User talk:Ikan Kekek

Hello, everybody! If you'd like to discuss anything with me, please post new topics at the bottom of the page and sign the posts with 4 tildes (the ~ key) in a row. Thanks!

Currently inactive discussions can be found at User talk:Ikan Kekek/archive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Ikan Kekek/archive

This time reaching out to you - and what this Wiki is about

Hi Ikan,

on the QI candidates page you have just written something to me that reflects a misunderstanding of my intentions. And by telling me that this Wiki is not a private discussion space you have crossed a border of mutual respect, since of course I know that, and judging from your user page, I know that for nearly eight years longer than you.

I do not want to start a debate or write lengthy stuff about every disagreement among reviewers or image authors. That's an impression you probably got because just we two have collided with our views of quality twice within a few weeks. If it comes to lengthy statements on the QI candidates page, it is usually an indication that already something else went wrong before. I have seen people explode alarmingly often on the page during the last weeks, repeatedly changing to writing German in their excitment.

You have written: We're all volunteers here with limited time, and some of us are just using our eyes and mind to make judgments and might not be able to advise you on what to do differently. If you think that's not legitimate, then you don't respect the right of the viewer to make up his/her mind about what s/he's looking at. As I understand this, your writing reflects a very special view about what the work on the QI page is about. It is a legitimate view in some sense, and I respect that view. But I want to tell you that it is just a very special one (as might be mine, of course).

Quality - in what field soever, photography or elsewhere - is not a matter of majorities, and not a thing that everyone can judge about in any field. On the other hand, Wikipedia or Wikimedia is for everyone. It is a community project where everyone is invited to contribute. That's a discrepancy that Wikipedia has to live with in general, and it has been astonishingly successful in spite of it. Nevertheless it is a discrepancy. Hierarchical structures like roles with approval rights or admin roles can only mitigate the problem. At the same time the situation is aggravated by the volunteer character of its contributors. The majority of project members are probably amateurs in their fields. All contributions are just for free, and therefore professionals presumably stay away. I did not make a single Wikipedia edit on the fields where I earn my money from in normal life or where I hold a university degree. If I look at the image contributions on Commons I observe the same: I am quite sure that professional photographers are a minority there.

So what is the QI page about in my observation? As far as I remember, it was created when in the early days of this Wiki amateurs and photographic laymen began to upload any shots they had in order to illustrate the Wikipedia articles. Some more advanced photographers could not bear to see the blown-out white skies, distorted buildings and sharpening halos any more. Therefore they created the QI initative. It was meant to improve the quality of Commons by spreading photographic knowledge among contributors. Ten years ago, I experienced the QI page as a page for image authors to work together.

If I look at the page today, after being less active on it for considerable time, the impression is a bit different. There seem to be more nominations in shorter time, and most important, there is the filtering feature on Commons, where you can select out all QI from a category to be displayed in prominent position. This feature is nice for finding good pictures, and actually I suggested it many years ago. (I don't know if anyone remembered this at the time when the feature was really created. Anyone could have had this idea too.) But on the other hand, the feature increases the desire for QI status, resulting not only in better quality, but also in more review work load.

If you write that you are a volunteer doing reviews with limited time, you seem to reflect the new spirit of the page to me, which lies in the purpose of filtering much nominations in limited time. This is a legitimate aspect, as collecting and categorizing is an important acitivity. Some people seem to specialize on it also for other Wikis. It is important work, and therefore it is legitmate that you ask for respect for reviewers. On the other hand, you would have nothing to review, if no one would create images. Therefore let me urgently ask you for respect also for image creators!

Image creators are volunteers too, as are reviewers. (Most people assume both roles anyway.) Image creators might even invest more of their limited time than reviewers. Therefore, if I do a review, I try to respect the image creator. This does not mean that lengthy explanations of reviews or even advice on improvement procedures are necessary. If the situation is simple, simple headwords are sufficient. But if it is more complicated and the author has questions, I feel obliged to explain. That's a matter of respect for the image author. In some cases, I even help someone to improve the image, but only if he or she asks for it explicitly. I do it voluntarily, although my time is also very limited. And it is possible, because there is no project plan that says I should work on as many images as I can in my limited time. I did not invent this mode of working. I learned it from others.

I know from your writing that your intentions may be different. That's OK in the sense of a division of work. But don't exaggerate. Just writing "bad quality", as some people do, is kind of insulting for the nominator. (You did not write exactly this and I did not receive it. But it is an extreme example from the page.) A nominated image may be even obvious trash, but if someone nominated it, he or she did not want to do any harm usually, but just was not able to perceive the problem, and therefore deserves respect by the reviewer nevertheless. To say it more clearly: If you feel not to have the time for paying a minimum of respect to the image creator by providing him or her with a clarification of your findings, you should not review the image at all after my opinion.

In summary: There are many aspects that make up this Wiki project. At the heart there is collaboration among volunteers. If you aim at collaboration on a high level of quality, this is neither a matter of majorities, nor can it be judged in an incontrovertible, absolutely objective way. There has to be discussion, here on the Wiki as in normal life, and that's the reason why every article on Wikipedia has its discussion page.

So yes, this Wiki is not a private discussion space. But in the above sense, it is a public one.

Best regards

--JRff (talk) 08:52, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

P.S.: Hope you don't blame me for having made you discussion page so much longer...

All of this makes sense, and thanks for recounting the history. It's certainly good to be reminded to be sensitive toward the photographers who choose to upload their own work to this site. That said, if something isn't sharp enough in my opinion for the QI designation, it should be clear enough to state that in my opinion, it's not sharp enough for the QI designation. If people don't agree, that's what Consensual Review is for.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

If you still think that even after a question an image author cannot expect more than just pointing your thumb down (for the current case in terms of sharpness), it seems that I have not reached you with my plea. Some keywords where exactly on the image you see a problem in a less obvious situation would cost you only seconds and require no technical background. I did not want to make you change your judgement. I just hoped to create more sensitivity for communication. The name for the Wiki keyword that sends images to consensual review was not randomly chosen to be /Discuss instead of just /Vote.

Anyway, I have to thank you for your kind acceptance of a discussion on the review procedure at least, if not on the image itself.

Have a nice day,

--JRff (talk) 09:21, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

You mean pointing out where I mainly was seeing the unsharpness? It was on the left side of the building, but at least one other person pointed that out. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:23, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

OK, thank you finally. And yes, meanwhile user "King of Hearts" gave that hint, but much, much later. There is indeed a distinct difference in sharpness between the left and the right part. I did not take notice too much before, because I considered it more as background and concentrated on the castle. And still I don't find it too serious, but this is of course up to the reviewer to decide. The reason is the natural decrease of sharpness towards the image border, which is present for any lens, only somewhat less for the very expensive ones. This together with a non-centered crop made the effect most likely. --JRff (talk) 20:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Ikan,

I only recently realized that you never post pictures on QIC and all your FPC nominations are those of other photographers. Thank you very much for your avid selfless quality work on Commons! --Trougnouf (talk) 12:47, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

My pleasure. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Hemidactylus frenatus (Common House Gecko) on white background, focus stacking.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hemidactylus frenatus (Common House Gecko) on white background, focus stacking.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Good evening Ikan Kekek,

Thank you for your comment on my photo of Cyclamen coum. This pink flowering cyclamen was the most beautiful one I could find under the trees of the avenue. Flowering cyclamen in various colors are currently blooming. From white to this pink and many colors in between. I have selected 4 photos. The other 3 are under this picture. Personally, I do not think these are the best because they have been photographed from above. and the others from the side. The flowers stand on fairly long stems above the marbled leaves.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:26, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
PS: I can always make a difficult choice.

I understand. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Good morning Ikan Kekek,

Thank you for your comments on my FP photo. My question: what do I need to change the text for the file?--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:35, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

"Ruïne Casti Munt Sorn Gieri (Burg Jörgenberg)" doesn't look English to me and is identical to your Dutch text. It's the ruins of a castle, right? So "Ruins of [Name, I suppose Munt Sorn Gieri] Castle (Burg Jörgenberg)" or something like that. If anything is unclear, let me know. I regret that I know so little Dutch. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. I have adjusted the text. Hopefully it is good now. We speak in our province Frisian. That is a minority language.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:31, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Well, I know even less Frisian (none). :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Moioio Island

Hi, thank you very much for your review of photo in QIC. And If you like to see; all my photos of Moioio Island are here. Do you think that one of this images has a FP potential? And can you see my photos here? Do you think that they are enough good for I nominate for FP? Thank you one's again and have a nice day! Tournasol7 (talk) 14:35, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Tournasol7. No time to look at everything now, but I'll try to get to this. The second link is red, though.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:13, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's not urgent :) Secont link is: here -> section "FP potentials". Best regards! Tournasol7 (talk) 22:02, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

thanks for the advice

Thanks for the advice, I haven't figured it out yet with the categories of pictures. --Alexandr frolov (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure how best to help. Maybe User:XRay has some advice on how to find the best categories, beyond the remarks that have been made in your Quality Image Candidates nominations. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Alexandr frolov: Just an answer here ... I gave an hint for the categories: Commons:Categories. Please read it. There are a lot of hints. IMO the best way for categorization. For me these things are important: Categories are not tags, look for categories for everything seen on your photograph, look for the categorization of other photographs in the appropriate category. --XRay ^talk 09:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Clivipollia pulchra 01.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Clivipollia pulchra 01.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Why?

Do know Colin, and he's doing a false allegations... so why you are removing your votes? -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 00:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

The dialogue speaks for itself. Address the arguments where they're given and don't talk to me about this on my user talk page. Thank you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

War memorial, Millport, Cumbrae, Scotland

Hi Ikan! Thanks for nominating my image. Sorry for not reacting there, I was away for a week or so. Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 08:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

That's fine! I hope you enjoyed your vacation. Sorry most voters didn't like that photo the way I did. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Almsee Nordbucht-4224.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Almsee Nordbucht-4224.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Interior of The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands, Singapore.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Interior of The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands, Singapore.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Ikan hope you're doing great!

I want to ask you what you think about this picture of the EZB? This there anything I should improve?

Best regards --A,Ocram (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm doing fine. I think this is a good compositional idea. I'm not sure it's possible to take an FP of this motif, but greater sharpness would be good.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Ikan, about 2000 pictures of about 500 different types. I myself am surprised about the amount. The effort is not so big when the cars come by in short intervals. You only need sun for short shutter speeds and a lot of time to classify the models. Last year I found time for four events. This year it will probably be less. Thank you for your tireless and always objective work. Regards --Ermell (talk) 08:00, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

You're most welcome. I've been looking for a possible FP among those pictures. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

FPC discussion

Hi Ikan, thanks for this edit. You're absolutely free to vote as you like, either positively or negatively. The reason of our long discussion is partly due to my misunderstanding of your text, either because English is not my mother tongue, and because your review destabilized me at the beginning. Bootshift immediately voted "per Ikan", and I could imagine this painting being quickly disqualified by a rude succession of red votes following each others, as it happens sometimes in FPC, until a fatal configuration it becomes almost impossible for any potential supporter to share their feelings without considering it will just be a waste of time, since the result is already done. Yes I think the coloration of the texts below an FPC is influential and can also determine the further participation. Although maybe that's wrong, and in any case that's the "game" (or the process). This is a painting I appreciate very much, and finding it in good quality was a good surprise, thus an immediate disqualification in FPC was hard to follow from my side. Now of course I feel more relax and confident after other's supports, but I don't know what would have been the result (which is still not completely done) if my natural behavior had been total indifference. We can't change the past, only see what happens at the present. Also my first sight towards this painting was similar to yours as stated in your first comment, since I found strange the sculptor works on a wrapped subject with this uncovered lady, but only after a second interpretation, the work appeared funny and interesting to me, and as a consequence when I read your oppose I wondered if your personal view was superficial or legitimate. Now I'm still unsure but it doesn't matter, I just want to explain my misunderstanding of this sentence "you would never appreciate my father's art, since at the moment, it sells for 5 and not 6 figures." Talking about prices, in France (or maybe only in my neighborhood), we most often refer to the number of zeros. So, for example a piece of art sold 50'000 € has a price with 4 zeros. This is sometimes a matter of joke when talking about expensive things, we say "this is not 3 but 4 zeros", or "you can add one more zero and you're closer to reality", etc. On the contrary, I'm not really familiar with these "figures" you mentioned, until I catch their meaning in the context. So the confusion started here. There was 5 zeros in Dantan's price, so you were likely to mean your father's paintings were sold for 6 zeros, which means millions ! In your sentence, the it in "it sells" referred for me to Dantan's painting, while obviously you were talking about your father's. This has become very clear afterwards, but believe me at this stage, in my hurry reading, it was not, and I honestly thought you were saying your father sells masterpieces for more than 1'000'000 USD. So yes, you can imagine how dubitative I was, because one (or five or nine) million dollars for a painting is such a high price, usually artists don't paint only one but many pieces. However, as surprising it would have been, I was not completely mistrusting you, since you seem a honest person, and thought perhaps I missed something (sometimes family stories are very complex, family links too), and you could have an extremely successful ancestor doing some kind of powerful abstract art selling very well in some corners of New York, and making you just completely allergic towards other styles, or you could have added a bit of romance but not so much to the story, so finally, to be frank my first reaction was half skeptical and half curious and embarrassed. That's why I answered this slightly ironic text requesting more details. Sorry this could have been avoided if my English had been better, my reading less hurried, my contrariety weaker, and my knowledge better concerning the description of prices through "figures". I apologize for the mess resulted, since my error was fixed while I did not completely adopt your point of view either, but it would have been more hurting to strike completely my sentence after your valid explanations (you were right to defend a truth, but the truth also gives credit to my own position in this context). Well, finally this message on your talk page is above all to let you know that I have absolutely no judgement on your father's art, for the simple reason I don't know what he did. Perhaps I would be extremely admirative, perhaps at the inverse totally sick, or perhaps just 100% neutral. I don't think this is important here, but prefer to bring a bit of light, since the discussion can be confused or confusing. Debates are fine in FPC in general but this was not a great debate in my view. Maybe next time :-) Kind regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for this message. Of course I realize I have the right to vote pro or con, but I considered people's remarks about why the content of the painting is interesting or funny and ultimately found that a meritorious argument. Besides, after living with the painting for a while, while I still don't love it, at least from the reproduction (and no matter how good a reproduction is, the experience of seeing an artwork in person is different), it's really not as bad as it seemed to me at first.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

N178FA Cirrus Vision

Thanks for the review. I had the same reservations, and I'm not fond of the busy background with the hangars and porta-potties, but the alien-looking plane with the sun gleaming on it and the sunrays were too good to pass up in the 30 seconds available. It was intermittently raining, and there were occasional opportunities for sparkle. Acroterion (talk) 12:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm glad you didn't pass up the opportunity. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Need your presence at Featured sound candidates

		We request the honor of your presence at Featured sound candidates
		Dear Ikan Kekek, Featured sound candidates needs your help and you can participate by reviewing or nominating sounds for the FS tag. You can start reviewing/nominating sounds now. Welcome! -- Eatcha (Talk-Page ) 06:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Sure. I'll check that out when I have the chance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:21, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Eatcha, I hope you don't regret inviting me now. I may be serving as a giant buzzkill at FSC, but I'm an opinionated professional musician with high standards. I hope everyone on that board doesn't hate me now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

What ? Why would I regret ? I actually want more musicians & audiophiles to participate in that project, I don't want some nonsense crap to get featured. And your proposal to start a Valued sound project is nice, but I agree with others that we first need to get the FSC up and stable until we don't have about 20 regular participants, I also started a project for featuring videos, but now I'm sure that it will crash within next few weeks, want to know why ? See this. The number of videos is just 0.259% of all the files on commons, want to know about sounds ? It's just about 2%, on the other hand pictures are more than 90% of what commons is. But I hope that commons will change and we'll see some more diversity. ————Eatcha (Talk-Page) 17:17, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I get you. But I don't think that's a reason to shelve the featured video project. It can be quiet for a while but continue in the background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Fusinus syracusanus 01.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fusinus syracusanus 01.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Angela Conner 'Renaissance' water sculpture, Hatfield House, Hertfordshire, England 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Angela Conner 'Renaissance' water sculpture, Hatfield House, Hertfordshire, England 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Hi, I want to award you with this barnstar. This is my way of apologizing for all the trouble I caused recently. Thank you BoothSift 23:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

It's OK. I'm fine; I just speak forthrightly when I see the need. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

re:

Please see Commons:Valued image candidates/Mourning in Shanghai (1).jpg, I have replied to that question, and, thanks for your reminding. --WQL (talk) 06:41, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Review of c:File:Pisaner_Dom_Westfassade.jpg

Thank you for the review of my picture. I would like to learn from it, so i looked up the category of similar pictures. There are 11 pictures shot from nearly the same position. None of those seems sharper to me. At least mine is the one, where the inscription above and to the right of the main portal is readable best. So my question is: What did I do wrong and could I really have done better? Thanks for advice and best regards --Cyberolm (talk) 13:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

I can't address how other people may have reviewed other pictures. Reviewing at Quality Image Candidates is very inconsistent because different people are reviewing at different times. I also can't really tell you technically what you did wrong, except for what I said in the review: The Duomo is out of focus, and then it looks to me like you tried to sharpen it with software, but that resulted in a lot of unpleasant noise while not making it sharp. So all I can suggest is, make sure to have a better focus. The composition is very good, so I hope you have a chance to retake the picture. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Astern IMG 3343.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Astern IMG 3343.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

My FP-nomination Callithrix penicillata

Hallo Ikan, I uploaded a version with a wider crop. Please have again a look on it, wheter it is better now. Greetings --Llez (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Help?

Can you look at File:Alan Shepard (1971).jpg and tell me what you think? There is another version in the file history to compare it to. -- Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) 01:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

The original definitely looks too red, but I think you've drained too much of the color. At least on my monitor, it looks too white now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thought you could use a nice soothing cup of tea about now. Cart (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

You're right. I didn't mention that I'm also struggling to recover from bronchitis. Thank you for the tea and sympathy. <3 Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh dear! Not a good combination. I was wondering where you were and I was hoping you were on vacation. I assume you will also have an upcoming struggle with an insurance company. Take care now, best you can. --Cart (talk) 15:13, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

I have no renter's insurance, so I have to deal directly with the landlord and haven't yet gotten a response to any of my emails or my one voicemail so far, so it's time for a certified letter. Fortunately, I didn't take much of a financial hit or lose any irreplaceable art or documents in this flood, but it's a problem not to be able to live in the apartment I'm paying rent for. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:58, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

I had forgotten how tricky landlords in NY can be.:-( My sister divides her time between Sweden and an apartment in Queens, so I've heard a few things. I'm glad you at least have friends you can stay with while you sort this out. Hope you get well soon so you'll have the strength to deal with all of it. Do drop in here or on FPC from time to time so we'll know you're ok. --Cart (talk) 23:18, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Things are a bit unsettled, in that I was informed today that I have to leave this apartment in a week and my girlfriend's mother says I could stay with her for a few days but should contact other people. So I'll call my godmother and one or two other friends. I also am likely to have the phone number of a pro bono tenants' lawyer tomorrow and can discuss things with him/her. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

What a mess! You have my deepest sympathies. --Cart (talk) 09:29, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. This isn't fun. I have hopes that when it's all over, my apartment will be in much better shape than before the flood, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:47, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Life events

Sad to hear. Good luck and hopefully see you soon -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:56, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Basile. The necessary repairs have been approved but are now delayed because I'm recovering from pneumonia. But at least I'm staying with my cousins and one of them is a nurse practitioner. They also have good Wi-Fi.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

• We missed your reviews and comments everyday. Good luck, really, and a fast recovery! -- Basile Morin (talk) 18:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back --A.Savin 17:25, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

+1! I've been keeping tabs on you at Wikivoyage to make sure you were ok. :-) --Cart (talk) 17:53, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. That's very sweet of you two! My apartment is definitely still a work in progress. For example, I threw away my old office chair and haven't bought a new one yet, and there are still a bunch of things on my desk and nowhere to put my computer. Etc., etc. I just cleaned the dishrack this afternoon, as it was dirty from when they sanded the floor, and I haven't dealt with the things on the stove and turned the gas back on yet. But I am back as of this past Thursday night. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

sparrows

The chattery sparrows you see most are probably house sparrows, which don't really have much of a song. The next most common in NY is, I think, the white-throated sparrow. They have a song but it's pretty boring ("Oh sweet canada" is the goofy wording people give it). There are plenty of song sparrows, too, but they're less common than the other two. They do have a cute little song. So there's that. :) And yeah, it was snacking when I came across it. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  14:40, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd forgotten the sparrows I see all the time are called house sparrows. The song sparrow looks very similar, so I mistook it for being the same species. That is a sweet song. I don't remember seeing white-throated sparrows before. They're really pretty. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:17, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

White-throated are cute enough and common enough that I feel like I should've had better luck taking pictures of them. Alas, they are still small and jumpy. Best effort is probably this handsome fellow (perhaps if it were 2005, it would be a good candidate for FP :) ). — Rhododendrites ^talk |  18:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Fun fact: white-throated and song sparrows are native here. House sparrows, though I think the most abundant bird in the world (and in the US), were only introduced because some guy in New York imported some from England, hoping they'd help kill some moths. Now here we are. Starlings, too... super common bird only here because some guy in New York decided to try to bring all of the birds mentioned by Shakespeare into the US. Now both species are extremely common and pushing out other bird populations :/ — Rhododendrites ^talk |  18:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, and the house sparrows, instead of concentrating on eating insects, preferred to go after the oats fed to horses. That picture you linked is impressive to me, quite a bit larger than life. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Videos of sports championships

Hi Ikan Kekek. I read your comment here and would like to tell you there are a few more Dutch swimming championships videos. :-) For example: File:Nationale zwemkampioenschappen Weeknummer 43-34 - Open Beelden - 73628.ogv (1943) and File:De nationale zwemkampioenschappen in het De Mirandabad in Amsterdam.ogv (1956). Trijnstel_talk 20:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Trijnstel. They're probably all featurable. I have to wonder what kinds of hoops a Dutch athlete had to jump through to compete during the Nazi occupation. Clearly, they had to be Aryans, but did they have to be Nazis or the Dutch equivalent, or would it have been tolerated for them not to be members of a party but to simply salute German officials when called to do so and so on? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:46, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, as far as I can read people used sport in the Netherlands to be distracted from the horrors of World War II. I have no idea whether or not it was required to sign an agreement or so. Of course, Jewish people weren't allowed sport and NSB'ers (the Dutch Nazi's) had a special rank. Trijnstel_talk 19:59, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Coast with Dome Hotel, Kyrenia, Northern Cyprus 03.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Coast with Dome Hotel, Kyrenia, Northern Cyprus 03.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Ferrocarril White Pass, Portage, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-31, DD 39.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ferrocarril White Pass, Portage, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-31, DD 39.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Aerial view of Hardinge Bridge and Lalon Shah Bridge.jpg

Hi Ikan, you reviewed File:Aerial view of Hardinge Bridge and Lalon Shah Bridge.jpg as "too noisy for QI". I can see dust and JPEG compression artefacts or over-sharpening? and lots of micro-structures (waves, power cables, ...). What are you exactly referring to as noise? As a reviewer and someone with knowledge in this area, do you have a guess how a digital photo can be noisy with an ISO speed of 100? -- Rillke^(q?) 14:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Look at the water in particular, especially closer to the near bank. Unless those patches of different colors are accurate, that seems to me like a lot of color noise. Also, look at the view on the other side of the river. Some of that has to be smog, but it looks very noisy, though the noise isn't colorful like it is on the river. But feel free to support the photo and change the photo's status to "Discuss" if you think it's a QI, or feel free to add your own comment if you feel that I've incorrectly described the problems with the photo. I'm not an expert on photographic techniques and go more by what I see, so I could easily be wrong in my terminology. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Did you notice the photo most likely taken by a drone? Not sure about the colour patches in the water. Never visited Bangladesh, though it's possible that chemicals together with the low sun create them. You can compare to similar photos taken with the same device on Category:Taken with Hasselblad L1D-20c. -- Rillke^(q?) 23:44, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

I did notice that, yes, and considered it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:46, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Independence Monument glass tower.jpg

Hi Ikan Kekek, I tried to remove a big dust spot in File:Independence Monument glass tower.jpg as requested by you. In the meantime I believe that it worked, but at first I could only see the old version. So I am sorry for the confusing entries at Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list#November_5,_2019, which are correct now (hopefully). Best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

No problem. I'm glad the photo didn't get unnecessarily declined, though in that case, it could have always been resubmitted with the point made that the dust spot had been removed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:19, 13 November 2019 (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:
Trappist beers.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Patroller!

Counter Vandalism Unit

Hi Ikan Kekek,

You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.

As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.

We could use your help at the Counter Vandalism Unit. For example by patrolling an Anonymous-edits checklist and checking a day-part.

If you have any questions please leave a message on the CVU talkpage or ask for help on IRC in #wikimedia-commons.

---

-- ~riley (talk) 03:02, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

FP Set Nomination Étang de Salses-Leucate

Hallo Ikan, there were some problems with my nomination of the set of the Étang de Salses-Leucate. Cart proposed a new nomination and to delete the former, which I did. Could you please have a look again on the nomination and also make notes on the description page of the images concerning your remarks (" there looks to be a very light stitching error that's most visible at the top of the picture frame a bit to the right of the left corner, but it's not easy to see, and there's what might be one dust spot in the water, about a quarter of the way from left to right at the far end of the light part of the water"), not on the nomination page of the set. I will corredt it as soon as possible.

From the former nomination:
"* Info Ok, there is a technical problem with this nom. When Llez created this page they accidentally removed the top lines in the nom with the link to the nomination page (now restored manually) and also the 'FPVotingPeriodFlag' (can't restore that, maybe some admin can, don't know). You can see there is no "Voting period ends on..." at the top of the page. Without it, the FPCBot will not able to handle this nom. It would be best if you just withdrew this page and made a new nomination so that the nom and photos have a chance to enter the system. You will prpbably have to use another set name though, like "Étang de Salses-Leucate-2" or something. --Cart (talk) 10:19, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

• Should also 'ping' Ikan Kekek about this since he already voted on this. --Cart (talk) 10:20, 25 November 2019 (UTC)"

Thanks. I'll have a look. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:15, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Llez, to be clear, do you mean the file page? It doesn't look like I can annotate the nomination page, but in the past, it's been considered vandalism to put these kinds of notations into file pages, so I want to make doubly sure that's OK with you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Copyright violation accusations

Just so you know, not all of my wikimedia files are Google Maps Images. So, I do not believe that it is entirely fair for WMSR to accuse me of doing so. I agree that there are quite a few Google Maps Images I may have uploaded but that doesnt mean that all my images are from Google Maps Street View. Also, when I have tried several times uploading Google Maps Images by stating it is from Google Maps and not my own work, Wikimedia commons keeps on removing them and saying that I cannot upload them, despite me giving fair credit to them and being legally allowed to use them in wikipedia articles in their terms so long as I give them fair credit. I have tried to do this legitimately but wikipedia will not allow me to do so. I did not know that Wikipedia prohibited Google Maps Street View images from being posted in articles but I have strongly felt the need to place them in Wikipedia WMATA Metrobus Route articles as they sometimes provide pictures of bus routes, such as U2 & U8, which no longer exist. Also, for WMSR to paint me as being disruptive reptitively to Wikipedia and say that I should be permanently banned/banned for a long time just makes Wikipedia sound very corrupt/unforgiving and like it is controlled by a few elite members who rarely get their edits/articles questioned and want to oppress others. That makes me insulted as an editor that I am constantly being picked on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctor of Directions (talk • contribs) 05:31, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

First, why haven't you replied to any of the messages on your user talk page? Second, just so you know, on all Wikis, the newest threads go at the end of the page, and the newest replies go at the end of the relevant thread. Third, please sign every post on a talk page by typing 4 tildes (~) in a row at the end of it. Fourth, this is Commons, not Wikipedia, so don't discuss your beefs about Wikipedia here, because I'm not part of that discussion. But the main point is that Google images are copyrighted, period. No-one has the right to upload any Google images to any other site, and Wikimedia sites uphold copyright laws to prevent users like you and the sites themselves from being sued. Google is a huge corporation that is in business to make money. Did you think Google was a service that offered images for your free, unrestricted use, include commercial use, as would be required on Commons? If so, please disabuse yourself of that notion. Uploading Google images, regardless of whether you credit them or not, is not "fair use". Please review Commons:Copyright rules. I strongly suggest you defend yourself at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Doctor of Directions, where I called for you to be blocked for being a seemingly copyvio-only account and totally ignoring all posts to your user talk page since 2017. If you plan to stop uploading Google Street View images, I suggest you post that in that thread, and if it's untrue that all your uploads have been from Google, I suggest you mention there which ones are not. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, I appreciate your feedback and based on what you have told me, I will never again use Google Maps Images in wikipedia articles. I did not know that it was against wikipedia's policy to do so. Also, I respectfully disagree with your claim that I have ever been disruptive to wikipedia intentionally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctor of Directions (talk • contribs) 06:25, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Why didn't you post your reply at the bottom of the page? Why are you conflating me with another user? I didn't claim anything about your behavior on Wikipedia, which I'm entirely unfamiliar with. Finally, why are you still posting here, instead of posting at this link, which I gave you? Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Doctor of Directions. Post there, where admins can read your remarks. I don't know if you absorbed the fact that I'm not an admin here, just someone who's started to patrol edits here and noticed the problem with your edits. Please stop replying here and go to that thread! Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Saint Geraud church of Salles-Curan 07.jpg

According to one source the stained glass windows in this church are a gift from François d'Estaing, bishop of Rodez (1504-1529) [1]. However, they don't seem to be that old. In addition, some stained glass window shows the date 1874, and on the other, an inscription "renewed in 1879". Tournasol7 (talk) 18:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. That does seem more likely. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2020!

		* Happy Holidays 2020, Ikan Kekek! *
		Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!    -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:02, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

			* Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, Ikan Kekek! *
			Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- Llez (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a happy 2020! ;–)

	✴ Happy Holidays, Ikan Kekek ✴
	Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël! Bonne année! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! Frohe Weihnachten! Ein gutes neues Jahr! --Aristeas (talk) 09:46, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, George, Llez Aristeas! Some to you! I hope you have a year of health, happiness and much beauty! Thanks for sharing some of the beauty you saw in the past year! Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Jüterbog 25 Pfg 1920 Hl Geist Kapelle.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jüterbog 25 Pfg 1920 Hl Geist Kapelle.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Images de qualité promotion

I would like to thank you for the interest in my proposal for quality images. I have already taken into account your observations and put the geographic coordinates as recommended if that is enough to promote the two images 1 et 2. In fact I really don't know how to put comments on the images that's why I'm writing to you here. cordially.--Adoscam (talk) 14:11, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Merci. I'll have a look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:10, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Done. The way you edit at Quality Images Candidates is to click the "Edit" button on the left above whichever date the photo was uploaded. For example, there's a heading of "January 14, 2020" with a horizontal line under it; "[edit]" is immediately to the right of it. In order to make it easier to find the particular upload I whose nomination discussion I want to edit, I select some text from it and search for it when I'm in edit mode. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

QI review

Hey there, first of all thanks for your feedback on the pictures of Vasco da Gama bridge (at sunrise and as viewed from parque Tejo that I nominated for QI.

I tried to address the issues you mentioned, would you please give them another look?

Thank you very much!

-- Abmatos (talk) 20:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Chrysantheme rot tautropfen -20191024-RM-102058.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chrysantheme rot tautropfen -20191024-RM-102058.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

A very old FP conversation

Hello, four years ago you took part in a featured picture nomination discussion where you asked a question about an artistic choice in a restoration and never received an answer. Reading through that conversation, you appeared to believe the nominator was the person who had done the restoration. That conversation ended without a reply and with that ended the nomination, which closed without a promotion since other participants valued your query.

Normally it wouldn't be worth revisiting such an old matter except for three factors: the image happens to be in wide use across dozens of Wikimedia projects, it is already a featured picture on four different language editions of Wikipedia, and I happen to be the person who restored it.

Until today I had no idea someone had nominated it for FP on Commons. A decade ago I stopped editing. (Not recalling my old login password at the moment, hence the red signature at the bottom of this comment).

So about your comment, here's what you wrote:

• This is certainly an interesting photo, and I would support it for its historical significance, interest and good composition, but before I actually decide on how to vote: The original looks sepia-toned. Do you think that could have been an artistic choice, and if so, one we should respect?

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/April_2016#File:Circumcision_central_Asia2.jpg,_not_featured

So to compensate you for your long wait here's a detailed reply.

At the time when the original image was made the technology existed for three different types of photographic media: daguerrotype, glass plate negative, or albumen print. Daguerrotypes went into disuse as soon as other methods became available but glass plate negatives and albumen prints coexisted. Albumen prints acquire a sepia tone; glass plate negatives do not. Yet nineteenth century photographers probably selected between them for technical reasons rather than esthetics.

To explain by example, one rare instance where an individual photographer used both methods on the same subject and the same day was Alexander Gardener on July 7 1865, when he photographed the Abraham Lincoln assassination conspirators' execution. Unfortunately the only instance that comes to mind is this grisly topic: here[2] is one among a number of glass plate negatives Gardner took that day. This[3] is a stereoscopic albumen print--possibly the only albumen print he took that day--and this[File:Lincoln conspirators execution2.tif] is my restoration of the right frame from that stereoscope. Of course the glass plate negatives retain their original grayscale and the albumen print is sepia, but both the archivist's note and albumen print itself suggest a different artistic intention: the albumen image is the only one with motion blur and that blur occurs only in specific parts of the image. Albumen photography is more sensitive to light than glass plates. That was the closest Gardner could get to action photography. His choice to set up the albumen on a stereoscope reinforces that priority: he wanted to bring his audience as close as feasible to witnessing the moment when the condemned criminals met their deaths.

That technology remained unchanged a few years later when this FP nominated image was taken. So the most probable reason for choosing albumen in an unposed moment would be to get reasonably sharp focus and finish the exposure before anyone moved.

In discussion at FP candidacy the nominator mentioned that albumen would change color shortly after a print was taken. That much is true. What that person doesn't point out is the paper also aged for more than a century before the image was digitized. The original audiences for the image would not have seen the yellowing and fading that subsequently occurred. Although modern photographers occasionally add sepia to give a new image a vintage appearance, image degradation over time is not something photographers hope for. In the nineteenth century photographers made that clear by abandoning daguerrotypes as soon as they could.

That's a longwinded way of saying the esthetic options of modern digital editing sometimes lead us to forget the technical constraints of earlier eras.

Fast forward to this particular restoration. As you wisely noted when you posed your question, contrast and sepia adjustments are the decisions which are most open to challenge in this type of digital restoration. For this reason the small circle of editors who were doing this work made it standard practice to upload three copies for each restoration: one archival unrestored image, a second partial restoration where all the technical work such as dirt and stain removal had been done, and then a third version which had the restorer's best estimate of appropriate contrast and color/sepia fixes.

The notes for this restoration include "selective color adjustments," which was the phrasing for instances where an old print either had stains or acquired uneven tones as it aged. The latter happened in this instance: the left side has a yellow tint and the right side leans toward magenta. Stare at that a moment and it really jumps out once you know it's there. *Fixing this problem* motivated my decisions in the final edits. Once I corrected for that I did a partial desaturation (it isn't totally grayscaled) since the tonal qualities of the image were either the result of a minor technical glitch somewhere along the way from paper manufacture to archival storage.

Someday another image editor might want to second guess those final few restoration decisions. The File:Circumcision_central_Asia1.tif is there to facilitate that. It isn't uploaded to be an *alternate version* in the usual Commons sense--it's a separate file because otherwise this important stage of the process would get lost in image file history. That's the point in restoration where all the long hours of rote work are done. If anyone wanted to try their own curves edit, the partial restoration is the go-to right before the histogram gets choppy.

So either you're fascinated or your eyes glazed over eight paragraphs ago. On the off chance you're still reading I'll wave farewell from the bottom of this rabbit hole. Best regards. (And please excuse the rusty markup--it's been quite a while). Durova 2 (talk) 07:28, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Durova 2. I really appreciate this reply. I wish you had been there to give such a reply in that thread, as it might very well have changed my vote.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to Wiki Loves Folklore Team

Hello Ikan Kekek,

I am co-ordinator of Wiki Loves Folklore International photography contest on Wikimedia Commons. You have been highly recommended by some of our advisors. I would like to extend invitation to Wiki Loves Folklore in our Pre-Jury team. The work will start from 1 March 2020 and will continue till 20 March 2020. There is a space for a week long extension should that is needed and the work will be done on Montage tool in about 2-3 rounds, each round may last a week or so. Please let us know if you are available during this time to share your amazing expertise on Commons and photography.

Looking forward to your reply! :) With Wikilove! Wikilover90 (talk) 19:54, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

That's very nice of you, and I strongly support this project and look forward to seeing some of the photos that come out of it, but I don't think I could commit the time for it.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

for the notes on my photo. I have now hopefully removed the last stains according to your instructions. Sincerely,--Famberhorst (talk) 16:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC) PS. sometimes the page needs to be reloaded a few times. But you probably know that

I support now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Corneometer probe.jpg

Thank you for voting for this picture. I have changed the scope now and would be happy if you could review it again. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Marbach am Neckar - Alexanderkirche - Langhaus - Gewölbe 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Marbach am Neckar - Alexanderkirche - Langhaus - Gewölbe 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/EatchaBot (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)