User talk:Kritzolina
Danke!
[edit]
|
The Commons Barnstar | |
| Vielen Dank für deine Lösung im Fall Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by XRay. Es ist sicherlich auch im Sinne der Commons-Gemeinschaft. XRay 💬 07:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
Quality Image Promotion
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Covas del Drac - lit stalagmites and stalagtites 01.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Capocorb Vell 02.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Capocorb Vell 05.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Fischzucht Aumühle 07.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Fischzucht Aumühle 05.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Human footprint.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Jagoda Marinić at Republica 2024 05.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
You deleted this file with this rationale: per nomination and Com:Nude. The first part does not make sense, since no valid reason was given in the nomination or its replies.
Regarding COM:Nudity, this is the sort of file that would normally be subject to such a rationale. But in this case, I did argue that this file provided context for the uploader’s other upload, whose own deletion request is currently headed for a ‘keep’ result. What are your thoughts on that? Brianjd (talk) 11:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- The wording of the nomination might not be expressed the way our policies read, but basically the person is saying this is nudity that is out of scope. I am not really convinced we should keep the other image, because while it might be high quality, it is also not adding anything educationally to the existing collection in the categories. But I will not decide both images, I am leaving this for someone else.
- But even if the other image is kept, I see no reason to keep both. Yes, you argued that this image is adding context. I don't follow this line of thought, I don't think the other image needs context. --Kritzolina (talk) 16:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)