User talk:Jacek Halicki/Archive21

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Twierdza Srebrna Góra, fort główny (donżon) 11.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. Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 00:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Twierdza Srebrna Góra, fort Ostróg 8.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. Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 00:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Twierdza Srebrna Góra, fort Ostróg 7.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. Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 00:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Twierdza Srebrna Góra, fort Ostróg 6.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. Comments Quality high enough for a Q1 --Michielverbeek 00:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Twierdza Srebrna Góra, fort Ostróg 5.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. Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 00:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Twierdza Srebrna Góra, fort główny (donżon) 10.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Niemcza, pl. Rynek 15 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:08, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Baszta Bramy Górnej w Niemczy 04.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 00:19, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Koscioł Niepokalanego Poczęcia NMP w Niemczy 06.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. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 00:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Koscioł Niepokalanego Poczęcia NMP w Niemczy 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Niemcza, pl. Rynek 19 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:15, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Niemcza, pl. Rynek 34 03.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 06:21, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stadnina w Świdniku 1.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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stadnina w Świdniku 2.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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stadnina w Świdniku 3.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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stadnina w Świdniku 4.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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Gramofon Daniel 1.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Gramofon Daniel 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Koscioł Niepokalanego Poczęcia NMP w Niemczy 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 06:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Schronisko Orzeł, Góry Sowie, Sudety.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:41, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Pawilon parkowy w Bukowcu 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:41, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Pawilon parkowy w Bukowcu 3.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. Comments High quality. --Joalpe 00:32, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kościół Matki Bożej Różańcowej w Radomierzu 12.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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)  Comment - Jacek Halicki, I would suggest for you to include information about where in the church this window can be seen in your file description. -- Ikan Kekek 10:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Dom ogrodnika w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments Good quality. --Frank Schulenburg 01:05, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Pawilon parkowy w Bukowcu 5.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 22:10, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2016 Konica Auto S3 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016 Konica Auto S3 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, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Pawilon parkowy w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:57, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Pawilon parkowy w Bukowcu 6.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. Comments Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 10:14, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Natura 2000.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. Comments Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:38, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Pawilon parkowy w Bukowcu 4.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. Comments Good quality. --W.carter 16:10, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:41, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:41, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stodoła w Bukowcu 1.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. Comments Might have been a little bit sharper, but good enough for me.--Agnes Monkelbaan 06:50, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stodoła w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 07:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Budynek mieszkalno-gospodarczy w Bukowcu.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:09, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Młyn w Bukowcu 1.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. Comments  Comment Please check the sky, there are three spots (birds?); see annotations --Llez 05:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC) Done --Jacek Halicki 10:12, 31 December 2016 (UTC)  Support Good quality --Llez 10:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Młyn w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments Good quality --Llez 05:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 08:32, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 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. Comments  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:36, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Młyn w Bukowcu 3.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 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. Comments Good quality. --XRay 07:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 06.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 08.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 09.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. Comments Pity the heavy shadow, but good quality for me.--Famberhorst 06:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 10.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. Comments Good quality --Llez 14:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Rezerwat przyrody Głazy Krasnoludków 11.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. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kościół św. Mikołaja w Świdniku 1.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. Comments GQ --Palauenc05 10:20, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Stajnia w Świdniku.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. Comments Is it possible to remove the CAs (see annotation)? --Llez 14:58, 3 January 2017 (UTC) Done--Jacek Halicki 15:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)  Support OK now, good quality --Llez 16:02, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Staw Kąpielnik w Bukowcu 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Staw Kąpielnik w Bukowcu 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Staw Kąpielnik w Bukowcu 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Staw Kąpielnik w Bukowcu 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Staw Kąpielnik w Bukowcu 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. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 02:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Wieża widokowa w Bukowcu 1.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. Comments Looks OK. Perspective is good and sharpness also seems fine. --Peulle 11:11, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Wieża widokowa w Bukowcu 3.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --Scotch Mist 11:45, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Wieża widokowa w Bukowcu 4.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 12:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Wieża widokowa w Bukowcu 5.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Scotch Mist 11:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kościół św. Mikołaja w Świdniku 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 12:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Dwór Górny w Nowej Rudzie 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Dwór Górny w Nowej Rudzie 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Dwór Górny w Nowej Rudzie 3.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

File:2017 Miniaturka Małej Syrenki w Kopenhadze.jpg

File:2017 Miniaturka Małej Syrenki w Kopenhadze.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 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!

Polimerek (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

FYI: Here's an article about the mermaid http://web.archive.org/web/20170109010223/http://journalisten.dk/havfruens-arvinger-tjener-fedt-pa-ophavsret --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 01:04, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Opactwo w Bukowcu 3.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:35, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Dom opata i kościół św. Józefa w Krzeszowie.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:35, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Plac Grunwaldzki w Nowej Rudzie.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:54, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Opactwo w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality. Sky very bright. --XRay 05:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Sztuczna ruina w Bukowcu 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Sztuczna ruina w Bukowcu 5.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Opactwo w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kościół św. Józefa w Krzeszowie.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:39, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Nikon D5500.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. Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:25, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Ballantine's.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. Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 E-papieros mod 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Likier wiśniowy Krupnik.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. Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Likier śliwkowy Krupnik.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. Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Sztuczna ruina w Bukowcu 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Sztuczna ruina w Bukowcu 3.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Sztuczna ruina w Bukowcu 4.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. Comments Good quality --Llez 06:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Góry Sokole, Rudawy Janowickie, Sudety 3.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:11, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Motocykl typu chopper 2.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:11, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Góry Sokole, Rudawy Janowickie, Sudety 1.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:52, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Góry Sokole, Rudawy Janowickie, Sudety 2.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. Comments Good quality. --Milseburg 14:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Motocykl typu chopper 1.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, kościół ewangelicki, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 11:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, kościół ewangelicki, 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 10:40, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, kościół ewangelicki, 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 11:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Tablica na zabytku.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 11:41, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Bystrzyca Kłodzka, kaplica św. Floriana 08.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 10:41, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2017 (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:
Sony DSLR-A700 with N50 battery grip.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 00:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Nysa Kłodzka in Bystrzyca Kłodzka.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 00:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Town hall in Bystrzyca Kłodzka, tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 00:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Śnieżne Kotły, Śnieżne Stawki, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 17:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 00:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Brama Wodna, 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Baszta Kłodzka, 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kaplica cmentarna 08.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kaplica cmentarna 06.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. Comments Good quality. --Pudelek 10:58, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, mury obronne, 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 14:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, mury obronne, 12.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 15 January 2017 (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:
Mineral museum in Złoty Stok, entrance.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Mineral museum in Złoty Stok, interior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, mury obronne, 16.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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 06:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Brama Wodna, 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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 06:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kaplica cmentarna 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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 05:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 16 January 2017 (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:
High Ropes Course Skalisko.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support Useful --Pierre André (talk) 15:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Gold Mine Museum in Złoty Stok, bronze gnome sculpture.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment - Scope seems to be too wide, as there is another gnome sculpture at the museum: File:2016 Gnom w Muzeum Kopalni Złota w Złotym Stoku 1.jpg. Can you narrow the scope? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

   Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you.  Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Gold Mine Museum in Złoty Stok, main building, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Gold Mine Museum in Złoty Stok, main building, exposure from S.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Gold Mine Museum in Złoty Stok, narrow gauge railways.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Gold Mine Museum in Złoty Stok, underground.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Baszta Rycerska, 04.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 11:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Baszta Rycerska, 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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 11:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Baszta Rycerska w Bystrzycy Kłodzkiej 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 14:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Zieleniec, kościół św. Anny 09.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. Comments Good focus, sharp photo, Q1quality --Michielverbeek 14:28, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 17 January 2017 (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:
PSP-3000, black.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Halavar (talk) 11:19, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Unitra turntables, Daniel G-1100 fs.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Radmor 5102 stereo receiver.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Very good, and by far the best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, ratusz, 14.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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 09:40, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, ratusz, 15.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. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 09:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, ratusz, 19.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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 09:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, ratusz, 27.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. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 09:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Baszta Kłodzka, 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. Comments  Comment Probably CA on the right side of the door (see the note) --Halavar 00:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC) Comment Nothing to see for me.--Ermell 07:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)@Halavar: I also don't see anything there --Jacek Halicki 10:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)Good quality. --Ermell 14:45, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 18 January 2017 (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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, main portal.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 10:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope .--Pierre André (talk) 20:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, eye of providence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and best in scope. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, stucco over side entrance.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and best in scope. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 10:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Figura św. Trójcy, 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 7, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, ratusz, 28.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, ratusz, 23.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 4, 03.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. Comments OK. --A.Savin 17:33, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 19 January 2017 (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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, altar.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful. lNeverCry 06:10, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Our Lady of the Rosary church in Radomierz, stained glass window.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 23:12, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Minox C, open, front view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 23:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Minox C, open, back view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 7, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 04:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 8, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 04:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Figura św. Trójcy, 08.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. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 09:16, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Figura św. Trójcy, 09.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:45, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 7, 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. Comments weak  Support. You cut the chimney and the right window at the roof. And the minimum size requirements are very narrow demanded. But the quality is good. -- DerFussi 06:15, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:09, 20 January 2017 (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:
Minox C, close, front view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Minox C, close, back view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Minox C, in case.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful. lNeverCry 21:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 02:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2016 Minox C 8.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016 Minox C 8.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 7, 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 13:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 8, 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. Comments Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 8, 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 12:56, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 21 January 2017 (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:
Villa Hubertus in Złoty Stok, exposure from E.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful. lNeverCry 22:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Palace in Tomice, gate.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Palace in Tomice, folwark.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Palace in Tomice, avant-corps.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 8, 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 15:17, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 9, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 14:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 10, 06.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. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 12:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 10, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Pudelek 10:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 10, 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Pudelek 10:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 22 January 2017 (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:
Orzeł Hostel, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Horse stud farm in Świdnik, recreation horse cart.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Horse stud farm in Świdnik, stable interior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Park pavilion in Bukowiec, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 00:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 00:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 00:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 10, 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. Comments Good quality. --Cvmontuy 13:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 11, 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. Comments Good quality. --Cvmontuy 13:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 4, 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 13:18, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 23 January 2017 (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:
Park pavilion in Bukowiec, inscription and relief .
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Barn in Bukowiec, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Gardener's house in Bukowiec, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Barn in Bukowiec, interior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 06.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. Comments Good quality. --СССР 01:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 13, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2017 (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:
Watermill in Bukowiec, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Residential-economic building in Bukowiec, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Nature reserve Głazy Krasnoludków, mushroom rocks.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Church of Saint Nicholas in Świdnik, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Only photo in scope and a pretty good one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Nikon D7100.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 00:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Sigma 10-20 mm f-3.5 EX DC HSM.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 00:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Mod Siegelei Mini Book Kit 2.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. Comments Good quality. --Cvmontuy 02:02, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 08.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 12, 09.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. Comments Above some short cut, but good enough for me.--Famberhorst 05:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 25 January 2017 (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:
Church of Saint Nicholas in Świdnik, belfry.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Observation tower in Bukowiec Palace Park, exposure from NE.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Observation tower in Bukowiec Palace Park, entrance.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Observation tower in Bukowiec Palace Park, spiral stairs.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Unique in scope and a very good picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Mod Siegelei Mini Book Kit 1.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Sigelei Evaya and Kayfun V4.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. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 06:58, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 26 January 2017 (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:
Kąpielnik pond in Bukowiec, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Manor in Nowa Ruda, main portal.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Manor in Nowa Ruda, coats of arms over main portal.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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 in Bukowiec, exposure from SE.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 22:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2015 Winobluszcz trójklapowy 02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2015 Winobluszcz trójklapowy 02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pinceta ceramiczna 1.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. Comments Good quality Olivier LPB 10:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pinceta ceramiczna 2.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. Comments Good quality. --Lucasbosch 11:13, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Sigelei X-Tank.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. Comments Good quality. --Lucasbosch 11:13, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 13, 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:03, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 13, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 27 January 2017 (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:
Mausoleum in Bukowiec, tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Church of St. Joseph in Krzeszów Abbey, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Artificial ruins in Bukowiec Palace Park, closeness.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Nikon D5500.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Pierre André (talk) 10:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 17, 08.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 17, 09.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 14, 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 16:34, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 14, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 13:29, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 14, 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 13:29, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 14, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 13:29, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 28 January 2017 (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:
Mods (electronic cigarettes), power supply Wismec Reuleaux RX 2/3 and vaporizer SvoëMesto Kayfun V4.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Góry Sokole, exposure from S.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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 Anne church in Zieleniec, Maria column.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
11 Wolności Square in Bystrzyca Kłodzka, oriel window.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:03, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 28 January 2017 (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:
Nikon D7100 with Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5 lens.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:05, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Very good and best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 17, 13.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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 00:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 19, 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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 00:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 17, 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. Comments Very small (though larger than 2 MP), but a QI to me. -- Ikan Kekek 05:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 17, 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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 22:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 17, 10.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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 23:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 14, 04.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. Comments Good quality. --W.carter 12:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 11, 09.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. Comments  Comment Please allow me a suggestion to improve a rather messy (pardon me) composition: crop the bottom and fix the upper horizontal lines. Cheers--Moroder 07:31, 24 January 2017 (UTC)  Done --Jacek Halicki 10:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC) Good quality. --Moroder 13:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 29 January 2017 (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:
Holography, brand Sigelei certificate of authenticity.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Apparently unique in scope and used in 2 WP articles. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 21, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 04:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 21, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 00:34, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 21, 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 04:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 22, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 00:34, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 18, 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. Comments Good quality --Llez 06:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 19, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 07:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 20, 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:51, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 31 January 2017 (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:
Mods (electronic cigarettes), Siegelei Mini Book Kit.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 23, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 24, 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 21, 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 1 February 2017 (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:
Ceramic tweezers.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question - This is one of two photos of ceramic tweezers on Commons, both by you. Why do you consider this better in the scope than File:2017 Pinceta ceramiczna 2.jpg? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

  In this second picture are visible handles for unscrewing vaoprizers. This is optional and in my opinion do not fit the scope. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks for your answer.  Support per your explanation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 24, 03.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13 3.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. Comments Good quality. --Olivier LPB 00:30, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Sigelei Mini Book and Kayfun V4.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 13:19, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 24, 06.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:21, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 24, 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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:24, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 25, 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. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 18:31, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 25, 03.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 16:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 25, 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Rynek 25, 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13 1.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. Comments Good quality. --DXR 06:31, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Scotch Mist 19:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2014 Nowa Ruda, rynek 01.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Nowa Ruda, rynek 01.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 09.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 14:11, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 03.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. Comments Small but ok --Poco a poco 21:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 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. Comments Same here --Poco a poco 21:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 14:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 15.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 12:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 11.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. Comments Good quality. --Pudelek 11:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Bystrzyca Kłodzka, wójtostwo 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 20:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Bystrzyca Kłodzka, wójtostwo 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 20:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, Sempołowskiej 13, 08.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. Comments Good quality. --Pudelek 11:08, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

File:20160810 Pyay, Myanmar 9593.jpg

Bardzo dziękuję za poprawki! -- Jakubhal 08:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:52, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny 10.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. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:52, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny, ogrodzenie 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2017 Sigelei Evaya and Kayfun V4.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017 Sigelei Evaya and Kayfun V4.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny 03.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 04:31, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny 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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:12, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:12, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, zespół kościoła św. Marii Magdaleny 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. Comments Good quality --Rjcastillo 14:55, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny, ogrodzenie 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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 15:20, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny, ogrodzenie 03.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 14:32, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny, ogrodzenie 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. Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 16:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Gorzanów, kościół św. Marii Magdaleny, ogrodzenie 04.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. Comments  Support good quality --Christian Ferrer 17:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 06.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 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. Comments OK for me. --Basotxerri 17:20, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 11.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 12.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:53, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 13.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:52, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Pieta w Gorzanowie.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. Comments GQ --Palauenc05 12:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 13 February 2017 (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:
Mods (electronic cigarettes), Power supply Sigelei Evaya 66W and vaporizer SvoëMesto Kayfun V4.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:19, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:58, 13 February 2017 (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:
Chapel of St. Anthony of Padua in Gorzanów, latern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 12:20, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Chapel of St. Anthony of Padua in Gorzanów, window.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Please check the scope --Llez (talk) 12:24, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 Support useful --Llez (talk) 22:17, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Chapel of St. Anthony of Padua in Gorzanów, portal.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 12:23, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Chapel of St. Anthony of Padua in Gorzanów, pietà.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 07:32, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nowy Waliszów, kościół 11.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nowy Waliszów, kościół, budynek bramny 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nowy Waliszów, dwór 09.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nowy Waliszów, dwór 08.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nowy Waliszów, dwór 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Antoniego Padewskiego w Gorzanowie, 10.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. Comments  Comment Please check your image. Shadows are very dark, it looks tilted CCW and there are some CAs. --XRay 11:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC) Done --Jacek Halicki 19:53, 10 February 2017 (UTC)  Support IMO acceptable. Thank you. --XRay 12:46, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kościół św. Małgorzaty w Starej Łomnicy, 15.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kościół św. Małgorzaty w Starej Łomnicy, 20.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kościół św. Małgorzaty w Starej Łomnicy, 21.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Rocha w Starej Łomnicy, 09.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 15:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Dwór Dolny w Starej Łomnicy 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 10:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Dwór Dolny w Starej Łomnicy 06.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 15:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Dwór Górny w Starej Łomnicy 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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 11:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, kościół 06.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 15:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Rocha w Starej Łomnicy, 03.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 15:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica św. Rocha w Starej Łomnicy, 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 15:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Staw w Paczkowie 6.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Smog nad Nową Rudą.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 02:54, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kłodzko, ul. Malczewskiego 12.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 08:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kłodzko, ul. Malczewskiego 13.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Honda HR-V.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Staw w Paczkowie 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Staw w Paczkowie 2.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. Comments Good quality in my opinion, and I enjoy the shapes of the ice. -- Ikan Kekek 09:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Kościół św. Anny na Górze Świętej Anny 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:20, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Wodospad w Kłodzku.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. Comments Good quality, nice atmosphere. --Tsui 02:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Staw w Paczkowie 4.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:49, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Staw w Paczkowie 5.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 09:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kaplica w Jerzykowicach Małych 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kaplica w Jerzykowicach Małych 3.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 09:01, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Kościół św. Anny na Górze Świętej Anny 1.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:59, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Staw w Paczkowie 3.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. Comments  Comment The category in which this photo is, is missing any geographical category. Insufficient categorization --A.Savin 02:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC) @A.Savin:Look on the categories here. --Jacek Halicki 23:50, 16 February 2017 (UTC) Good --A.Savin 08:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pomnik Aleksandra Fredry we Wrocławiu 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pręgierz we Wrocławiu 1.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. Comments Good quality. --Olivier LPB 00:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pręgierz we Wrocławiu 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Jaz w Kłodzku.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Strzelin, ul. Św. Floriana 16 1.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 11:14, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Strzelin, ul. Św. Floriana 16 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Strzelin, ul. Św. Floriana 16 3.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Sky Tower we Wrocławiu.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 11:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pręgierz we Wrocławiu 3.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:13, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pręgierz we Wrocławiu 4.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:13, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Ratusz Staromiejski we Wrocławiu 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. Comments Nice picture and good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Ratusz Staromiejski we Wrocławiu 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. Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nysa Kłodzka w Kłodzku 1.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 03:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Hydropolis we Wrocławiu.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pomnik Aleksandra Fredry we Wrocławiu 1.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. Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 07:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Kategorie Quality Images

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#Help_needed

Administrator A.Savin prosi o pomoc i większą aktywność osoby zaangażowane w nominowanie i ocenianie zdjęć w QI.

"Whereas me, XRay, Halavar, Code and some very few other users do, the big rest (including not only unexperienced newbees but also some longstanding QI nominators like Ermell, Charlesjsharp, The Photographer, or Martin Falbisoner) categorize their QI's in user categories like "Quality images by xxx" but never to QI by country, by city, or by subject. Can they tell me why not?"

Zauważyłem właśnie, że ty nigdy nie dodajesz do swoich zdjęć kategorii QI choć byłoby to bardzo potrzebne dla wszystkich użytkowników projektów Wiki. Dodajesz tylko i wyłącznie kategorie swoją, która nikomu poza Tobą nie jest potrzebna. Kiedyś dodawałem kategorie do Twoich zdjęć, dzięki temu będą one łatwiej dostępne dla ludzi, liczyłem że sam zaczniesz potem to robić, ale niestety tak się nie stało. Hmm, pomyśl nad tym. Pozdrawiam! --Halavar (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2017 (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:
Fence church with gatehouses in Gorzanów, western gatehouse.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk).

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Mary Magdalene church in Gorzanów, crucifix.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 06:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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 church in Długopole Dolne, crucifix.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 15:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Chapel of St. Anthony of Padua in Gorzanów, statue of Onuphrius.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support BEst in scope --Llez (talk) 06:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Interior of church of the Assumption in Nowa Bystrzyca, sacristy.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 06:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 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. Comments OK. --A.Savin 02:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 06.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 09.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. Comments Good quality and interesting --A.Savin 02:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nysa Kłodzka w Kłodzku 2.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Nysa Kłodzka w Kłodzku 3.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 11:21, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 11:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 03.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 11:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 10:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2017 Smog nad Nową Rudą.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017 Smog nad Nową Rudą.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 08.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 07:47, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 25 February 2017 (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:
Honda HR-V (GH3/GH4), GH3, side view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Chapel in Jerzykowice Małe, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 25 February 2017 (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:
Chapel in Jerzykowice Małe, altar.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful - Damage that is not used. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Smog in Poland, over Nowa Ruda.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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 Anne church in Nowa Ruda, exposure from SW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 07:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Pociąg do nieba we Wrocławiu.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. Comments Good, clear picture. I have to tell you, when I saw the name "Train to Heaven", I thought it would end up in Treblinka. Sorry, dark thought, but they had the "Road to Heaven" there. -- Ikan Kekek 02:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)  Comment Congrats to your empathic and specific comments, Ikan.-- Johann Jaritz 04:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Międzygórze, kościół św. Józefa 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, kościół 16.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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 67 06.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:07, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 10.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Rancho Overo w Nowej Rudzie 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 09:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Rancho Overo w Nowej Rudzie 2.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 10:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Rancho Overo w Nowej Rudzie 3.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 09:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Wieża widokowa na Górze Świętej Anny.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 09:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Kategorie QI

Hej!

Widzę, że w końcu zacząłeś dodawać swoje zdjęcia do kategorii Quality Images. Pamiętaj jednak o tym, aby dodawać zdjęcia do kategorii miejsca bardziej dokładnie, czyli jeśli jest to możliwe, to do kategorii miasta, a nie województwa. Jak zobaczysz tutaj: Category:Quality images of Lower Silesian Voivodeship to jest już stworzonych 17 kategorii miast i zdjęcia najlepiej umieszczać tam. Niestety jest masa zdjęć (ponad 1450) które są w kategorii województwa i dobrze byłoby je przenieść do nowo utworzonych kategorii miast, bo w kategorii Twojego województwa jest bardzo dużo zdjęć i z czasem ich będzie więcej i więcej, a wtedy przeglądanie kategorii będzie zbyt uciążliwe... --Halavar (talk) 12:33, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 67 08.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:15, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 67 09.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:15, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 112 06.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:15, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, kościół 18.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:07, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 27 February 2017 (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:
16 Świętego Floriana Street in Strzelin, exposure from NW.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
16 Świętego Floriana Street in Strzelin, window.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Can you add monument number as you usually do please. Charles (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 22:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
16 Świętego Floriana Street in Strzelin, portal.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 22:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Weirs in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, in Kłodzko.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sky Tower in Wrocław, exposure from W.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 112 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Stary Waliszów, kaplica przydrożna, 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Wilkanów, kościół św. Jerzego 16.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 67 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:45, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Stary Waliszów, dom nr 112 04.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:21, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Muzeum Współczesne we Wrocławiu 1.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:00, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Wilkanów, kościół św. Jerzego 22.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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Wilkanów, kościół św. Jerzego 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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:52, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2017 Muzeum Współczesne we Wrocławiu 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 06:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Wilkanów, kościół św. Jerzego 18.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. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 06:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Dwór w Dzikowcu, 04.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Bystrzyca Kłodzka, kaplica przydrożna, 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. Comments  Comment Please check your image. There are CAs at the top. --XRay 06:43, 26 February 2017 (UTC)  Done --Jacek Halicki 10:13, 26 February 2017 (UTC)  Support Thank you. IMO OK now. --XRay 06:54, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Dzięki

Wykorzystałem Twoje bardzo ładne foto. Dzięki! H.Rabiega (talk) 08:32, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kościół św. Barbary w Droszkowie.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Mauzoleum Jana Świdnickiego w Starym Wielisławiu 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:56, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Kościół Bożego Ciała w Ścinawce Średniej 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Fontanna w Szczytnej 04.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Zieleniec 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. Comments Good quality. --Pudelek 12:08, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica Św. Trójcy w Dusznikach-Zdroju, 06.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. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 15:32, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Gimnazjum w Stroniu Śląskim 2.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. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 06:12, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Gimnazjum w Stroniu Śląskim 1.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. Comments  Comment Left side of the building is not straight (see the note). Also, there are 3 blurred birds on the sky (also see the note). --Halavar 10:43, 1 March 2017 (UTC) Done --Jacek Halicki 11:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)  Support Good now. QI for me --Halavar 13:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kaplica cmentarna 04.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 04:24, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Jaskinia Niedźwiedzia w Kletnie, szata naciekowa 03.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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:07, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Jaskinia Niedźwiedzia w Kletnie, szata naciekowa 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. Comments Good quality --Halavar 01:07, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Dwór w Święcku 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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 06:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kościół Wniebowzięcia NMP w Nowej Wsi 10.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. Comments Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 06:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2016 Kamieńczyk 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. Comments GQ --Palauenc05 07:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2015 Kościół św. Józefa w Ponikwie 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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! 2014 Kaplica Św. Trójcy w Dusznikach-Zdroju, 03.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. Comments Good quality. --Ermell 09:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)