User talk:A.Savin

For older comments see User:A.Savin/Archive.

---

Bildnutzung

Moin, das Support-Team hat heute nen Tipp bekommen, dass ein Blog Texte und Bilder ohne ausreichende Lizenzinfos nachnutzt. Es ist auch ein Bild von dir dabei (File:Christian lindner 2009.jpg auf [1]). Nur zur Info, falls du dich bei denen beschweren willst. Die restlichen falschen Nutzungen trage ich gleich in der WP in die Mängelliste ein. Grüße, XenonX3 (talk) 16:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Danke. Immerhin haben sie "Quelle: Wikipedia" vermerkt, oft gibt es nichtmal das. A.Savin 17:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

OTRS

Не расставляйте самостоятельно шаблоны разрешений OTRS. Это должен делать агент OTRS либо участник, который отправил разрешение. Другие учатсники не знают, принято разрешение или нет, не знают, на какие фото было прислано разрешение, на какие — нет.--Anatoliy (talk) 13:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Я получал подтверждение от Butko User talk:Butko#OTRS Алдонина. И попрошу вас быть с кнопкой отката поосторожнее. - A.Savin 13:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

В OTRS у тикетов есть статусы: открыт, закрыт неуспешно, закрыт успешно. Хотя волонтёры не всегда правильно ставят статусы. Поэтому нужно смотреть на последнее письмо, если там написано, что разрешение получено и какой шаблон нужно поставить в описании, значит с тикетом все в порядке. Тогда нужно смотреть первые письма, где есть список фото, на которые нужно поставить шаблон и уже на эти фото его ставить.--Anatoliy (talk) 15:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Вопрос

Добрый день. Поясните пожалуйста почему удалили файл  ?--Ivengo(RUS) (talk) 15:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Здравствуйте, Ivengo(RUS), файл по какой-то причине не отображался в категории и на странице описания, к тому же нигде не использовался, я думал, что вы его заменили на этот. Вы желаете восстановление? - A.Savin 16:10, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Да пожалуйста. Это была новогодняя версия :)--Ivengo(RUS) (talk) 17:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Категоризация фото RIAN

Здравствуйте. Я смотрю, вы активно занимаетесь категоризацией изображений РИА Новости. В связи с этим:

• во-первых, прошу вас проставлять подкатегории Category:Black and white photography by subject/Category:Black and white photography by subject, хоть сейчас и обсуждают Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/03/Category:Black and white photographs of people;
• во-вторых, предлагаю выработать пособие по категоризации некоторых типов изображений. Подробнее см. User:Ain92/Пособие по категоризации фото времён ВОВ;
• в-третьих, забыл, что ещё хотел сказать. =)

Ain92 (talk) 13:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Здравствуйте, Ain92. Спасибо за подсказку. При такой массе файлов, конечно, сложно учесть действительно всё, но я постараюсь по возможности. - A.Savin 13:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• Вспомнил: пожалуйста, не убирайте прежде времени категорию Images from RIA Novosti needing categories, хотя бы для фото последней заливки. Спасибо. Ain92 (talk) 13:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Выкладывание DjVu-книг

Добрый день! Подскажите, пожалуйста, можно ли размещать на складе DjVu-книги, опубликованные более 100 лет назад, автор которых умер более 100 лет назад, которые были отсканированы Google для проекта Google books, и выложенные на archive.org? Например. Поясню: я не собираюсь просто скачать оттуда DjVu-файл и поместить здесь. Я хочу взять там сканы страниц в формате .tif, очистить, ресемплировать, выровнять и т.д. и наконец собрать новую DjVu-книгу в новом, хорошем качестве (кстати при этом все логотипы гугла, если они там будут, отсекутся). Не может ли использование страниц, отсканированных гуглом и снабжённым их логотипом рассматриватся как нарушение какого-либо копирайта? Хотелось бы разъяснить этот вопрос сейчас, до начала работы над файлом. Заранее спасибо. --Kaidor (talk) 18:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Здравствуйте. К сожалению, не могу ничего сказать, так как сам никогда этим не занимался. Попробуйте спросить на форуме, а если там никто не ответит - на форуме авторского права в ВП. - A.Savin 18:13, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ajami3.JPG

Пожалуйста, удалите остальные файлы, упомянутые в запросе. Это же относится к Commons:Deletion requests/File:Academy at Sisters education.jpg и Commons:Deletion requests/File:200159 185590561485146 100001026119055 485618 1969619 n (1).jpg. Спасибо. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Хорошо, сейчас удалю. Но вообще советую для таких случаев делать массовый ЗУ на участника (по ссылке "Perform batch task" слева от страницы участника), чтобы сразу было видно, что надо удалять. - A.Savin 00:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Zergelin

Russia - Многие файлы являются архивом СССР, согласно лицензии Template:PD-RU-exempt and Template:PD-BY-exempt авторство на эти произведения не требуется, не нужно удалять, нужно изменить лицензию. Мне изменить лицензию и сохранить нашу историю ?
English - Many files are archives of the USSR, license Template:PD-RU-exempt and Template:PD-BY-exempt the authorship of these works is not required, no need to delete, edit Abcent18 02:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Там много фотографий, охраняющихся копирайтом, а шаблон PD-RU-Exempt действует только для значков, медалей, почтовых марок и пр. - A.Savin 23:17, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Эти 2 файла под подают под лицензию Template:PD-RU-exempt Ордена, и медали СССР. Изменить лицензию и оставить

• File:Medal 50 years of OBKhSS the Ministerstvo Vnutrennikh Del (MVD) USSR.jpg
• File:Medale of Voluntary People's Druzhina USSR.jpg
• Исторические документы СССР File:Direction at work from Komsomol, distribution to work after receiving the speciality.jpg под подают под лицензию Template:PD-RU-exempt
• сообщения о событиях и фактах, имеющие исключительно информационный характер: (прошол Всесоюзный съезд 1986 г.) File:Congress Of The Communist Party (1986).jpg, File:Congress Of The Communist Party The Soviet Union (1986).jpg под подают под лицензию Template:PD-RU-exempt - Abcent88 09:09, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Уважаемые администраторы, мы готовы материально отблагодарить за Ваши услуги и хлопоты если Вы возьмётесь подыскать нужные лицензии для сохранения и дальнейшей загрузки файлов СССР (фото плакатов, Пионерской организации, КПСС, Комсомола) , для сохранения нашей истории, которые мы можем потерять. Это не реклама, а благотвирительность с нашей стороны. Для связи E-mail: dsk163@mail.ru - Abcent88 09:20, 7 February 2012

Файлы плакатов СССР можно спасти по лицензии Союзной республики Украинской ССР Template:PD-Ukraine 50 лет - CPI-RUS (talk) 23:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

• File:The Lenin Pioneers Organization USSR (Poster).jpg
• File:The Lenin Pioneers Organization USSR (Poster 2).jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Trapiche emerald.jpg

Hello A.Savin, the copyrigth holder told me that she had sent the email to the OTRS, so couldn't you look there if you found it? Regards LZ6387 (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I am not an OTRS member, so please ask someone of them first, and let me know if they confirm that there is a ticket. - A.Savin 16:53, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll write to you later again! --LZ6387 (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It's okay, the OTRS member has restored the picture. --LZ6387 (talk) 07:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Usercat

Я отменил вашу правку на категории Photos by PereslavlFoto, потому что это не пользовательская категория. Она создана не для удобства пользователя и построена не по нраву пользователя. Напротив, она собирает категории русского фотографа XXI века и поэтому включена в категорию Category:21st-century photographers from Russia. Пожалуйста, будьте аккуратнее. Если фотограф сам публикует свои фотоснимки под открытой лицензией, он не теряет профессию.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Я вас не понимаю, простите. Я — фотограф из России. Я работаю в XXI веке. Поэтому я и ставлю категорию Category:21st-century photographers from Russia, потому что мои работы должны быть видны в дереве работ других фотографов, наших современников. Вы хотите какое-то доказательство, что ли? Справку из загса о том, что я фотограф? Разве в России дают такие справки?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Вижу, что одна категория не скрывает другую, так что я оставляю оба варианта. Однако я постараюсь лучше разобраться, что такое user categories. Мне очень жаль, что вы не знакомы с вопросом и не даёте мне ссылку на описание таких категорий.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Судя по правилу COM:USER, все правы. Вы правильно отметили категорию как пользовательскую («user-specific categories»), а я правильно ввёл её в дерево категорий, означающих современных фотографов. Ошибка состояла в том, что вы попутно удалили тематическую категорию. Спасибо за повод обратиться к правилу!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

В этой категории - фотографы, не являющиеся участниками википроектов, а профессионально работающие в этом качестве для информагентств и СМИ. Если бы я был не прав, то в этой категории насчитывалось бы подкатегорий как минимум несколько тысяч. Если я на досуге подрабатываю игрой в порнофильмах, то это тоже не значит, что я могу свою страницу участника поместить в Category:Porn actors. Последний раз убираю категорию, продолжать войну правок не советую, вы уже знаете к чему это приводит. A.Savin 19:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Я профессионально работаю в этом качестве в СМИ. Справку вам принести, что ли, чтобы вы прекратили вашу войну правок?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 05:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Переименуйте учетную запись, работайте под настоящим именем, дабы каждый мог вас найти в Интернете и убедиться в правоте вышесказанного. Пока что у меня нет оснований верить тому, что Безымянный Ответ пришел из СМИ, а не из русской ВП, где неоднократно блокировался за абсурдные войны правок. A.Savin 11:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Как я понимаю, у вас есть основания лгать обо мне и приписывать мне чужие поступки? Будьте добры предъявить основания, чтобы мне не пришлось выносить вашу ложь на обсуждение участников викисклада.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Насчет лжи вам бы, живущему в стеклянном доме, не следовало камнями особо кидаться. Считаю разговор исчерпанным, где лежит книга жалоб, вам известно. - A.Savin 12:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Спасибо за совет, я обращусь в «книгу жалоб», как вы её называете. Хотя очень противно, честное слово!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Page deletion warning

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

 

Affected:

• File:Stalin-grave.jpg

A.Savin 17:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Burgerszoo aquarium 1280.jpg

Dear A. Savin, You deleted this file, which was in use on nl.wikibooks. I can't find the deletion discussion on commons (google can't find it anyway) and the reason for deletion you gave in the summary is not clear to me. Can you please give me a link, so I can check why this file was deleted? Sincerely, KKoolstra (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

The deletion request was the following: Commons:Deletion requests/Bad quality files with dubious reuse requirements by user:Norero. - Regards, A.Savin 22:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Do I understand correctly that contacting the uploader by e-mail has already been tried? KKoolstra (talk) 22:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

As I see, it was proposed by User:Saibo in the discussion, but I don't know if something has been done in this direction. It was a fairly old discussion that needed to get closed anyway. You may ask Saibo if she had sent a mail to the uploader, or do it yourself, because it is of course so that if there should be a statement by the uploader which would clarify the license question, the files may be undeleted. Regardless of that, you also can start an undeletion request. - A.Savin 22:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Сбитые категории

Расставляя категории по многим файлам, вы в двух местах по ошибке убрали категории, связанные с местом выступления людей. File:Dyma 1288.jpg‎ выступал в Смоленском, а File:Kulikov-2009-5383.jpg‎ выступал в Горках. Имейте в виду. Спасибо!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Я убрал несуществующие и некорректно названные категории. - A.Savin 15:14, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Вы предлагаете другие категории?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

О, большое спасибо!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Церковь Воскресения Христова в Шереметьеве.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good,--ArildV 09:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Cha_Truong_Buu_Diep.jpg

Dear Savin, I expressed my opinion about the intention to delete this file, it's a real protest. But there are not any more comments since my opinion, so why would you proceed to delete it? Please give me an explanation. Thank you.--Tran The Vinh (talk) 22:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello, my user name is "A.Savin", not "Savin". The deletion based on this deletion request, apart from the comment by the initiator there was an objection by you which I cannot start with since I don't know Vietnamese. But it was a relatively old file, a fact which makes your authorship as stated in the description rather dubious, and since the same file appears on an external web site it makes sense to assume that you had copied the picture from there and uploaded it here on Commons, which is not allowed here (please read Commons:Copyright). Now, if you really are the copyright owner of this file, please send a confirmation to the OTRS team of Commons (how it works, you may read on COM:OTRS), otherwise you also have the possibility to let an other admin decide in this case; then, consider starting an undeletion request. A file which is deleted on Commons is not deleted ultimately, there is always a possibility to restore if the copyright status should get clarified. - A.Savin 22:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Носик

Приветствую! А зачем вы убрали категории из фотографий Носика? -- TarzanASG ⁺¹  23:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Потому что здание МИДа или Б.Дорогомиловскую там можно разглядеть разве что через лупу. - A.Savin 23:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Так кому-то может понадобиться именно фотография дальнего вида. -- TarzanASG ⁺¹  17:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Для этого существует category:Panoramic views of Moscow, не нужно засорять категории отдельных зданий изображениями, на которых их нет. A.Savin 17:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Ruslan Khasbulatov August 2011 Moscow.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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.

Template:Original description

Einmal ru bitte. :-) --Leyo 17:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

то, что не успел добавить Турелио

я думаю, можно удалять всё без разбора --Алый Король (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Новгород

Фотография Юрьева монастыря требует небольшой коррекции. По-моему, необходимо повернуть на 0.9 градуса по часовой. В любом случае, готов поддержать, красивое фото.
С уважением, Георгий -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Здравствуйте. Спасибо за подсказку, я файл совсем чуть-чуть повернул и теперь вроде бы все там прямо. - A.Savin 19:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Здравствуйте! +1. С уважением, Георгий. -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

The image has been promoted to Featured picture The image File:Novgorod - View on Yuriev Monastery from Volkhov 02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Novgorod - View on Yuriev Monastery from Volkhov 02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Kashira 10-2011 Wooden architecture 05.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 00:00, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Vidnoe LenKomsomola Street - Trolley04.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Very good light and sharpness. Some (minor) CA to be corrected (wires)--Jebulon 00:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

QI

Погодите-ка, это же получается второе дерево категорий внутри Quality images, которое принципиально повторяет первое, основное дерево категорий? Неужели так?!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Blue veil

«The blue veil somehow does not impress». Там всё гораздо хуже — дом облицован бледно-голубой плиткой . Но, конечно, remarkable там ничего нету, это самый обычный дом. Я был сильно удивлён этой номинацией: в городе с населением менее 50 тысяч человек не может быть ничего remarkable или notable. Всё, что у нас было существенного, давно забрали и увезли столичные правители (это началось ещё в XVI веке). Поэтому провинциальный патриотизм такая сложная штука. На родине нечего любить, да вот надо, надо!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:40, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Rosneft-azs.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 18:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Reinhold Messner in Koeln

Hi, I would like to nominate this photo of yours for VI but can you tell me where exactly in Cologne was this authograph session?--MrPanyGoff 09:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

This was in Mayersche bookshop in Neumarkt Galerie (not sure though if this detail is really that important). Thanks a lot for your interest, - A.Savin 10:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. Yes, this detail is important since Cologne is not a small town ;) I would like to ask you to include information like this in your photos or directly to add a camera location. Cheers.--MrPanyGoff 20:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I do it normally on landscape/architecture shots, but it's rather optional imho if you photograph a person (albeit it could be useful in certain cases indeed). - A.Savin 21:18, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Ivan polzunov.jpeg

File deletion warning

File:Ivan polzunov.jpeg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  Anton Chorny (talk) 14:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Названия месяцев

Привет! Не мог бы ты, как адмиристратор, создать несколько MediaWiki-страниц с творительным падежом названий месяцев? Это нужно для корректного отображения текстов шаблона {{other date}} с параметром between. Привожу полный список со ссылками:

• MediaWiki:January-ins/ru январём
• MediaWiki:February-ins/ru февралём
• MediaWiki:March-ins/ru мартом
• MediaWiki:April-ins/ru апрелем
• MediaWiki:May-ins/ru маем
• MediaWiki:June-ins/ru июнем
• MediaWiki:July-ins/ru июлем
• MediaWiki:August-ins/ru августом
• MediaWiki:September-ins/ru сентябрём
• MediaWiki:October-ins/ru октябрём
• MediaWiki:November-ins/ru ноябрём
• MediaWiki:December-ins/ru декабрём
• Надеюсь на помощь. --Art-top (talk) 08:46, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Сделано. - A.Savin 11:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Большое спасибо! Только я сразу не сообразил, что {{other date}} защищён. Не мог бы ты сразу поправить в этом шаблоне строку

• |ru=между {{ISOdate|1={{{2|}}}|2=ru|form=gen}} и {{ISOdate|1={{{3|}}}|2=ru|form=gen}} <!-- Need Genitive case -->

на строку

• |ru=между {{ISOdate|1={{{2|}}}|2=ru|form=ins}} и {{ISOdate|1={{{3|}}}|2=ru|form=ins}}

--Art-top (talk) 11:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Да, поправил. Надеюсь, все правильно. - A.Savin 12:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Ещё раз спасибо! Примеры стали показываться корректно, значит всё правильно. --Art-top (talk) 12:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

University of Cologne VI nomination

Hi, there are some proposals in your nomination of University of Cologne. Maybe the scope should be extended to Main building of the University of Cologne (exterior) or Main building of the University of Cologne (main facade). The reviewers are waiting for you to decide. --MrPanyGoff 11:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Vidnoe LenKomsomola Street - Trolley03.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 12:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Aachen 11-11 AlbertVahleHalle 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 12:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Perepechinskoe02.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments  Comment Notable perspective distortion. --Iifar 13:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC) Thx, have fixed that. - A.Savin 13:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC).  Support Looks good to me now. --Iifar 17:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Exterior of Main building of the University of Cologne.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:51, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

•  Question It seems that there are two faces to this building, each quite distinctive. Would it be suitable to have a VI for each side? If not, we need to consider which side is more recognizable and better-known. cmadler (talk) 17:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

  This one is the front side with main entrance and also the Albertus Magnus monument at the left of it. - A.Savin 18:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Removable  Oppose for the moment. IMO, we should add "Main entrance", or, at least, "exterior" in the scope, like as for churches or other buildings.--Jebulon (talk) 10:18, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
  •  Comment Jebulon's remark, is legitimate and I will confirm my vote if the scope changes. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Main building of the University of Cologne to Exterior of Main building of the University of Cologne by the nominator. --MrPanyGoff 12:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

•  Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment OK, opposition removed, but IMO, the scope should be "Main building of the University of Cologne, exterior", as for other exteriors of buildings. So I do not oppose anymore, but I don't support.--Jebulon (talk) 09:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 23:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Blog Feature

Hello,

My name is Elaine and I'm a communications intern with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. We're starting a new feature on the Foundation blog to profile the photographers behind the beautiful photos that become Picture of the Day (POTD) on the Commons home page. Given that your photo is scheduled for 13 April 2012, we'd love to do a short interview with you either by phone, Skype, or email to discuss your work and your POTD.

If you're interested, please let me know by email at communicationsinternwikimedia.org.

Thanks,

Elaine CommIntern (talk) 19:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Sleeptracker blue.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 13:57, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Khmelnitsky-bridge.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments nice view --Carschten 14:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 IS II USM without hood.jpg

Корпус объектива действительно такой жёлтый с кремовым оттенком? На образце и другом образце видно, что обычно у них корпус бесцветный.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

да - A.Savin 13:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Сама по себе фотография оставляет сильное ощущение увода в желтизну. Поэтому я и нашёл важным описать необычный цвет объектива. Надо иметь в виду, что на обычных фотографиях такого объектива он всегда показан с белым корпусом, и этим резко отличается от вашего экземпляра. Это одно, а теперь второе. Скажите пожалуйста, что такое Supported by Wikimedia Deutschland? В чём состоит поддержка? Спасибо.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Я не использовал вспышку и корпус получился таким, каким его видят мои глаза. Объектив стоит около 2.000€, он мне не принадлежит, а был предоставлен Викимедией Германия на временный прокат. - A.Savin 14:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Page deletion warning

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

 

Affected:

• File:Вид на центр горорда.jpg

And also:

• File:Нефтеюганский порт.jpg

Yours sincerely, Kobac (talk) 07:26, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

native speaker needed

Hallo A. Savin, ich weiß nicht, ob du es schon gesehen hattest, aber IP 91.122.163.67 hatte einige deiner DR-tags entfernt. Ich habe ihn revertiert bzw. sie wieder eingefügt. Er ist wohl kein einfacher Vandale, da er auch eine Menge offenbar korrekter Informationen hinzugefügt hat.
Könntest du dir - als Native-speaker - mal diese Uploads anschauen. Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 09:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Die IP ist der gesperrte Sockenspieler Фёдор Гусляров, der die ganzen Copyvio-Uploads beigesteuert hat. Hier hülfe wohl nur, die Anträge so schnell wie möglich abzuarbeiten, sonst kommt er noch auf die Idee, die aus der DR-Kandidatenseite zu entfernen, ohne dass es - wie so oft - jemandem auffällt. - A.Savin 11:01, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Der andere lädt Buchcover hoch, laut Inschrift auf den Covern und Beschreibung auf seiner Ru-Wiki-Seite sind es seine Bücher. Allerdings weiß man nicht, ob er der Rechteinhaber sowohl der Texte als auch der Coverillustrationen ist. Sieht auch nicht so gut aus. - A.Savin 11:01, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Just a quick heads up

Just a quick heads up that I have suggested an amendment to the editing restriction on FtO, and have made a note of it here. I am advising you as you have provided an opinion in that thread, and may wish to take this into account if any concerns you may have raised are addressed with it. russavia (talk) 13:48, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:SPB View on Fontanka Embankment.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments  Support Good qualityfor me. --Jkadavoor 05:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 IS II USM without hood.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Óðinn 01:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)  CommentAn isolated version on white with higher contrast would even bei better ;) --Martin Kraft 09:26, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

The image has been promoted to Featured picture The image File:Moscow GUM Middle Line view from 2nd floor.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Moscow GUM Middle Line view from 2nd floor.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

CA

Помню, вы советовали специальное ПО от Canon для борьбы с хроматическими аберрациями. К сожалению, я не смог найти на сайте Canon место, где это можно скачать. Они предлагают только обновления. Вы действительно имели в виду, что такое ПО существует? Или его нигде нельзя отыскать?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

CD диск в комплекте с каждым фотоаппаратом. - A.Savin 11:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Посредничество\перевод.

Добрый день.
У меня с одним голландским коллегой возникло некое недопонимание. Из-за моего почти нулевого владения английским, я не могу внятно объяснить ему свои соображения и не уверен, что правильно понимаю его. Не могли бы Вы рассудить нас, а заодно донести до него мои слова на грамотном, понятном инглише?
Короче, ситуация такая. Я загрузил на склад несколько изображения одного корабля, в своё время участвовавшего в научно-исследовательской экспедиции. Участник Stunteltje на днях создал Category:Peacock (ship, 1828) об этом корабле, что само по себе отлично, но при этом он включил эту категорию в две другие, на мой взгляд неверные. Category:United States Exploring Expedition там не к месту, так как «Пикок» был спущен на воду ещё за 10 лет до начала этой экспедиции и не факт, что все его изображения имеют к ней отношение. Другая категория Category:Twenty_years_before_the_mast_(1896)_by_Charles_Erskine была создана, чтобы собрать в ней иллюстрации к книге — "Пикок" там есть только на одной-единственной картинке. Когда же я попытался сделать вот это, то моя правка была откачена участником Stunteltje. По вышеуказанной ссылке он подробно объясняет почему.
Stunteltje считает (если я правильно перевёл его слова), что файлы, на которых изображены корабли, можно включать только в «корабельные» категории, а, например, «историческая» категория Category:Washington (state) in the 1840s должна быть убрана, так как «is not correct for all files in the ship-category», что вызывает у меня не доумение. А причём тут, простите, «все файлы»? Я-то ставлю категорию на конкретное изображение, мало ли что может быть изображено на соседних картинках. Может я его просто не правильно понял, тогда объясните, пожалуйста, что он хотел этим сказать? И вообще мне показалось, что коллега Stunteltje действует по принципу: «Чем меньше категорий у файла — тем лучше», с чем я категорически несогласен. ИМХО, чем больше корректно проставленных категорий, тем проще будет другим юзерам найти его в миллионах прочих изображений, тем выше вероятность, что его используют в как можно большем количестве статей и проектов.
Поэтому я хотел попросить Вас о нескольких вещах:
1. Объясните, пожалуйста, прав ли я в этом споре, и если нет, то в чём.
2. Если мои аргументы хотя бы частично верны, донесите их до него на его странице обсуждения, а то я чувствую от Google-translate больше вреда, чем пользы. К тому же вы админ, у ваших слов вес больше.
3. И ещё. Создайте, пожалуйста, внутри Category:United States Exploring Expedition две подкатегории: "Корабли этой самой экспедиции" и "Книги об этой самой эспедиции" (названия на английском конечно). Я в обсуждении писал зачем. Надеюсь это снимет большую часть разногласий. Я бы и сам мог, но боюсь наделать грамматических ошибок. :)
Заранее спасибо. --Kaidor (talk) 16:25, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Мне кажется, что тут уместно категоризировать как раз наоборот, т.е. категорию книги и категорию экспедиции в категорию корабля, т.к. оба предмета, насколько я понял, имеют к кораблю прямое отношение. Попробую обратиться к Stunteltje. - A.Savin 17:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Видети ли, в этой экспедиции участвовало 8 кораблей (например этот был флагманом) и о ней написаной около десятка книг многие из которых я планирую разместить в вики. Это уже не говоря о том, что будут ещё люди-участники и т.д. Так что главной, я уверен, должна быть категория об экспедиции.--Kaidor (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Я уже написал коллеге, почему я считаю неправильным в данном случае помещать категорию корабля в категорию экспедиции. А вот наоборот, по моему скромному мнению, это можно, причем вовсе не мешает сделать категорию экспедиции субкатегорией всех принимавших в ней участие кораблей. Но это только мое мнение как имеющего часто дело с категориями вообще, в то время как по кораблям и связанной с ними истории я ровным счетом ничего сказать не могу. - A.Savin 17:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Хотя... если, по вашей просьбе, создать category:Ships participated in United States Exploring Expedition и поместить туда Пикок и другие, это будет нормально. Но одно другому имхо не мешает... - A.Savin 17:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Не могу с вами согласиться. У Stunteltje вы написали, что без корабля не было бы ни экспедиции, ни книги. Поверьте, это не так. Там была очень большая ротация во время подготовки и если бы "Пикок" не успели подготовить, то заменили бы его другим. К тому же он погиб во время корбалекрушения и это не помешало экспедиции дойти до конца, а книге появиться на свет. Но дело даже не в этом. Видите ли, по Вашей логике получается, что, например, надо категорию "Вторая мирова война" включать в категорию "танк Т-34", а не наоборот, так как без него война была бы другой. А это согласитесь нелогично. Событие должно включать в себя его участников и использовавшуюся технику, а не наоборот. Разве нет?--Kaidor (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Вы ко мне обратились с просьбой убедить участника Stunteltje в том, что категория корабля не должна быть в категории экспедиции. Теперь вы утверждаете как раз обратное. Разумеется, мне никогда бы в голову не пришло включить Вторую мировую в Т-34, но я не уверен, что сравнение в данном случае уместно. Впрочем, повторяться не буду - я в кораблях полный неуч, и если вы ищете компетентного мнения, вам следует обратиться к другому участнику, имеющему к этой тематике отношение (и вовсе не обязательно админу). Считаю данную тему для себя исчерпанной. - A.Savin 18:49, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Я прошу прощения, если чем-то вас задел, но я с самого ХОТЕЛ, чтобы категория корабля была внутри категории экспедиции. Видимо по-русски я выражаю мысли ещё непонятнее, чем по-английски. Впрочем, воля ваша. Ещё раз извините, если что не так. --Kaidor (talk) 18:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

File:MoscowTVtower-2009-lift02.jpg

File deletion warning

File:MoscowTVtower-2009-lift02.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  89.169.233.209 20:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Crowded on Category:Musicians with synthesizers

Hi, A.Savin.

On Category:Musicians with synthesizers, almost same images on "Schallwelle 2012" are unnecessary crowded category. In this case, sub-categorization of these group of images is suitable for most people who does not interested on these almost same images.

Please consider sub-categorization of bulk-images to avoid crowding of category. best regards, --Clusternote (talk) 01:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, sub-categorization should make sense for people who search files, and not be done just to have the superior category as empty as possible. The latter applies for Musicians with synthesizers on Schallwelle 2012. Otherwise, we could take e.g. this file and create several "very useful" specialities for it, like maybe the following: Category:People with guitars on Schallwelle 2012, Category:People using Apple Macintosh on Schallwelle 2012, Category:People from Norway on Schallwelle 2012, Category:People with blonde hair on Schallwelle 2012, etc. etc... - A.Savin 18:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Kallmuth Aussicht mit Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Vassil 19:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

PereslavlF​oto

Доброго времени суток!
Я не думаю, что пользователь PereslavlF​oto в действительности хотел фальсифицировать Вашу реплику. Скорее всего, это просто нетерпеливость и неумение ждать. Буду рад, если Ваш с ним конфликт будет на этом исчеран. Рассмотрите, пожалуйста, возможность досрочного его разблокирования.
С уважением, Георгий --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

«...не думаю, что <...> в действительности хотел...» -> читайте форум (по желанию могу продемонстрировать еще несколько диффов) и не подобайтесь нерусскоязычным админам, закрывая глаза на явно деструктивное поведение. - A.Savin 19:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

File deletion request

Hello A. Savin, sorry for bothering you, but can you delete the file File:Srao.jpg. I no longer want to have my picture onwiki, so can you please speedy delete it? I couldn't find a suitable reason in the Speedy deletion page on commons, and I noticed you were online, so I thought of asking you. (Note: The file is in use only on a private wiki, and I'll fix the red link there). Thanks! MikeLynch (talk) 20:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! MikeLynch (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Ddf 11-2011 Kaufhof Hochhaus.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Yann 06:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Rhein und Promenade Koeln-Muelheim.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Nice and good--Lmbuga 20:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Krylatskoe-hills.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality for me--Lmbuga 20:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

The image has been promoted to Featured picture The image File:Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 IS II USM without hood.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 IS II USM without hood.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Peterhof Fountains 01 - Big Cascade 01.jpg

Hi A.Savin, Sorry for this file, I like the composition, but I know that the correction of CA is usually not simple. Happy Easter. --Moonik (talk) 10:50, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. The same to you, - A.Savin 10:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Rassudovo MZD rail platform.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. (sieht fast nach HDR aus???) --Ralf Roletschek 12:25, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Zosimova Pustyn 02 Wall.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Nice colors and sharp, but a crop is needed (see note). Yann 08:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)  Done - A.Savin 11:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC) Good quality. --Yann 14:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Vidnoe LenKomsomola Street.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments I like the composition, quality. QI for me.--JDP90 16:30, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Ddf 11-2011 Pressehaus Rheinische Post.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments I had crop a part of the useless foreground... OK - A.Savin 15:43, 7 April 2012 (UTC) QI to me. DimiTalen 08:09, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Meschenich-koelnberg.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Fine! DimiTalen 15:50, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Alexander Babakov IF MOW 07-11.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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.

Verstaubte Kanadagans

Hi,

die Dinger rühren von Partikeln im Wasser. Sollten sie derart störend sein kann ich sie auch verschwinden lassen. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Ja, das wäre besser, da man sie schon sehr leicht mit Sensordreck verwechseln kann! - A.Savin 10:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Sind nun entfernt. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:16, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Aachen 11-11 Eupenerstrasse PiusGymnasium.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Bf-b-albrechtshof.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Dear A.Savin

Would you please change the image name FH Campus Bad Honnef to IUBH since the university does not use the term FH anymore.

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Bogdan Khmelnitsky Bridge in Moscow.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

review

•  Support Best in scope, meets all criteria. Nice photo! cmadler (talk) 21:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 19:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

kannst du mal …

… kurz: Hier ist noch mind. eine Stimme nicht stimmberechtigt Kannst du die streichen, bitte? die AK ist ja in 50 Min. zu Ende. Danke. Ich guck noch mal weiter per Hand durch, der Bot scheint abwesend zu sein. Viele Grüße --Geitost ^diskusjon 16:12, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Wieso soll ich das tun? Eigentlich ein Job für die Bürokraten, oder? - A.Savin 16:19, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Weil ich es besser finde, wenn man das vor dem Ende einer derart knappen Kandidatur sehen kann und ich keine Lust hab, da per IP oder so aufzuschlagen. Die Pros bin ich jetzt durch, scheint also zu klappen, wenn da nicht noch Socken oder Doppelstimmen drunter sind. Die Bürokraten können sich doch anschließend noch um den Rest kümmern, streichen kann jeder, der grad ungesperrt ist. ;-) Grüße --Geitost ^diskusjon 16:27, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Erledigt. - A.Savin 16:36, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Dank dir, die Kontras bin ich nun auch durch. Dann bin ich mal gespannt, ob das nun das Ergebnis bleibt. --Geitost ^diskusjon 16:44, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Nu isses durch. 184:90. Sollte mich wundern, wenn die Bürokraten da anders entscheiden sollten … --Geitost ^diskusjon 17:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

So schnell war APPER wohl noch nie. ;-) --Geitost ^diskusjon 17:11, 14 April 2012 (UTC) PS: Und hat sich in der Eile sogar vertippt und 194 geschrieben. ;-) --Geitost ^diskusjon 17:22, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Rhein und Promenade Koeln-Muelheim.jpg

I have uploaded a new version with contrast adjustment. Hope you dont mind... --Jovian Eye _storm 03:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, looks good to me. - A.Savin 09:35, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Koeln-Muelheim Rheinpromenade und Clemenskirche.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments bit oversaturated but good for QI --Taxiarchos228 13:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Rolf Hochhuth 2009 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Habbelrath-kirche.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Montreal - Olympic Park panorama.jpg

Hi! I rearranged my nomination. The cropped version is the alt version now. I think that nominate is the one you would like to support. The original one will remain as it was, except for the removed plane. Just in case! Kind regards, --Paolo Costa (talk) 06:16, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Explain in German?

Recently I uploaded some images to a new gallery [2], and today ‎user:NeverDoING moved them all to Category:Celtic spirals. I left an explanation on NeverDoING's talk page [3] explaining why he/she should not have done that, but it seems that NeverDoING is a German speaker, and I am not sure the message will understood what I wrote. If you could help and convey the problem I would be very grateful. Thank you. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for translating. But user:NeverDoING has now made a number of category moves that seem problematic. For instance he/she moved 'Category:Historic Buildings in Fort Worth to Category:Historic buildings in Texas' [4], when 'Category:Historic Buildings in Fort Worth' should have been made a sub-category of 'Category:Historic buildings in Texas' (if it was not already).

Would it be best if I took this problem with NeverDoING to one of the Commons noticeboards? Malcolm Schosha (talk) 12:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd try COM:ANU indeed, - A.Savin 12:19, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Yakhroma-station.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good. -- MJJR 20:17, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Schloss Bornheim Jan2012 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 08:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Ddf 11-2011 Media-Tower.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments I would have chose a crop to eliminate some of the shadowed areas but still a nice image of the tower. --Saffron Blaze 17:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Vidnoe Monastery 04 - Bell tower.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Lovely... suggest FPC. --Saffron Blaze 15:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Vidnoe Monastery 03 - Bell tower.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Also very nice. --Saffron Blaze 15:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Taj Mahal

Hi,

Could you please upload your correction to a separate file? I think it would be best nominated as an alternative. There are comments about the quality. If that could be corrected, it would be great. Best regards, Yann (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, reading the comments by both opposers I get the feeling that the original version would not be really better to them. But - OK, if you prefer it to be splitted into different files (I generally don't; but it's your image), just feel free to upload separately. Note that in my version, I have not only sharpened, but also reduced highlights a bit, and removed some black spots (birds?) in the sky. - A.Savin 15:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

The image has been promoted to Featured picture The image File:Rhein und Promenade Koeln-Muelheim.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rhein und Promenade Koeln-Muelheim.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Vidnoe Monastery 01 - Cathedral.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:NaturGut Ophoven Dec2011 07.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Bit dull but OK. --Mattbuck 00:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Hotel National (Moscow), exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

review

 Support Best in scope, indeed.--MrPanyGoff 21:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Olli Dittrich Kulturkirche-Nippes 04.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Yann 14:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Minsk National Library entrance inside.jpg

File deletion warning

File:Minsk National Library entrance inside.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  84.61.181.19 21:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Minsk National Library outside.jpg

File deletion warning

File:Minsk National Library outside.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  84.61.181.19 21:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Minsk National Library view deck 02.jpg

File deletion warning

File:Minsk National Library view deck 02.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  84.61.181.19 21:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Minsk National Library view deck 01.jpg

File deletion warning

File:Minsk National Library view deck 01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  84.61.181.19 21:13, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Olli Dittrich Kulturkirche-Nippes 02.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:17, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Troll-Abwahlaktion

Hallo,

nachdem nicht mal vor einem Jahr mein Bild vom Schloss Neuschwanstein mit rechtdeutlicher Mehrheit gewählt wurde, ist in einer Nacht-und-Nebel-Aktion ohne vorherige Information an mich vor einigen Tagen diese Abwahl gestartet worden Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/File:Hohenschwangau - Schloss Neuschwanstein1.jpg. Vielleicht willst Du dem entgegen treten. Viele Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

FOP Russia

Hallo. Ich habe bemerkt, dass sich in letzter Zeit eine IP (ein alter Bekannter?) daran macht Löschanträge ([5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] usw.) auf allerhand Bilder wegen der nicht vorhandenen Panoramafreiheit in Russland zu stellen. Als ich hier dann weiter gestöbert habe ist mir aufgefallen, dass es noch weitere Nutzer wie Artem Karimov gibt, die produktiverweise zig Löschanträge wegen fehlender FOP stellen. Weist du vielleicht, ob man hier gelöschte Dateien die auf de eingebunden waren irgendwie listen kann, bzw. ob diese bereits irgendwo gelistet werden? Ich kann ja unmöglich alle Artikel die Russland betreffen auf meine BEO packen. Viele Grüße, --Paramecium (talk) 08:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Nein sorry. Das weiß ich leider nicht (mit Ausnahme von U-Bahnbildern). Man behält vllt. den Überblick, wenn man die Beiträge des CommonsDelinker in Wikipedia regelmäßig überprüft. - A.Savin 10:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Schade. Aber gut, dann werde ich den Bot im Auge behalten. --Paramecium (talk) 15:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Plavsk Administration building.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments  Comment Imo you can add a bit more exposure. --Iifar 15:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Please check the new version - A.Savin 22:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC).  Support QI to me now. --Iifar 17:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Bornheim Castle, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Kolomenskoe George Church with bell tower.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Schloss Benrath Jan2012.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Файл:RU-WP-WikimediaCommons.ogg

Позволил себе нормализовать уровень звука в аудиофайле о Викискладе. А то слишком тихо было, на некоторых устройствах, вероятно, плохо слышно.

Скажите, а почему вы загружаете аудиофайлы в Русскую Википедию, а не на Викисклад? -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 14:15, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Не думаю, что это где-либо кроме русской вики может пригодиться. А можно спросить, почему в новой версии появился сильный фоновый шум? - A.Savin 17:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Не совсем верно, что он появился, он был и в предыдущей вашей версии. Но. После нормализации (см. Audio_normalization) становятся громче и основной голос, и все шумы. Поэтому, если вы будете слушать тише (на хорошей аппаратуре), то разницы теоретически с предыдущей версией не должно быть. Нормализация нужна IMHO, для тихих ноутов или плееров, которые слушают на улице и тихого звука, который был изначально - скорее всего, недостаточно, как не увеличивай громкость.

>> "...где-либо кроме русской вики может пригодиться."

Аргументов веских не придумывается, единственно - наверное, лучше, чтобы всё было кучкой в одном месте. Сейчас большая часть английских, немецких и русский аудиостатей хранится на Викискладе (Category:Spoken Wikipedia articles by topic), поскольку так написано в правилах аудио-проектов. Но я не настаиваю. Настолько редко кто озвучивает, что лишь бы было - а уж как кто оформит и куда зальёт - дело десятое. -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 17:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Понятно. А как можно избежать этого шума при записи (на домашнем компе, а не в профессиональной студии, разумеется)? - A.Savin 18:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Микрофон получше. Например, у меня гарнитура с одним наушником и неплохим микрофоном Sennheiser MB 25

Хорошая звуковая карта. У меня внешняя (E-MU 0202 USB), я её к ноуту через USB подключаю. И выбираю момент, когда у соседей нет ремонта :)

И еще вопрос. Среди аудиостатей в русской вики большинство - только введения в статью. Какой вы видите смысл в таких "озвучиваниях"? - A.Savin 18:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Очень хороший вопрос. Конечно, озвученная статья лучше чем только введение. Но, сами знаете - сколько это трудов. Поэтому "на безрыбье и рак - щука". Лучше введение, чем совсем ничего. Я стараюсь выбирать из введений статью с двумя условиями: избранная или хорошая + введение подлинее. Надеюсь, что будут находиться герои среди нас, которые будут хорошо озвучивать статьи целиком. -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 19:48, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Huechelnkh.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 20:42, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Reversal of spam blacklist action

A.Savin, please see my recent comments in a couple of places referring to your Spam blacklist action here as "wrongful". I do believe that what you did was wrongful, and I do believe that the Commons community has weighed in extensively on the side of it being wrongful. However, I harbor no ill will toward you. I would just like you (or someone) to revert your wrongful decision. I'd prefer a note on my Talk page if you respond. Thanks. -- Thekohser (talk) 16:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I am disappointed that you would continue editing Commons without giving my request even the courtesy of an up or down reply. -- Thekohser (talk) 16:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Right, sorry. My answer ist: the blacklisting was a result of a discussion, not my standalone decision because I like or dislike some particular websites. Therefore, I see no reason to cancel it now. If I did something wrong, one of the remaining 265 sysops will surely correct it sooner or later. - A.Savin 17:22, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Могила Маршала Огаркова Н.В..JPG

File deletion warning

File:Могила Маршала Огаркова Н.В..JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:15, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:NC patch cable yellow.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good -- Der Wolf im Wald 12:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Gropius-passagen.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Very nice! --Florstein 17:31, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Вопрос логотип по лицензии CC BY-ND (удалено логотип компании)

Добрый день. Поясните пожалуйста почему удалили файл File:UCMS-Group-logo-official.png "UCMS-Group-logo-official.png". Файл удалён с Commons участником Fastily. Причина: Uploader requested deletion of unused file. Файл был удален без предупреждения, хотя я запросил обсуждени тегом "Обычное удаление", где подробно расписал почему файл загружен с лицензией CC BY-SA и почему проставлены теги не для свободного использования + критерии добросовестного использования.
((Несвободный файл | описание = UCMS Group Logo | источник = Official Website http://www.ucmsgroup.ru/ | время создания = 2011 | автор = UCMS Group ))

((Несвободный файл/ОДИ | статья = UCMS Group | цель = отображение официального логотипа компании UCMS Group | заменяемость = нет, уникальный | прочее = товарный знак,официальный логотип компании ))

CC BY-ND не доступен в вики, но это логотип компании UCMS GROUP было бы идеально прописать теже требования, что и на старом логотипе. Не могли бы вы помочь с загрузкой или аппрувом?
link with discuss http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:UCMS-Group-logo-official.png

—Preceding unsigned comment added by GerRove (talk • contribs)

Добрый день. По поводу удалённых изображений, почему бы вам не обратиться к администратору, осуществившему удаление. - A.Savin 12:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Invigorator Corset

You had delete the page Invigorator Corset, by that you deleted a important information for the pictures. And and made ​​a lot of dead links. haabet 10:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

QI категории

Вы добавляете категории Quality images для страны и для области. Как я понимаю, это hidden категории, то есть они не видны пользователям Commons. Их видят только зарегистрированные участники, которых намного меньше, чем обычных пользователей. Скажите пожалуйста, для чего нужно создавать такие hidden категории? Кому они помогают?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:41, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:LEV-Steinbuechel Franziskuskirche.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Nice, but the perspective correction distorted the tops of the lamp posts, especially the left one. Any idea to avoid this ?--Jebulon 14:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC) Again: there was no persp. correction. - A.Savin 22:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC) Good. Mattbuck 19:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Suedfriedhof Bonn - Grab Wessel.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --kallerna 12:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Khodynka Field 2010 12.jpg

File deletion warning

File:Khodynka Field 2010 12.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  russavia (talk) 07:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Schlebusch Evangelische Friedenskirche.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good!! --Keymeulen 11:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:LEV-Hitdorf Antoniuskapelle.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments good --Carschten 11:08, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Kerpen-Sindorf Church Maria Koenigin.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 16:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:LEV-Rheindorf Heilig-Kreuz-Kirche.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 16:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Saint Isidor's Church (Saint Petersburg), exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 08:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! File:Buir Haus an der Kirchenstrasse.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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. Comments Good photo. --Florstein 12:28, 19 May 2012 (UTC)