User:ComputerHotline/Archive 9

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-11-19-Waning crescent moon.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 of the moon. Its better improved also. --Katarighe 16:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC) Comment Unsharp at 100% ? --PierreSelim 10:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC) It's caused by the atmosphere. --ComputerHotline 17:29, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Image looks good, but you should add English description.--Ahonc 14:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC) Done --PierreSelim 15:36, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Ruines

Si tu t'interesse aux ruines, tu devrais allé aux anciennes installations de triage lavage proche de l'ancien puits du Chanois. il y a de beaux vestiges... http://www.abamm.org/centrale.html http://www.abamm.org/triage.html Salutation, collègue ;) Bourgeois.A

C'est noté. --ComputerHotline (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Si tu va photographier ces vestiges, pourra-tu renger tes photos dans cette catégorie ? Category:Puits du Chanois et le triage-lavage-cokerie http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Puits_du_Chanois_et_le_triage-lavage-cokerie?uselang=fr (Bourgeois.A (talk) 12:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC))

ok. --ComputerHotline (talk) 13:39, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-04 16-28-58-Asteraceae-88f.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. --Saffron Blaze 15:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-04 16-24-26-Asteraceae-71f.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. --Saffron Blaze 15:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

houillère de Ronchamp

Bravo pour tes nouvelles photos et merci ! Si il y a un lieu que tu rechercheS n'hésiteS pas à me demandER ! (Bourgeois.A (talk) 10:28, 17 December 2011 (UTC))

Merci à vous. --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:46, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-13 12-48-57-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.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. --Saffron Blaze 17:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-13 12-42-48-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.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; nice framing. --Saffron Blaze 17:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-13 13-04-03-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.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. --Smial 12:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-13 12-58-49-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.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. --Smial 12:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-13 12-53-53-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.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. --Smial 12:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-20 17-07-07-capteur-16f.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. --Berthold Werner 13:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-21 16-05-00-fossiles-23f.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. --Smial 12:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Microfossil the term is reserved for specimens of millimeter. these fragments, crinoid, are centimeter.--Archaeodontosaurus 16:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-20 17-38-36-capteur-10f.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. --Smial 12:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-11-09 14-43-52-sun-in-h-alpha.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-25 22-36-06-etamines-tulipe-24f.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.--Jebulon 13:38, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

HR

Merci beaucoup pour tes nouvelles photos ! Il y en a désormais 116 sur les houillères de Ronchamp, je vais bientôt en ajouter également. Cordialement (Bourgeois.A (talk) 12:19, 29 December 2011 (UTC))

suject (sic)

Stop adding nonsense categories to commons please. Hans 17:39, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

What is nonsense categories for you ??? --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:39, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:2011-12-13 12-58-49-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2011-12-13 12-58-49-eglise-st-maimboeuf-montbeliard.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Morpho

I used one of your excellent photos here [1] A very useful addition. Many thanks Notafly (talk) 09:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Image guidelines - downsampling

Hello. There have been many inconsistencies regarding the evaluation of images in Commons, mainly on the issue of resolution and sharpness. I think we should agree upon a uniform policy, and try to reach a consensus. I started a new discussion on the matter of downsampling, if you would like to share your view. Thank you. Gidip (talk) 17:51, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-28 14-50-00-puits-buyer.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. --NorbertNagel 22:28, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-28 14-05-56-plaine-chanois.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. --Haeferl 23:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2011-12-28 14-10-02-plaine-chanois.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. --Haeferl 23:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-04 18-06-12-lys.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 I do not know to do this. I can't say if it is excellent, but it's clear QI to me--Lmbuga 19:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-04 17-57-36-lys.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 Quality to me. --NorbertNagel 18:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Fossiles

Salut, tes images de fossiles en focus stack sont impressionnantes je trouve. Je pense que ce genre d'image gagnerait à avoir une petite échelle sur le côté. En tout cas j'espère que tu t'amuses bien à faire du focus stack parce que c'est magnifique que ce soit sur des fleurs ou sur des fossiles. PierreSelim (talk) 13:20, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-08 09-29-48-trilobite.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. A scale would add value to the image --PierreSelim 13:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Calymenid2.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. A scale would add values to the image --PierreSelim 13:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-10 22-53-20-nightscape.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. Nice Colors. --Ralf Roletschek 20:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-17 13-00-30-egl-st-maimboeuf.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 HDR quality. --NorbertNagel 21:40, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-17 12-49-39-egl-st-maimboeuf.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 HDR quality. --NorbertNagel 21:40, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-17 12-46-57-egl-st-maimboeuf.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 HDR quality. Reviewers: Please note, that the organ is not too dark. It's just a problem of the thumbnail. --NorbertNagel 21:40, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-17 22-11-44-constellations-20f-6d-11o.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 Yeah, OK. Mattbuck 02:08, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-24 12-46-46-eurovelo6.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. --Iifar 15:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-22 17-02-39-autruche-riv.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 I like pictures without sunshine, there is a change of weather and that is difficult to map. --Ralf Roletschek 20:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-22 16-47-57-madeleine-riv.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. --Ralf Roletschek 20:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-01-22 15-21-42-bourbeuse.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. --Ralf Roletschek 20:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-03 17-35-24-etang-graviers.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 photo quality, meets all of the criteria. --Katarighe 17:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-03 21-32-54-etamine-tulipe-21f.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 Image composition could be better, but good quality. --NorbertNagel 18:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Fort d'Arches

Salut.

Tu viens de proposer 6 photos dont les noms de fichiers ne se différencient que par l'heure (même pas: minutes et secondes...) de prise de vue, et qui en plus portent exactement le même nom dans ta série de propositions en QIC.

Il est impossible de ne pas se tromper quand on évalue, tu pourrais peut-être faire un petit effort à ce sujet et prendre le temps de respecter un peu plus les gens à qui tu soumets l'examen de tes photos.

Si on appliquait vraiment les règles, tes images devraient être rejetées comme ne satisfaisant pas les critères (nom de fichier incorrect).

"Commonist" a ses limites...

Cordialement, --Jebulon (talk) 14:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Using a photo

Thank you for providing the creative commons with so many beautiful images. I have used one, and as you have requested, left this note. The context of my use is a YouTube video, so I cannot leave a direct link here (because of the spam filter). If, for whatever reason, you'd actually like to see it, then leave a comment on my Wikipedia discussion page (which has the same username as here). Again, thank you. --MilesEques (talk) 00:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm using one of your pictures for my website. All of your pictures look very awesome and I really like the way you're taking pictures.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 15-28-41-fort-arches.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 Please see here--Jebulon 15:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Good quality. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 15-32-00-fort-arches.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 Please see here--Jebulon 15:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Good quality. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 15-35-56-fort-arches.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 Please see here--Jebulon 15:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Good quality. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 15-43-41-fort-arches.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. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 15-51-20-fort-arches.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. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 16-03-14-fort-arches.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 Please see here--Jebulon 15:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Good quality. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 16-09-53-fort-arches.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 Please see here--Jebulon 15:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Good quality. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-05 16-14-05-fort-arches.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 Please see here--Jebulon 15:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Good quality. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-06 12-58-32-ruines-etupes.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. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-06 13-02-15-ruines-etupes.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. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-06 13-06-37-ruines-etupes.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. --Tomer T 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-03 20-34-32-salbert-moonlight.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 Question Balance white on an idea for clear day? --Aleks G 22:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC) Day light. --ComputerHotline 13:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Cool. Mattbuck 11:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-12 20-57-15-pano-ciel-soir-hiver-30im-10d-16o.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 work. Do you think we should add more annotations? --Kadellar 18:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC) Yes, of course. --ComputerHotline 19:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:2012-02-03 20-34-32-salbert-moonlight.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2012-02-03 20-34-32-salbert-moonlight.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-27 22-36-46-chapelet-lune-14f.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 interesting. --Jkadavoor 08:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-29 21-14-18-pano-conj-lune-aldebaran-48f-2s-11d-10o.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 Wonderful! --Jkadavoor 10:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-29 12-45-27-tape-recorder-head-26f.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 for me. --Jkadavoor 05:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-03-06 23-43-57-etang-veronne.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 for me. --Jkadavoor 07:57, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-02-27 21-38-50-m44-42f-41d-8o.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 very nice --Carschten 16:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I have used several of your photos

I have used several of your photos on my website featuring "virtual reality" photos.

http://verybigphotos.com

Each one of them has your name in the title of the photo and the web address. For example:

http://verybigphotos.com/France_360_Photo%20_BressonThomas2011-03-20-fort-lomont-7.html

Philkon (talk) 15:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC) Phil Konstantin

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-03-01 18-02-05-etang-forges.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 for me its QI --Ralf Roletschek 15:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-03-06 23-52-21-etang-veronne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-03-14 21-42-55-file-etoiles-14f-2min-3d.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 for me. --Jkadavoor 05:59, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2012-03-07 00-01-29-etang-veronne.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 OK. --Mattbuck 18:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)