any resolution smaller than 800px high and put the results here? Thanks. --Digon3 ^talk 16:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Are there even any FPs smaller than 800px wide? --Dschwen 16:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Self reply: yes, one: Image:Sliven-thracianlowlands-dinev-flickr.jpg. --Dschwen 16:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for doing it so quickly! --Digon3 ^talk 16:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

  Do you know of a bot I can use to put all these images into a catagory? --Digon3 ^talk 16:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• No, sorry, not off the top of my head. --Dschwen 21:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Goettingen 21 2.jpg

Since you happen to be an admin, can you please give in to my speed deletion request, placed 5 days ago? This is a very delicate case. Thanks in advance, .:. Sarazyn 18:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Dschwen 21:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your repair of galleries code

Your fix to the galleries code seems to work under Firefox, and I tried to test it under Internet Explorer. The trouble was IE kept crashing ! But I don't know that it was anything to do with the gallery code. I could look at the the commons main page and featured pictures page, but looking at the Quality images or QI/candidates pages would crash IE (even when not logged on). And the main QI page doesn't even use the QI templates in descriptions. Looking at pages like Category:Astronomy which is a large gallery works fine. I was testing it with IE 6 and tried 3 different computers. I will try and check it out with a later version of IE. Have you seen any other comments about this? --Tony Wills 21:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Upgraded one of these machine to IE 7 and everything works fine, almost as good as Firefox :-) --Tony Wills 22:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

FYI: MediaWiki:ResizeGalleries.js

Hi, Dein "tr-Löscher" hat leider auch "caption"s gelöscht ;-) Ist repariert (hoffentlich...) --Magnus Manske 20:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Autsch, Danke! --Dschwen 09:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

qicbot ok?

Is qicbot running, haven't seen any activity for 48 hours. --Tony Wills 13:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm just guessing here, but we recently introduced "wide galleries" with the following tag "<gallery>" being replaced with "<gallery widths="145px">". I'm guessing that the bot is unable to parse the new format. I'd imagine that the "145" could change in the future, but the parsing code should be able to handle that case easily enough. -- Ram-Man 13:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the parse is a bit unflexible. I'm currently on vacation (brace yourselves for some alpine flower shots soon!!!). Might take a day or two until I get it fixed. --Dschwen 17:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Hope the bot is fixed soon and that we get to see those pictures. Have fun. It takes me months to upload pictures from my big vacations! -- Ram-Man 17:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, that little addition was my idea, I'll change all the galleries back just before the bot runs so that it can execute a few promotions, then change them back when its run - that should clear the list -- Tony Wills 01:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, the bot now looks for lines starting with <gallery and ignores all the rest. Should work now. --Dschwen 18:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:CH_Tarasp_Fontana.jpg

Hoi Daniel, dieses Bild ist wirklich sehr gelungen. Ich könnte es mir als Featured Picture vorstellen, hätte aber noch einige Wünsche zum Korrigieren: Der Staubfleck oben rechts sollte weg. Die Chromatischen Aberrationen sind gerade in den Wolken deutlich sichtbar, auch das eine Kleinigkeit zu korrigieren. Ferner ist das Bild etwas unscharf, gerade wenn man die Bäume im Hintergrund betrachtet. Wenn du das Bild etwas verkleinerst und nachschärfst, müsste es dennoch für ein perfektes Bild reichen. --Ikiwaner 22:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Danke fuer die Anregungen. Ich werd das mal umsetzen wenn ich aus dem Urlaub zurueck bin (kommende Woche). --Dschwen 07:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH senecio incanus ssp. carniolicus.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}}}

user page

Hi! Can you help me how to create new pages on my user page? Thank you very much! --Beyond silence 00:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, it's pretty easy, just place a link like this on your page (notice that it is red), click it and edit the empty page. Change New Page to any title you like. --Dschwen 08:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, it ok! ;)--Beyond silence 13:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Tarasp Fontana.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}}}

Camera thoughts (cont)

Hi, Dschwen

I have finally made my mind and bought a new camera and lens: a Nikon D80 with a 18-200 VR zoom (and a cheap 35-70 Nikkor). Though expensive, I know this is not the ideal lens for everything, specially in the macro side. But it is a good enough all-purpose solution. What do you think of the results? I'm now tempted by two second-hand lenses: a Tokina 105mm AF macro (about 200 euros) and an old non-AF Nikkor 55mm macro, with superb optics. Regards, Alvesgaspar 15:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Huge improvement over your old camera. I'd hold back on the high f Numbers though. Your pics with f/20 show diffaction unsharpness. The zoom is probably not the worst choice :-) it is always nice to have a variable lens for travel. I'm afraid I have no first hand experience with the macros. I was tempted by the Tokina too but chose the higher focal length of teh Sigma 150mm (it focusses to infinity too). If you intend on doing insect macros I'd go for the Tamron (higher focal length = longer working distance = insects won't get nervous and flee). --Dschwen 13:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Scuol.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:DE KKW Grohnde.jpg

You uploaded this image which you claim to be your own work. On the upload page you agreed to place it under a Free license but did not specify which one. Please do so by replacing the {{OwnWork}} tag with a suitable copyright tag. Oxam Hartog 17:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah yeah, thanks! Just forgot it. --Dschwen 17:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Common.js

Please add 'is': 'Undirsíður', to **subPagesLink** in the Commons JavaScript. Thank you. --Steinninn 23:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the translation. Could you help with Commons:WikiMiniAtlas/Translations too? --Dschwen 06:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Saxifraga.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! CH Fluela pano.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! CH Caterpillar.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! CH Leontopodium alpinum 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 {{{3}}}

Image:Circulation in macroeconomics.svg

Thanks for help!: "The Investment arrow is missing the t." --Beyond silence 13:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I would have corrected it myself, but the text is not editable (converted to curves). Also Government is missing an n. --Dschwen 13:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, sorrowful! :( --Beyond silence 13:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've asked Lady of Hats about it. I'm sure she can easily correct it. --Dschwen 13:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

QI camera

• I actually am getting a new camera (Canon EOS 400D) but its on backorder and I won't get it for at least 3 weeks. --Digon3 ^talk 17:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Congrats! This is supposed to be a pretty nice camera. I know people who are very happy with it. --Dschwen 17:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• That green tint is from the WB settings on my camera on auto. I noticed this when Lycaon mentioned it, and since I have changed it to Fluorescent mode and have not had any problems. You won't see any green tint on any new photos I upload (unless its color fringing). --Digon3 ^talk 12:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Spider black yellow.jpg

Can you make more bright? It is too dark I think. --Beyond silence 00:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Min fluorite.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! Min sulfur.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! CH Val d'Uina 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH IT Schlingenpass ret.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! CH Diavolezza Hut.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! NZ whitianga NI.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}}}

Coordinate conversion helper

Hello, I discovered this tool today and it's a very cool tool, so thanks very much for your work. I have translated your explanations in french, and introduced your tool on the french Bistro on commons. I hope a lot of people will use it. Thanks very much. historicair 02:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goe SEM students working1.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! CH Val d'Uina.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! S'Charl.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}}}

Question regarding MediaWiki:Upload.js

Hey, is this the file that does the automatic filling in for files uploaded through locations such as here? I'm trying to figure this all out, but my head is exploding trying to navigate around mediawiki space...

Near the end there are the two lines:

   case "ownwork":
    uploadDescription.value = doubleBracket + 'Information\n|Description=\n|Source=self-made\n|Date=\n|Author= ' + wgUserName + '\n}}\n';

If I'm reading it right, that is what fills in the self-made source parameter automatically.

I have a major update request associated with this, currently only the English upload gets prefilled - can you modify it so that other language forms (for example the French one also get an appropriate pre-filled parameter to source? Thanks.--Nilfanion 14:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Gleis Furka-Bergstrecke.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! Min chalcopyrite.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! USA san gennaro vendors NY.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}}}

Commons:Wikipediatag-2007-Galerie

Danke für den Hinweis! Werd mal ein paar Bilder raussuchen --Simonizer 13:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

View_old_city_of_Dubrovnik-6.jpg

Thanks for your work. Sorry, it's a bit darker. I have a psd version, I try to fix the tilt (but it's realy minimal). --Beyond silence 17:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I hope made the last version! ;) What do you think? Thank you very muvh for your help! --Beyond silence 17:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• I fixed the other picture to! thanks for feedback. --Beyond silence 17:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Rhone images

Yes, the 12 MP take better resolution. So in small view the sharpness isn't really problem. But my picture has much more better lighting condition, can you agree or not? But the sharpness isn't the main problem your picture - if you can't may I try improve on it (you help me too ;)! --Beyond silence 17:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm, I think the main difference is the weather. No postprocessing will ever make a sunshine image out of those pictures. But do we really only want sunshine-blue-sky QIs? --Dschwen 18:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Not, but in foggy weather hard to make an QI. --Beyond silence 19:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a watch on Image:CH Rhone upper reaches 1-bs.jpg! ;) --Beyond silence 20:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you pulled out quite some detail there, I didn't even know it was there in the first place. Looks dramatic :-). But not quite how I rembemer it (I would have stopped taking pictures an ran for cover instead ;-) ) --Dschwen 20:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :D! I don't understand second statement, what do you remember on? --Beyond silence 20:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I remember the sky being foggy and fairly structureless, I also rembember the fresh glacial meltwater to be very bright and milky. And thus the edit looks nice, but shows a very different scene. --Dschwen 20:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I thinked you like my edit. Then ilooks like there wasn't meaningful working on it. Sad. --Beyond silence 03:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

To me it is not only important whether the picture looks nice/dramtic, but whether it represents the scene accurately. I see commons mainly as an image database for an encyclopedia, where facts count. Please don't take that personal, I really appreciate the work and effort you put into editing this picture, and also the work and effort you put into COM:QIC as a very laborous image reviewer! Anyway, being able to disagree on some technical details like the overexposure issue is part of good collaboration, so please don't worry about it too much. --Dschwen 06:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, it forgot. Thanks for peacemaker talking & kind words! --Beyond silence 08:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Viamala Gorge descent.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! CH cow 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH grasshopper.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! CH Fire engine Berne.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! CH Binn 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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! IT Pforzheimer Huette.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! CH boundary stone Fuorcla Sesvenna 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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Rhone upper reaches 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Julier Pass column 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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH boundary stone Fuorcla Sesvenna 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 {{{3}}}

QICbot am 27.8.

Hallo Dschwen, möglicherweise bin ich zu ungeduldig, aber Dein Bot hat heute die Tag promoted Quality Image- und Notify user of promoted Quality Image(s)-Arbeiten vernachlässigt. Kommt das noch? Gruß, --Aconcagua 15:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

So, manuell gestartet. Komisch, vielleicht hatte der Toolserver ein Problem. --Dschwen 16:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm, der Bot behaupte es gaebe nix zu tun. Kann ja auch mal passieren, oder siehst Du faellige Nominationen? --Dschwen 16:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Er hat einfach mal einen Haufen Bilder archiviert ohne die gewählten Bilder mit dem Bapperl zu versehen [3]. Ist er jetzt eingeschnappt, weil du ihn geschubbst hast? --LC-de 17:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I have manually tagged & notified users, will now post to QI pages --Tony Wills 20:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Worked today. I'm still looking into what happened yesterday, most likely a wikimedia server error threw it off. --Dschwen 12:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)