User talk:A. Öztas
|
|
Thanks for replying to my review. Rather than withdrawing, you could upload a new version, if you can do so in the next ~week. Or nominate it again after corrections, ping me, and I'll happily re-review. It's looking good, except for those lens flares (could be removed using a dust spot removal tool), and the perspective. Understood about the building on the left not being straight, but you could use the railings on that side, and there's plenty of verticals on the right. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:17, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for you message! I will have another look at the photo tomorrow and try to correct the perspective properly. I also saw your comment on COM:QIC. --Аныл Эзташ (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Mike Peel: I've now taken another look at the photo and corrected the perspective. Some of the lines were really crooked, I don't know how I missed them, but sometimes you can't see the wood for the trees... I'll put it back into QIC tomorrow and see what I come up with. Best regards and thanks again for the tip. --Аныл Эзташ (talk) 20:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- It looks great now, nice work! Would support if you post it to QIC again. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 15.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Istanbul (TR), Bostancı -- 2024 -- 0006.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) 05:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 16.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Schönau am Königssee (DE), Königssee vom Jenner -- 2024 -- 0398.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! Ramsau bei Berchtesgaden (DE), Pfarrkirche St. Sebastian -- 2024 -- 0825.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! Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W -- 2024 -- 0012.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! Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W -- 2024 -- 0008.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) 05:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!
[edit]
Read this message in your language
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.
Round 2 will end at UTC.
If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 17.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Schönau am Königssee (DE), Schneibstein und Reinersberg vom Jenner -- 2024 -- 0450.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! Istanbul (TR), Burgazada, Kirche "Aya Yani" -- 2024 -- 0814.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) 05:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 19.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! G. g. gorilla, Duisburg (DE) -- 2023 -- 0087.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! G. g. gorilla, Krefeld (DE) -- 2023 -- 0521.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, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Ersetzung von Bildern auf Schwesterprojekten
[edit]
Hi,
du wolltest dort näher wissen, was genau mich an deinen WP Edits persönlich stört. Wenn du das beherzigen würdest, wäre es für alle produktiver.
Viele von uns sind ehrgeizig genug und möchten auch Bilder für Artikel beisteuern. Ich bin da auch keine Ausnahme.
Natürlich ist es zugleich so, dass wir immer einen gewissen Interessenskonflikt haben, wenn es darum geht für ein Thema ein Bild auszuwählen und ein eigens gemachtes ist in der Auswahl.
Das bedeutet natürlich nicht, dass es nicht erlaubt ist -- wäre ja sonst keine "freie Enzyklopädie"; aber man sollte schon sehr!! deutlich mit Bedacht vorgehen.
Aus meiner Sicht ist es nicht nur am nützlichsten sondern (gerade deswegen) macht auch am meisten Spaß, wenn man ein Bild dort beizusteuern schafft, wo zuvor gar kein oder kein vergleichbares freies Bild verfügbar war. Kommt aber, gerade was Sehenswürdigkeiten in Mitteleuropa angeht, heute nur noch selten vor.
Häufiger ist es so, dass wir versuchen, bestehende Bilder zu ersetzen oder zu ergänzen und dies kann manchmal zu Konflikten führen, etwa mit Artikelautoren/-Beobachtern oder auch mit Fotografen bisheriger Bilder.
Schon deswegen, und auch aus Respekt vor Kollegen, sollte niemals ausgetauscht werden "nur weil ich gerade ein neues Foto geschossen habe".
Ist das neue Foto FP oder QI, mag das in Einzelfällen eine Entscheidungshilfe sein, aber auch keineswegs per se ein Grund, dies durchdrücken zu wollen.
Um es kurz und bündig auszudrücken, und wenn du erlaubst verzichte ich auch auf Beispiele, gehe ich für gewöhnlich wie folgt vor:
Als Erstes schaue ich, ob das alte und das neue Bild vom Motiv her vergleichbar sind, also z.B. aus der gleichen Kameraposition, z.B. mit gleichem Blickwinkel wenn es um ein Gebäude geht.
Sind die so nicht vergleichbar, müsste schon ernsthaft überlegt werden, inwiefern sich wirklich ein Austausch lohnt. Das könnte etwa der Fall sein, wenn das neue Bild insgesamt "mehr zeigt" als das alte. Im Zweifel kann und darf gerne einfach nur das neue Bild ergänzt werden und das alte stehen gelassen, in vielen Fällen ist das sogar sinnvoll und hilft ohnehin dabei, mögliche Konflikte zu vermeiden. Gilt auch für Fälle, wo das neue Bild "aktueller" erscheint aufgrund wesentlicher Änderungen vor Ort.
Nur wenn die beiden Bilder vom Motiv her ähnlich sind, schaue ich dann sogleich auf die Qualitätsunterschiede. Vor allem die Auflösung, die Belichtung (kein ausgefressener Himmel etc.), die Perspektive, im Zweifel auch so Sachen wie Rauschen, die man oft nicht ohne Vergrößern erkennt.
Und wenn man sich mal nicht sicher ist, besser dies im Zweifel ganz sein lassen, oder auch vorab auf Diskussionsseite ansprechen.
Und ja, ich wähle auch im Vorfeld Motive aus. Heißt, wenn wir bereits Zigtausende Fotos vom Eiffelturm oder Neuschwanstein haben, dann brauchen wir keine zigtausendersten, -zweiten usw.! Es sei denn, mann ist in der Lage, die aus einer ungewöhnlichen Perspektive abzulichten. Manchmal ist es auch so z.B., dass es von einem Gebäude viele Außenaufnahmen bei Tag gibt, aber bisher wenig oder gar keine Nachtaufnahme oder Interieurs.
Mir persönlich macht gerade das am meisten Spaß, wenn ich was Neues oder gar Ungewöhnliches beisteuern kann. Solche Gelegenheiten ergeben sich öfter, als man vielleicht denkt.
Gruß --A.Savin 18:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hi,
- danke, dass du dir die Zeit genommen hast, deine Gedanken dazu zu schildern. Woran ich mich mich in der Diskussion auf FPC gestört habe, war der Umstand, dass dort eine Bewertung für das Foto abgegeben wurde, die in der Sache nichts mit dem Foto zu tun hatte – statt einer konkreten Auseinandersetzung mit dem Foto wurde dieses pauschal abgelehnt. Ich hätte mir da eher ein offenes Feedback gewünscht, um mich weiter zu verbessern – etwa wie hier.
- Das Ersetzen von Bildern in Schwesterprojekten kommt gar nicht so häufig vorkommt, wie man vielleicht denken könnte, sondern betrifft vielleicht eine Hand voll Fälle. Und klar, Sehenswürdigkeiten sind da ein Thema, aber ich mache nicht nur Fotos von solchen. Ich fotografiere alles Mögliche – manchmal sind das alltägliche Dinge, die weniger Aufmerksamkeit bekommen, ob nun ein langweiliger Boden oder Blumen an einem Parkplatz. Wenn ein Foto vom Kolosseum ausgetauscht wird, weckt das freilich mehr Aufmerksamkeit als ein neues Foto einer Parkbank in Neustadt am Kulm. Meine Gedanken dazu hatte ich während der dortigen Diskussion schon geäußert, möchte sie hier daher nicht erneut aufgreifen.
- Ich lade hier einfach Fotos hoch, von denen ich denke, dass sie in irgendeiner Form nützlich sein könnten. Manchmal entsteht daraus auch ein neuer Artikel. Interessant finde ich eher, Orte zu finden, die mit „Bild fehlt“ markiert wurden – da gibt es ja hilfreiche Tools für hier. Was ansonsten danach damit passiert, überlasse ich oft anderen, die vielleicht mehr Einblicke in die Artikelgestaltung haben.
- Insgesamt freue ich mich, dass wir das hier im Guten besprechen können. Lass uns gerne auch in Zukunft im Dialog bleiben, um das Projekt gemeinsam voranzubringen.
- Grüße Аныл Эзташ (talk) 19:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nee, hatte nichts mit dem Kolosseumbild an sich zu tun. Ich hatte mir das Bild gar nicht näher angeschaut, um es als FP Kandidat vollwertig zu beurteilen. Das mag unfair für die Nominierung sein; aber ich muss auch irgendwie an problematische Aspekte aufmerksam machen, die damit unmttelbar aber auch (so in diesem Fall) mittelbar in Zusammenhang stehen. --A.Savin 05:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
FP Promotion - 20.10.2024
[edit] |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Rom (IT), Kolosseum -- 2024 -- 0610.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rom (IT), Kolosseum -- 2024 -- 0610.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 21.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Neuss (DE), Hafen -- 2023 -- 0120.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! Istanbul (TR), Bostancı -- 2024 -- 0011.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! Rom (IT), Via Francesco Crispi -- 2024 -- 0707.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) 05:35, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 22.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! P. pithecia, Krefeld (DE) -- 2023 -- 0067.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! Zenit-E (internationale Version), Oberseite -- 2023 -- 0011.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! Larus michahellis, Istanbul (TR) -- 2024 -- 0393.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! G. g. gorilla, Krefeld (DE) -- 2023 -- 0518.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) 05:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 23.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! P. pithecia, Krefeld (DE) -- 2023 -- 0079.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) 05:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion - 25.10.2024
[edit] |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Bottrop (DE), Halde Haniel, Totems -- 2023 -- 0055.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.
|