User talk:Yann

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Bahasa Indonesia ∙ dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ euskara ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ ქართული ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

/archives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

God is busy, may I help you? / Dieu est occupé, puis-je vous aider?

You can leave me a message in English or French, at the bottom. Click here. Yann 22:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Renommage Berthe Morisot

Bonjour, et merci de votre réponse positive qui va dans le sens du respect dû à l'œuvre et à l'artiste Cordiales pensées Léah 30 (talk) 12:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Léah 30: Bonjour,
Je sais, pour avoir travaillé sur les oeuvres d'un peintre français, que c'est difficile de s'y retrouver quand le nom du fichier ne correspond pas au nom du tableau. Merci pour votre travail. Yann (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Désolée je n'y arrive pas ;) après avoir trouvé la licence en mode modifications, je remplace par crochet crochet PD-Art|PD-old-100-expired}} certes, mais après ? où mettre le titre exact ? si vous m'envoyez juste le lien d'une de vos pages Cézanne modifiée avec la démarche ça m'aiderait (je consulterai l'historique) merci ! Léah 30 (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merci de vos interventions auprès de Mdaniels ! j'ai trouvé une parade provisoire en modifiant la page principale du Catalogue raisonné : ajouter les titres exacts à côté des n° ; mais comment intervenir, auprès de qui, pour que les critères de renommage changent définitivement quand il s'agit d'œuvres artistiques, littéraires, universitaires industrielles ou artisanales ? dès lors qu'il y a dépôt de l'œuvre et reconnaissance de ce titre ? (je sais, on a osé renommé les Dix petits nègres hélas, mais c'est une autre histoire) Avancer que remettre une capitale à Valenciennes, que tout le monde écrit ainsi, n'est pas admis par les critères c'est vraiment excessif Léah 30 (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Léah 30: Comme ça : [1]. Yann (talk) 13:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merci cette manip c'est bon ; mais la suite ? je vois que vous avez fait des re-directions mais je ne sais pas faire ;) et pour le nouveau titre ? je re-demande des renommages ? merci, vraiment, de voler à mon secours ! Léah 30 (talk) 15:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour ! au musée de Bagnols sur Cèze on peut voir ce tableau du Port de Boulogne ; qui est en fait intitulé L'entrée du port, peint à... Fécamp (je me réfère au catalogue raisonné Bataille et Wildstein, qui fait autorité puisqu'établi sur les indications de Julie Manet la fille de l'artiste.

Bonsoir, j'essaie en vain de créer des redirections ; je sais faire en principe sur wikipedia mais pas ici ; je saisis qu'il faut ouvrir une nouvelle page et insérer le hastag rediriger (du wikicode) avec l'adresse de lla File à "récupérer" mais je ne sais pas ouvrir une nouvelle page ? merci merci de m'indiquer la démarche, l'aide ne m'aide... à rien Léah 30 (talk) 00:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Film CCBY-NC-ND

Hi Yann, perhaps you forgot... when reverting my action, could you please ping, or do a real revert, because I did only notice this by accident. Film is nominated for deletion by myself now. Ellywa (talk) 21:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ellywa: I didn't see the license in the film, only in the description, but you are right. File deleted. Yann (talk) 22:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Ellywa (talk) 22:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. I can't understand why I didn't see this wrong license. Guess I was fooled by the results of my search on YouTube. Apologies for the initial mistake. Vysotsky (talk) 21:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete File:Amazing stories cover 1932 vol 7 no 8.JPG so I can reupload

Hi, could you do a courtesy delete of the above file - there is info in the EXIF that I don't like. I have a new version waiting to remedy the situation. Thanks -- Deadstar (msg) 18:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 18:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Yann! I just also realised we already have this cover File:Amazing stories 193211.jpg, so won't bother with my version! Thanks again, -- Deadstar (msg) 19:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Featured photo nominations

Hi Yann,

I noticed you commented on two of my featured photo nominations calling for more information. I added the gallery categories and locations as you asked for. However, it seems that the edits that I made on the nomination page aren't showing up in the list of candidates. Do you know why? Daftation (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I realised you are talking about the file information rather than the nomination. I have edited that as well. Daftation (talk) 19:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FMC etc.

Hi, I'm trying to fix a lot of the mess on those pages now. Just letting you know so you don't have to jump in or help, that may create some edit conflicts before I'm done. ;-) --Cart (talk) 20:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FP?

Any chance? ★ 18:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, sorry. Ordinary people, not so old, average quality. Yann (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ueli Steck in Les Drus "North Couloir Direct" (VI, Al 6-, M8).webm

Hi Yann

I notice you uploaded a video which I was previously extracting images from (e.g. File:Ueli Steck Les Drus "North Couloir Direct" (VI, Al 6+, M8) 5 (cropped).png). I didn't know videos could be uploaded, and that they could be 'Featured'. There are at least two other videos in the Petzl climbing series that are also license free here and here, that might be worth uploading? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aszx5000: Ah yes, thanks a lot! Yann (talk) 22:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here they are: File:Flatanger - Daniel Woods and Dave Graham’s Return to sport climbing in Norway.webm, File:Ice climbing - The SITTA project outtakes.webm.
You can upload videos easily with Commons:video2commons. Yann (talk) 22:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great - thanks for that Yann. Aszx5000 (talk) 07:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strange behavior

Hey, can you check this file's history? I'm not certain what's happening there, but if I had to I would bet the account is compromised. RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's just the usual copyright violations + advertisement... User warned, files deleted. Yann (talk) 05:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Dear Jann, please delete https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pneumia_nubila_(Meigen_1818)_%E2%99%82.jpg Thank you. Elena Regina (talk) 22:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pathé's Headquarters.jpg

Yes, it most certainly is a copyright violation. I posted the link to the Google Street View. You can even see the Google Earth logo prominently on the lower left. Schierbecker (talk) 16:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, right. Deleted. Yann (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Title of photo of the government office in The Hague housing the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security and Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations

Dear Yann, I saw that you had changed the title of my photo to File:Government office in The Hague housing the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security (2019).jpg. However, this is an incomplete title. In fact, they are two different ministries: the Ministry of Justice and Security and the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations. Could you change the title? Or else do you know a better title? Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 17:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@S. Perquin: Hi, You wrote that the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security is in the middle, so it is the main subject of the picture. Yann (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Yann, you're right about that! I hadn't thought about that yet! 😄 Thanks for the renaming! Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 17:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next 12 months

Maybe you'd want to add to Commons:Village_pump#Next_12_months_at_Commons. Enhancing999 (talk) 08:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for your opinion

Regarding Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gaza City, Palestine 2020.jpg, I will go by your opinion. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am resigned to the deletion, if that is what happens. No need to bother you about it. Krok6kola (talk) 00:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

.. for nominating my pictures on QIC ;-) Brackenheim (talk) 08:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gaza City, Palestine 2020.jpg

As you closed this DR on grounds that it was graffiti, I was wondering if you could comment on the concerns that it was a derivative work of the George Floyd selfie, which is a separate issue. IronGargoyle (talk) 10:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is a borderline case, but I don't think that deleting this would protect anyone's copyright. Yann (talk) 13:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are his heirs not the copyright holders of the image? You say it is a borderline case (it seems a pretty clear derivative to me though). Does that not fall within COM:PRP then? IronGargoyle (talk) 18:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There could be several legal justifications for keeping this image, but I am mainly interested by the moral one. George Floyd selfie is only one possible source, or it could be just a portrait resembling him. One could also says that our image is not a direct derivative work, and that the artist had the right to use the image of George Floyd, whatever it was. As Giraudoux said There is no better way of exercising the imagination than the study of law. No poet ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer interprets the truth. Legal experts will find every possible reasons to keep or to delete it. But deleting this would be a terrible mistake, contrary to everything what Wikimedia stands for: knowledge, equity, truth, justice, etc. Yann (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please provide the legal justifications? I am troubled by your nod to "knowledge, equity, truth, justice" (mostly words that do not appear in the Wikimedia Foundation mission). It makes it appear that you more interested in advocating for a particular political agenda with your role of administrator than maintaining Commons as a source of freely licensed educational material. And how moral is it to deprive the Floyd heirs of their right to control the disposition of Floyd's creative work? IronGargoyle (talk) 22:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reading your reply again, I think now the two sentences: "George Floyd selfie is only one possible source, or it could be just a portrait resembling him. One could also says that our image is not a direct derivative work, and that the artist had the right to use the image of George Floyd, whatever it was." is you legal justification right? I was too focused on your first statement about the importance of the moral argument. Let me talk through your legal argument then: If the work is derivative of something else, it is still likely a derivative work. Do we really think the Palestinian muralist met George Floyd in life? Or contacted the family of George Floyd to obtain permission? Both possibilities are very unlikely and that means this image falls afoul of COM:PRP. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:24, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware, yes. Some (including this one) are derivative of the famous George Floyd selfie. Not all of those should be deleted. Some of the derivative works are either de minimis or in jurisdictions which allow freedom of panorama for murals. This particular mural fits neither criteria. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just my opinion, but the mural and selfie look nothing like each other. The mural has more shading and they are from different angles. So I don't see how anyone could argue they are derivatives. Otherwise you'd have to argue any or all images of George Floyd are inherently copyrighted because you can't have an image of his face that doesn't somehow look similar to the selfie due to how generic it looks. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All moot

The photograph itself was a Flickrwashed blatant copyright violation of a photograph by Mohammed Salem/REUTERS. See https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/10/israel-hamas-war-black-struggle.html. I have deleted it as such. IronGargoyle (talk) 04:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fine. I updated the deletion request. Yann (talk) 08:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:The Wildcat (1921) by Ernst Lubitsch.webm

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:The Wildcat (1921) by Ernst Lubitsch.webm. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:The Wildcat (1921) by Ernst Lubitsch.webm]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Prototyperspective (talk) 11:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prototyperspective: Hi, This is a 1921 film, and the author died in 1947, so it is in the public domain in Germany and in USA. Yann (talk) 12:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, aware of that but if you play the actual file, you'll see that it's actually a recently-made documentary video about the film, not the film itself. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OOPS. Deleted. Thanks for looking. Yann (talk) 13:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old Ironsides

Can you undelete File:Old Ironsides (1926).webm today just so I can investigate the cause of the issue? I don't have the local file anymore, and I'd at least like some access. The issue has to do with the fact that certain video files are very much not empty, but that Commons incorrectly says that they are "0 bytes", and therefore the video player doesn't work properly with them. (The video will still play, but you can't go backwards or forwards.) I wonder if this is similar to a common issue with PDFs that often causes them to register as "0 bytes" as well, which purging the cache enough times helps fix.

Plus, I am going to upload a new version in its place tomorrow anyway so please undelete so I can investigate. SnowyCinema (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SnowyCinema: Hi,
This file has 0 pixel and 0 byte. I will also upload a HR version soon (1080p). Do you really need this file? Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have the same HD version locally, so I could upload it too, if you undelete this file I'd like it in the revision history, so I can see exactly what happened, thanks. (What I want to do is to make a Bot proposal to fix every file like this because there are actually not a few.) SnowyCinema (talk) 14:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SnowyCinema: Ok, done. Yann (talk) 14:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue seems to be that the metadata (text data about the video) is either missing, corrupted, or not being properly read by Commons. It therefore isn't reading the bit rate, since the bit rate is specified in this metadata apparently. But the video itself seems okay. It even plays correctly unlike what I originally thought... SnowyCinema (talk) 18:12, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bot mistake

Maybe you may help me, following the deletion of duplicate (thank you) of a very low quality of a file this revision was made by mistake and should be undid; it was not supposed to be removed by the bot following the renaming file after... Smart Consumers Shop Consumers (talk) 15:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The file is my own work , I am copyright of my own work--Smart Consumers Shop Consumers (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smart Consumers Shop Consumers: Hi,
For any work previously published elsewhere, a formal written permission is needed, unless the work is in the public domain. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Yann (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dalvago

Yann, you've already warned this user about copyright violations but they have recently uploaded an image that I believe was already declared a copyright violation. I think File:Black Electric Buffalo Records logo.png is the same as the deleted file File:EBR logo black.png. Can you check please? Thank you. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, file deleted. Thanks for noticing. Yann (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Farewell to Arms, 1932.ogv

File:Farewell to Arms, 1932.ogv has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

SDudley (talk) 23:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reefer Madness (1936) by Louis J. Gasnier.webm

File:Reefer Madness (1936) by Louis J. Gasnier.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Mayimbú (talk) 03:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Église Saint-Étienne de Vallouise, baptistère.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Église de Saint-Étienne de Vallouise, tympan du portail.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Ermell 19:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Église de Saint-Étienne de Vallouise, placard en bois sculpté.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Early Purple Orchid, Champsaur, France 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.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --C messier 19:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yann&oldid=876128901"