User talk:Tuxyso/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord 2014.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 cw tilt --A.Savin 13:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)  Done. Please take another look, A.Savin. --Tuxyso 20:01, 10 February 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 09:38, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg

Hi, via OTRS (ticket number 2014020710001483), we received the following message: It is a very beautiful photo but a parrot-expert friend wrote: "The photo is a Green Winged Macaw and not a Scarlet. The misinformation about the two macaws is everywhere; I saw that it came from your source. Green-Wing's have the facial feathers; Scarlet's have a clean looking face with no feather lines. " - could you take look at it? Jcb (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

• According to [1] the zoo has both, Green-Wing's and Scarlet's. I will check tomorrow, but it is surely possible that I am wrong because I'm no bird expert. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Jcb, the case is more difficult than expected. According to [2] (Similiar specicies) there are few differences between the Scarlet and the Green-winged Macaw. The facial feathers are a clear evidence for the Green-winged one thus the bird experts might be right. In the same enclosure there are two birds, I made a shot one year before at the same enclosure: File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster.jpg. This is clearly a Scarlet (no facial feathers). One aspect is still confusing: If you take a look on https://www.dropbox.com/s/gbzayk21sxdwc18/Macao-001.jpg (I've not uploaded it to Commons due to quality issues but it is the same as File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg) there are yellow and green upper wing feathers which is an indicator for the Scarlet. Probably you can send this additional photo to the bird experts and affirm that File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg is an Green-winged macao. If he is sure I will surely change the category and decription. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for taking a look at it, but I really do not know anything about birds. I will ask the mailer to join the talk here. Jcb (talk) 08:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
      • I've additional asked birds experts on the German Wikipedia: de:Wikipedia:Redaktion_Biologie/Bestimmung#Ara_macao_oder_Ara_chloropterus. Let's wait and change if required. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
• KPeregrine I'm the person who opened the ticket, a bird watcher and blogger about birds. My friend who works with parrots pointed out the identification error. Here are links to descriptions of both species: This description of Ara macao at Wikipedia says that the two species are easy to confuse and that the face feathers are a distinguishing charactersitc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarlet_Macaw#Description Another Ara macao description: http://eol.org/pages/1177962/overview Here are two descriptions of Ara chloropterus (Green-winged macaw) describing the red feather lines on the face: from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green-winged_Macaw#Description and at Encyclopedia of Life: http://eol.org/pages/1177966/overview I hope this helps. It is a very beautiful photograph. (p.s. this is only the first or second time I've joined a 'talk' so if my edit format is poor please correct it.)
  • KPeregrine, thanks for the information. I hope you will participate more often. Just to avoid further mistakes: You are sure that

    File:Ara-Zoo-Muenster-2013-02.jpg is an Ara chloropterus?

  • If that is the case I will modify the file description and correct the categorization. I was a bit unsure because of the green yellow feathers. Have you also taken a look on [3]] (same bird)? --Tuxyso (talk) 17:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
    • KPeregrine I am sure that the visible part of the bird looks like an Ara chloropterus. I read the zoo webpage [4] using Google Translate and it appears that a Scarlet Macaw paired with a Green-winged Macaw and produced a hybrid offspring (is this a correct translation?). A hybrid would have confusing traits. That said, since this could be a photo of the pure Green-winged and a very diagnostic trait of Ara chloropterus is visible in the photo (red feather lines on white face), it is safest to identify the photo as Ara chloropterus. If you find out this is a hybrid bird it will make an interesting note on the photo.
      • [[KPeregrine I've corrected everything (also in the articles). Please take another look if everything is OK. Thanks for your info and help. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
        • KPeregrine: Correction again. I've contacted the zoo and it's indeed an hybrid of Ara chloropterus and Ara macao. Probably a taxo expert can tell me how to categorize it. Are both categories OK? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
          • Tuxyso, yes, excellent! Thank you.
            • KPeregrine Is it your post? Excellent summary of the Ara discussion. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord Abend 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord Abend 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erlöserkirche Mülheim Heimaterde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Luftaufnahmen

Hallo! Ich möchte doch dich als Fotograf diverser Luftaufnahmen vielleicht einmal etwas fragen - wenn ich darf. Wir planen derzeit für Wikipedia Fotoflüge im Münsterland. Die entscheidende Frage ist die nach Equipment und Einstellungen. Meine Vorstellung ist derzeit, zwei Kameras mitzunehmen, eine mit einem Tele und eine mit einem Normal- oder Weitwinkelobjektiv, da der Wechsel zu lange dauert. Und wir planen, morgens zu fliegen. Ungewiss ist noch, ob eine Fenster im Flugzeug ist. Wenn, dann werde ich mir mit Tonkarton eine Blende bauen müssen. Wie ist deine Erfahrung bezüglich Zeit- und Blendeneinstellungen. Eine kurze Zeit (unter 1/500 s) erscheint mit sinnvoll, da das Flugzeug unruhig ist und schnell fliegt. Und eine ganz große Blende erscheint mit suboptimal, vielleicht f/5.6. Autofokus möchte ich auch abstellen, da eine feste Einstellung auf "unendlich" ausreichen sollte. Vielleicht hast du ja noch ein paar Tipps für mich oder kannst mir sagen, wo ich falsch liege. Es wäre sehr nett, an einigen deiner Erfahrungen teilzuhaben. Danke! --XRay ^talk 10:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Wir könnten kurz im IRC chatten, dort ist die Kommunikation direkter. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich bin gerade versuchsweise bei #wikimedia-commons angemeldet.--XRay ^talk 10:49, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

XRay, ich auch. Unter welchem Nickname denn? Ich heiße dort einfach Tuxyso --Tuxyso (talk) 10:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

XRay als Nickname, aber es ist der IRC über eine Webanwendung (Mibbit). Ich habe kein IRC-Tool installiert.--XRay ^talk 10:53, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich installiere mal ChatZilla.--XRay ^talk 10:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Du kannst auch den Webclient nehmen, damit bin ich auch drin, http://webchat.freenode.net/ --Tuxyso (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gnadenkirche Heißen Highres 2014.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 Remarkable qood quality. --Cccefalon 17:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Marktplatz Heißen Kirche 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good --Christian Ferrer 14:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sunderplatz Mülheim Heimaterde 2014.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}}}

About : File:Sunderplatz Mülheim Heimaterde 2014.jpg

I didn't expect you to correct all the problems on the branches because it seems to be almost impossible (imo). I've only tried to "do the job" as far as I could so as to help you as much as possible. I hoped you would correct the slight errors concerning the buildings, so that I could promote the picture. -- I've asked you about the softs because I've noticed they all make stiching errors but not the same ones... which is sometimes interesting. I usually use Hugin (with enblend) and Microsoft ICE when problems are obvious, and I compare the different results. Colin, who makes good panos, recommended me to use Hugin with Smartblend instead of Enblend... but I've not tried yet. -- I know there are only a few panos of that size on Commons, that's why I tried to review yours. I'm sure you'll soon do some other good ones with your Nodal Ninja ! -- Best regards. --JLPC (talk) 17:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• JLPC, thanks for your reply. I appreciate your work on the photo. I promise that I will upload a complete new stich tomorrow. Currently I am experimenting with different techniques. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Your new version is really better, even though I preferred the general contrast of the first one, but this is not important : matter of taste... Only four problems now imo (see notes, please) : two of them can be probably fixed easily. As for the two other ones, I can't tell because I don't know what's on the original pictures. But, according to your improvements, I think we can be optimistic ! (If you've experimented different techniques, maybe you can copy and paste the two problematic parts from one to another...) --JLPC (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
    • You are welcome ! -- Today's pano is better. Christian Ferrer promoted it before me but I uploaded it to straighten the savings bank (I'm working hard to do the same with one of my panos these days and this was a good training) : done !...But it was just for pleasure ! --JLPC (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Happy you've enjoyed your work... which is very good on almost the pano. I've suppressed two notes, now irrelevant (problems fixed) and added two other ones. On the right, near the house roof, some birch branches can be stiched easily (I think). On the very right part of the picture, you've done a great work with the branches on the brown wall... but I think there's something to do with the contrast under the archway. If not, I'll promote anyway. Best regards. --JLPC (talk) 19:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
        • Really good now. Your work concerning the lower left part is spectacular. -- Enjoy your Ninja ! --JLPC (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Harley Davidson Cafe Las Vegas 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good now. Btw, no, I don't care what kind of camera a picture was taken with, I just expect quality --Poco a poco 19:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mülheim Luftaufnahme mit Rathaus Blickrichtung Ost 2014.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 Colours are a bit dull but ok. --Mattbuck 22:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrmündung Duisburg Luftaufnahme 2014.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 Colours are a bit dull but ok. --Mattbuck 22:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Adam Opel AG Werk Bochum I Luftaufnahme 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 09:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Luftaufnahme Innenstadt Essen Blickrichtung West 2014.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 Bit dull but ok. --Mattbuck 00:02, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/Archive 6⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

D600

Hello Tuxyso, to answer your comment in the QIC page, I want to say not only the D600 is good but also the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II lens witch is an excellent lens. However the edition is also very important, I make a lot of sharpening with lightroom and I reduce a bit the size before to to upload it in wikimedia. --Christian Ferrer 11:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Christian, thanks for your reply. The 70-200 VR II is a great lens, especially the AF performance and sharpness at open aperture. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Uferensemble RWW Stadthalle Schlossbrücke Mülheim 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good--Lmbuga 22:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berliner Platz Mülheim 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. (Panorama template should be added IMO) --P e z i 22:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)  Done Pano template added. --Tuxyso 22:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrtalbruecke Morgens Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 10:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhraue bei Mintard mit Ruhrtalbrücke 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good!--Lmbuga 18:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haus der Stromwirtschaft Mülheim Delle 50-52 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhrbania Schlossbrücke Stadthalle Rundumsicht 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Just for information, what is the apro. fov? The exif say's 360° but this can´t be true... --Leviathan1983 12:59, 28 February 2014 (UTC) It a cropped version of a 360° pano. I would say about 270°. --Tuxyso 13:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Altendorf 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:39, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Altendorf 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:43, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Uferensemble RWW Stadthalle Schlossbrücke Mülheim 2014 Crop.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:16, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Altendorf 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:18, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 09:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Ruhraue bei Mintard mit Ruhrtalbrücke 2014.jpg

Hello Tuxyso, I saw this nice picture in the QIC page, and it seems that the houses in the left are leaning in a bit; It would be great if you could remove the perspectives, if not it's anyway a good and nice image! --Christian Ferrer 19:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Christian thanks for your careful view. I will look on it later, correction will be time-consuming because it is a stitching. Best wishes --Tuxyso (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patio de los Arrayanes Alhambra 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patio de los Arrayanes Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Am Abend 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:02, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Five Boats mit Marina Sonnenuntergang 2014.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 tilted counter-cw --A.Savin 12:59, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 13:16, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 19:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Werhanmühle Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 09:14, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trevélez Highres Panorama 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good--Lmbuga 09:54, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Generalife Garden Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and composition.--ArildV 08:16, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! El Partal Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:48, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Patio de los Arrayanes Alhambra 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 06:17, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Blaue Stunde 2014.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 Looks like some parts of the sky have been denoised and some not. Also, strange white spots. --A.Savin 12:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Better NR, strange white spots are clouds, or do we mean different things? Please take another look. Thanks. --Tuxyso 13:26, 14 March 2014 (UTC) No, several white points of unknown origin, no clouds, no stars. This I cannot mark because the annotator zoom again doesn't work. Please check the sky yourself. I'm sorry --A.Savin 19:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)  Done You are right. They were comming from the sensor (forgot to activate NR for long time exposure). Would be nice to take another look. --Tuxyso 00:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)  Support Looks good. --A.Savin 12:50, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenhafen Duisburg Werhahmühle Küppersmühle Blaue Stunde 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality! --Cccefalon 16:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of El Salvador Nerja 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --Halavar 12:36, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Faro de Torrox 2014.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 Slightly clipped white and leaning cw --A.Savin 12:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Done. Please take another look. --Tuxyso 13:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 22:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alhambra Patio de la Lindaraja Nasrid Garden 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 11:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church Santa María de la Alhambra 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 13:00, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Generalife Garden Alhambra 02 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. However, I had cloned out the airplane; but that might be personal taste.. --Cccefalon 10:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Done. --Tuxyso 11:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church Santa María de la Alhambra 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 07:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Generalife Garden Alhambra 03 2014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alhambra Löwenhof mit Löwenbrunnen 2014.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}}}