User talk:Ondřej Žváček

Welcome to the Commons, Ondřej Žváček!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

SieBot 14:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! That Chomsi.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 Composition is not very exciting. A little bit noise in the upper part of the sky. But overall quality is good. -- MJJR 20:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Křižník Aurora, Petrohrad.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 İt needs some perspective correction for the building on the right hand side. --Manco Capac 11:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC) Light, sharp, composition --Beyond silence 16:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Muslimský hřbitov, Tamga.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 Rather harsh light, but interesting subject. Acceptable for QI. -- MJJR 20:16, 6 October 2008 (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:
Potala Palace.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support This is a nice balanced composition and a valuable picture. I think File:Potala Palace 05-2007.jpg gives a more detailed view of the palace, but it fails to show the situation of the palace wrt the city. Plus, the picture in itself is less interesting (composition not so good). --Eusebius (talk) 13:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 12:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vladivostok.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 There is some IMO acceptable noise in the sea. Can you clone away the narrow dark border at top right? --Cayambe 19:22, 8 November 2009 (UTC)  CommentDone, thank you!--Ondřej Žváček 22:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC). Good now. --Cayambe 15:32, 11 November 2009 (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:
Nine Saints.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Looks OK to me, criteria met. The other image in the category doesn't display all the nine. --Myrabella (talk) 07:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:46, 18 November 2009 (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:
Tekeze River.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Unique picture of that major Ethiopian river in Commons, and nice, documented and geotagged image. --Myrabella (talk) 09:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 20:55, 24 November 2009 (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:
Bira River.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Why is this picture specific to this river? For me it is like the clouds example in COM:VISC#How_to_choose_your_scope. --Eusebius (talk) 13:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

It shows the river in its typical surroundings. On the left there you can see the Tikhonkaya hill, which is one of the symbols of Birobidzhan and the Jewish Autonomous Oblast. I believe it is a very similar case as with this Valued Image or this Valued Image.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree with the comparison, the landscape and the appearance of the river looks far more "specific" in the Tekeze case, and the Arse VI shows nautical activity which constitute the main interest of the river (I think there are a few declined river scopes as well, quite similar to this one, if you want to have a look). But it is a very subjective impression. I feel that if the river is not visually distinctive enough, maybe a map is more appropriate. I don't have a strong enough opinion to vote on this single candidate, though. --Eusebius (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I see no difference between the Tekeze case and this one. Why do you please think the landscape and the appearance of the river in the Tekeze case looks far more "specific"? If it is because the Tekeze River flows through (for an European) exciting landscape and the Bira River does not (it may be exciting landscape for an African though), that should not matter here I think. And yes, a map may be more appropriate. But there is no such map on Commons so far I know.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 19:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You're probably right, that's why I told it was pretty subjective and I wouldn't vote. --Eusebius (talk) 19:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

 Comment @Ondřej Žváček: you could add notes on the file naming the hill and the town on the opposite bank to characterize this view a bit more. --Myrabella (talk) 11:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Done with respect to the hill. Please note the town is on both banks of the river. The photo is actually taken from a bridge connecting both parts of the town separated by the river.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

• Nevertheless, I would recommend to add a second note on the file, something like "Birobidzhan (left bank)" (or right bank, if it is the case :-). Until I read some documentation, I didn't know whether Birobidzhan was a town, a district of a region, so I think that such a note would add valuable information for users as ignorant as me. By the way, I notice that Birobidzhan is the only town mentioned along the course of the river in cs:Bira and ru:Бира (река). I deduce from that that the nominated image is rare and could be considered as valuable, but would gain to be slighty more documented. --Myrabella (talk) 13:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, done.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

•  Support OK to me, now. --Myrabella (talk) 07:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2009 (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:
Corvus crassirostris (Thick-billed Raven).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Excellent! PS a moderate crop would make it even better. --MattiPaavola (talk) 23:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
•  Request Please add the scientific name in the description on the image page.--Myrabella (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, done.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 17:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment Scope formatted according to the guidelines. I also think that a crop would be more adapted for a VI. --Eusebius (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 10:23, 13 December 2009 (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:
Basilica of St Giles, Bardejov.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Oppose as not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (should be geocoded, but is not). "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so". I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 18:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC) - fixed. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 14:45, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Now geocoded. Thank you for the reminder. Ondřej Žváček (talk) 20:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Info This image IMO benefits from perspective correction. I've applied it; if you don't like it, you may revert. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support anyway. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Question The spelling Bardějov in the cs: description isn't used in cs:Bardejov? --Ikar.us (talk) 21:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
  •  Info This spelling is sometimes used in Czech as it corresponds to the actual pronunciation of the name of the city in Czech. For example see here or here. Ondřej Žváček (talk) 15:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support With a bit darkened air would be even better. --Mile (talk) 17:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:45, 7 August 2010 (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:
Lake Kari.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:36, 24 October 2010 (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:
St. George's Cathedral in Addis Ababa.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope. Flávio "Maddox" ^go! 15:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:28, 7 November 2010 (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:
Shushi Cathedral (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Interesting subject! Just to mention again ;) since there are interior photos the scope name here should be Shushi Cathedral (exterior). It also seems to me that this photo is somehow better ;) --MrPanyGoff 15:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC) I would also like to know how is actually the temple called because Here the name Ghazanchetsots Cathedral is chosen.--MrPanyGoff 15:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)  Comment:Category changed as you have suggested. Yes, the other picture is very good and I like it too. Still think this picture is more suitable though - it shows the cathedral in greater detail and it is better described (and geocoded). Also, the surroundings of the cathedral on the other picture are not actual (they have changed - please compare the two pictures to see it). So far I know the cathedral is called Cathedral of Christ the Savior or Ghazanchetsots Cathedral or Shushi Cathedral (and perhaps also Shusha Cathedral). Not sure what does the name in Armenian only (Ghazanchetsots Cathedral) mean as I do not speak Armenian.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 08:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 Support - Well, it seems that Shushi is OK as a name and finally I decide to support this photo. Bear in mind that the perspective distortion can be easily reduced to more proper level.--MrPanyGoff 16:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 Comment - I have corrected the perspective. Jovian Eye _talk 23:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

• Good ;) --MrPanyGoff 05:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 06:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cervino.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  Comment Good, but the camera location is missing-Florival fr 18:23, 9 April 2011 (UTC) -  Comment Thank you, camera location added.--Ondřej Žváček 10:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)- Support now its QI for me - Florival fr 19:54, 12 April 2011 (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:
Burana tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support. Best in its category for now. Interestingly, this structure was in my plans for nominations for the next two weeks.--MrPanyGoff 21:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 23:04, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment See the syntax of the scope that I have changed.
•  Support Scope very rich, but all crietria met. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:04, 26 September 2011 (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:
Sampson Fountain.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:19, 27 October 2011 (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:
Kynžvart Chateau (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  SupportBest in scope. I do share your humble opinion--Jebulon (talk) 17:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
•  Support I agree with this promotion but ay a problem. The vote can not be closed automatically ...
•  Comment the technical problem has been resolved --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- M 93 (talk) 22:53, 18 November 2011 (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:
Liberty Bridge, Budapest.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:32, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Chomejního mauzoleum.jpg

★ 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:
Mausoleum of Ayatullah Khomeini (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:53, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 04:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlín hlavní nádraží.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. You may crop the bottom left

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ježíš Kristus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:40, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment May we have a specific scope for the summit of a mountain?--Jebulon (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
•  Support I think it's a good idea. This leaves the possibility of a label for an image to the summit viewed from a distance.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
•  Support I also agree with both the idea of a sub-scope for the summit, and the specific nomination of this image for this scope. cmadler (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 19:33, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Bishkek White House.JPG

★ 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:
White House (Bishkek) (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope, meets all criteria. cmadler (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Agrees. For building it is useful to add (exterior). --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 21:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Yes, it is the best in the scope for now.--MrPanyGoff 10:44, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:16, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Katedrální kostel Proměnění.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}}}

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:
Palcho Monastery (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support I think so (The images must be placed at the bottom of the list) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:30, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Bishkek White House.JPG

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support I agree.--Jebulon (talk) 12:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

•  Info Heading fixed.  Support --Ikar.us (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:38, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Památník genocidy.jpg

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

Takabeg (talk) 06:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Jsme naše hory.jpg

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

Takabeg (talk) 09:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Budova prezidenta NKR.jpg

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

--Interfase (talk) 20:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Pomník padlým, Terst.jpg

Yours sincerely, Eleassar ^(t/p) 16:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Sv. Cyril a Metoděj ve Vladivostoku.jpg

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

Eleassar ^(t/p) 09:07, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Lion of Judah.JPG

Eleassar (t/p) 10:37, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Yekatit 12.jpg

Eleassar (t/p) 10:43, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Pomník prvním budovatelům.jpg

Yours sincerely, A.Savin 22:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Velká mešita sultána Kábúse.jpg

Yours sincerely, Jee 06:33, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Category:Pashupatinath_temple

Pashupatinath temple has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Stegop (talk) 00:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Porušení licence tvé fotky

Ahoj, dnes jsem našel na Aktuálně toto porušení tvých autorských práv. Zdravím, — Jagro (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Pomník Svobody.jpg

Yours sincerely, ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Pomník Svobody.jpg

Yours sincerely,   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 07:14, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

MasoodHA (talk) 12:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Bishkek White House.JPG

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Shabdan Baatyr.jpg

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

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 17:12, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

File:Pomník batkenských srážek, Biškek.jpg

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

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 17:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)