User talk:Mike Peel

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to my talk page. Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page, use headlines when starting new talk topics and sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. I will generally reply on this page to keep conversations together; please watch this page for a short time after leaving a comment. Uncivil comments will be reverted without response. Thank you.

Start a new talk topic.

If you would prefer to contact me off-wiki, then my contact details and a contact form are available on my personal website.

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 05:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Angel of the North 2016 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Scotch Mist 06:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Beamish Museum 2016 119.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. --Cayambe 17:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Beamish Museum 2016 137.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 08:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Beamish Museum 2016 142.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Scotch Mist 06:38, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Chicago 2024 051.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 22:48, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:At Cagliari, Sardinia 2019 171.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:At Cagliari, Sardinia 2019 172.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:At Cagliari, Sardinia 2019 173.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:At Cagliari, Sardinia 2019 174.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Old photos (MP) 2015 13.jpg

[edit]
العربية  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  hrvatski  italiano  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  русский  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Old photos (MP) 2015 13.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Didym (talk) 22:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2024 371.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Tuxyso 09:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2024 374.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 --Michielverbeek 07:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2024 472.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --TorinoDoc 09:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Berlin 2024 197.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. --D-Kuru 10:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Katowice 2024 031.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Grunpfnul 17:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Katowice 2024 025.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
Can you retouch that half person in the background? Otherwise would be ok. --Plozessor 19:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PC and crop applied, is that better? I can't remove them fully without also removing the top of the chess pieces. Thanks. Mike Peel 20:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Thx, I think it's ok now. --Plozessor 13:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 05:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:At Sardinia 2024 061.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 05:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Berlin 2024 201.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Berlin 2024 198.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Berlin 2024 204.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 12:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Berlin 2024 640.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Alexander-93 10:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Angel of the North 2016 012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support Good quality --Berthold Werner 16:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Estádio do Pacaembu, Sao Paulo 2017 030.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Estádio do Pacaembu, Sao Paulo 2017 043.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Rbrechko 07:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At London 2024 014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Benjism89 19:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At London 2024 015.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 16:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At London 2024 023.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. --Milseburg 16:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Dunham Massey 2024 077.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 16:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Dunham Massey 2024 078.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Olivier LPB 13:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Geneva 2024 351.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Btspurplegalaxy 05:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Estádio do Pacaembu, Sao Paulo 2017 042.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Long Island 2023 110.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:02, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Didcot Railway Centre 2024 064.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 10:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Silesian Park 2024 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Katowice 2024 426.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Scotch Mist 11:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2024 248.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality --Tzim78 22:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Sardinia 2024 045.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Rbrechko 16:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2024 218.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 11:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! At Sardinia 2024 068.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 Can you smoothen the jpeg-artefacts in the sky? --PtrQs 01:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review, I've tried reducing the noise, does that look better? Thanks. Mike Peel 20:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fear, there are still stripes of blue/green/purple in the sky - this can only be corrected by decreasing the shift/highlighting of colors - as far as my LR-experience goes. --PtrQs 00:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I think I see them, but they are difficult to spot. I've backed off the highlights alterations and tried reducing colour noise, has that helped? Thanks. Mike Peel 16:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it's better now. --PtrQs 17:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]