User talk:ReneeWrites

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, ReneeWrites!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

Archives 1, 2

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plateau Heilig Hartbeeld, Kerkplein Raamsdonk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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. --Bgag 02:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grote Kerk Breda grafzerk 13 wapen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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. --Bgag 02:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Het Blauwe Roodborstje 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grote Kerk Breda grafzerk 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 14:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Raamsdonk Sint-Bavokerk buitenkant 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 04:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stationsstraat 8, Made.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 02:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2024 Postcard

Please help translate to your language

Hello ReneeWrites!

We extend our warmest greetings and gratitude to you for actively taking part in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2024 Commons photography competition. Your valuable contributions have significantly enriched the world's knowledge and cultural heritage.

We are delighted to inform you that your efforts have placed you among the top 100 uploaders during this project. As a token of our appreciation, we would like to send you a special postcard.

To ensure you receive your special postcard postcard, kindly complete this form before August 15, 2024.

Looking ahead, we hope to see you again in February 2025 for the next exciting event.

Thank you once again for your dedication and Wikilove.

Wiki Loves Folklore International Team

-MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Equipment

Hello Renee,
i rejected two of your nominations.
You're a good photographer, but the quality of smartphone photos has a limit. You can get a high-quality shot outdoors in sunlight, but for interiors the lighting is not enough with such equipment. Even used A DSLR camera and one fixed lens will help you create great shots.
With best regards, George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:26, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @George Chernilevsky:

Thank you for your feedback and for taking the time to review my nominations. I understand the reasons behind the rejection. I'm aware of the limitations of smartphone cameras, especially in low-light environments, and have been looking into other options. One of the key factors for me is finding a camera that makes good photos while still maintaining a compact size, so that I can easily carry it with me (this is for me the main appeal of smartphones). This one caught my interest, and it isn't cheap, but if I got a camera that's too bulky (even if it's just as good or better and costs less) I'll probably end up rarely using it.

Anyway, let me know what you think. Best regards, ReneeWrites (talk) 20:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Renee,
i looked at the Rickon specs. I have never seen a camera from this manufacturer before, but i have used a few other similar cameras.
I believe that the Rikon will produce much better images than a smartphone, however, the Rikon has weaker optics than the competition, as far as i could tell from the specifications.Therefore, i recommend also looking at

• Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III
• Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX15EE

And to the question of bulkiness. I often go for walks in the forest with my granddaughter (she is now 9 years old). My equipment for such walks:

• camera body;
• 3 lenses (50 mm, 24 mm and 100 mm macro);
• 2 tripods (small for macro and full-size);
• flash and diffusers.

One SLR camera + one lens for walking around the city is not a problem at all, but this technique allows you to take excellent quality pictures.
Best regards, George --George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Batterij 8, Drimmelen voordeur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Batterij 12A, Drimmelen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Het Blauwe Roodborstje 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Isn't it tilted? look at the brick rows --Poco a poco 09:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)  Done It was, fixed the tilt ReneeWrites 00:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pastoor Doensstraat 2A, Bavel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pastoor Doensstraat 2A mural, Bavel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Molen Hoop Doet Leven, Made 2023-06-25.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality -- Spurzem 13:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ginnekenweg 145, Breda.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 15:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Batterij 8, Drimmelen 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --El Golli Mohamed 10:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Batterij 8, Drimmelen 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --El Golli Mohamed 10:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wijnand Zijlmans - Onbegrensd 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 03:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grote Kerk Breda grafmonument Jan van Polanen II 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 03:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haagsemarkt 16A, Princenhage.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Source

In the CoA QI candidates the source is directly in the Municipality page. And usually it isn't needed. Though, i am going to put it. Can you remove the decline message when i have done it? Thanks Ashoppio (talk) 21:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ashoppio: I will, the lack of sourcing was my only objection. I appreciate the fast response. ReneeWrites (talk) 21:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@ReneeWrites Thank you. I have put new CoA's, please don't decline them, as i will put a source for them in a manner of minutes. Thank for the comprehension. Ashoppio (talk) 21:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ashoppio: No problem. I saw that sources were added and removed my opposing votes. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:15, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@ReneeWrites Thank you very much! For the coa of Casanova Lerrone i'll add the source tomorrow, as it is quite late now. Thanks again. Ashoppio (talk) 22:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I also saw that you promoted my other images. Thank you very much! Ashoppio (talk) 14:06, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. Your CoAs are beautiful, you do good work :) ReneeWrites (talk) 15:08, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moersebaan 2, Zundert, dienstgebouw 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ccw tilt or some perspective distortion? Otherwise QI imo. --ArildV 10:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC) Fixed the rotation. ReneeWrites 22:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC) Thank you. QI imo. --ArildV 06:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Grafmonument Engelbrecht I van Nassau - Engelbrecht I and Johanna van Polanen with saints.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The scope is too broad and We must connect the scope to the category or gallery that contains the image.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: I linked the Commons category. I'd like to choose this category over Grafmonument Engelbrecht I van Nassau because this image focuses on Engelbert (and his wife Joanna), who can be seen kneeling in the front, rather than the monument in its entirety. ReneeWrites (talk) 07:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

I would suggest Grafmonument Engelbrecht I van Nassau - Engelbrecht I and Johanna van Polanen with saints as scope. --Thi (talk) 11:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

@Thi: Adjusted the scope again, thank you for the advice :) ReneeWrites (talk) 13:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Support Quality image used on other wikis. --Thi (talk) 15:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bruin plaatsnaambord Hooge Zwaluwe aan de Kerkdijk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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.--Tournasol7 04:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plaatsnaambord Hooge Zwaluwe aan de Kerkdijk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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.--Tournasol7 04:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Raadhuisstraat 10, Hooge Zwaluwe 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 04:20, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Raadhuisstraat 10, Hooge Zwaluwe voorkant.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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.--Tournasol7 04:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gaete 3, Lage Zwaluwe voorkant.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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.--Tournasol7 04:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Raamsdonk Sint-Bavokerk buitenkant 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 01:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bloemencorso Zundert 2023 - Dobberen onderkant 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --C messier 19:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sint Annakapel Breda.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 Tilted to the left (main focus: center section), CA on the cross, image also looks sheared (see my ~8 minute fix here); please ping me if fixed to promote --D-Kuru 19:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC) @D-Kuru:  Done ReneeWrites 04:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)  Info moved from decline to discuss --Augustgeyler 14:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC) * Perspective correction done --D-Kuru 17:30, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Het Blauwe Roodborstje 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 12:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Het Blauwe Roodborstje 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dorpsstraat 4, Drimmelen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 21:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
De Hoop, Princenhage.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpanelen 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Bgag 02:58, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpanelen 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI imo. --ArildV 08:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:38, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 03:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 03:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Raamsdonk Sint-Bavokerk glas-in-lood raam vestibule.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 20:49, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amsterdam Schiphol Treinstation lift.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 Overall good quality. Need small perspective correction. Maybe a small crop also to remove the overexposed station clock? --ArildV 08:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)  Done ReneeWrites 10:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)  Support Thank you. Good quality. --ArildV 10:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Raadhuisstraat 33, Terheijden 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Category:Grave monument of Jan I van Nassau.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 09:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
•  OpposeWho was Jan I of Nassau? This image, produced by the Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed (National Service for Cultural Inheritances) catalogues this tomb as being of an unknown person. The article en:John I, Count of Nassau-Siegen catalogues him as having been buried in burried Keppel Abbey, Germany. The tomb might be that of en:John IV, Count of Nassau-Siegen who was certainly buried in Breda, but we need more evidence to show that the "official" description has (see earlier) been updated. BTW, the links in Category:Grave monument of Jan I van Nassau should point to articles in Wikipedia, not to Commons categories. Martinvl (talk) 20:56, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Martinvl: Jan I was an illegitimate son of John IV. A bit more information on the grave (and the person) can be found on the website of Erfgoedweb here. Erfgoedweb (Lit. Heritage Web) is run by the municipality of Breda in cooperation with the city archive (whose logo can be seen in the bottom left). From the bottom paragraph:

  Jan the Bastard was buried on 29 November 1505. He is depicted on his grave monument in a shroud, stripped of all signs of dignity. The monument was hidden for a long time under a wooden floor and was rediscovered in 1902, attracting a lot of attention at the time. The inscription with the name of the deceased was placed on a copper strip that disappeared over time. For a long time, it was therefore unknown who was buried here, but historian Valentijn Paquay has shown, based on archival research, that this is Jan the Bastard.

  The page doesn't mention a date, but this page from a book about the church mentions the results of Paquay's research being published in 1999, the photo from the Rijksdienst is dated 1995. ReneeWrites (talk) 00:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment Explanation accepted. A pity that no reference was made to Paquay in either Commons or Wikipedia (en or nl). I will be updating the category description in due course so that your explanation is properly recorded. BTW, in English we use the word “tomb” rather than “grave-monument”. Martinvl (talk) 12:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose I have updated the information in the Category to reflect the information given earlier by ReneeWrites. However the image lacks geographical coordinates - a pre-requisite for any Valued Image of this type. Martinvl (talk) 16:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@Martinvl:  Done Added coordinates. ReneeWrites (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment Great! "Oppose" flag removed. Martinvl (talk) 20:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:55, 31 July 2024 (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:
Category:Pastorie, Sint-Laurentiuskerk (Ulvenhout).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used. It would be better to avoid the .PNG mode which gives an unpleasant rendering... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I've stopped using the .png file format for images like these since about a year and a half ago, but this is one of my older images which still has it. ReneeWrites (talk) 08:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpanelen 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 17:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Request by TemaGub2002

Hello, @ReneeWrites: TemaGub2002 just want to overwrite File:DC Comics 2024.svg with better source from Logopedia, which had the white background. Could you please grant the user a right to overwrite the file. Thanks for your attention.

Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Overwriting_existing_files/Requests#:~:text=Only%20users%20with%20Autopatrol%20rights,particular%20file%20on%20this%20page. Yayan550 (talk) 06:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I added the template, but for future reference requests like this go to COM:OWR, not my talk page. If someone made a request and it hasn't been fielded yet you can ping me or someone else on that page. ReneeWrites (talk) 08:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Facade of Villa Vredenburcht in Bréda.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Grafmonument Engelbrecht I van Nassau - Maria van Loon-Heinsberg and John IV of Nassau with saints.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used. --Thi (talk) 09:50, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. ReneeWrites (talk) 10:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Alexander-93 12:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 02:00, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpaneel 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tilburg Centraal Station Mosaicpanelen 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --ArildV 19:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Topaasstraat 54, Breda 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Problem in VI

Thank you for your work on VI where you will always be welcome. But it seems that closing promoted images is causing problems. There is a blocked image (Agostino Scilla. The philosopher Epicurus.jpg) that will be ignored by the bot and will be lost. My images that you closed are causing big display problems on my talk page. I spent time trying to understand the problem but I couldn't find it. I suggest that you don't close promoted images to avoid this inconvenience, thank you.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I apologise for the inconvenience, I had no idea! I saw that the image you mentioned did get promoted, but not removed from the page, so I removed it manually. I hope that's okay. I'll refrain from closing the vote on further VI entries. ReneeWrites (talk) 08:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breda beeld - Griffioen - Hans van Bentem - Kloosterlaan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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. --Bgag 02:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breda Nieuwe Ginnekenstraat 20 2024-08-06.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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 02:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Bgag 02:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Appartementencomplex De Poort van Breda 2024-08-05-2.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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Tagooty 01:03, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breda Delpratsingel 1 2024-08-05-1.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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 02:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breda Ginnekenweg 74–76 2024-08-06.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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Екатерина Борисова 02:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Mass deletion of "History of" categories

Good evening! Why did you let those categories be deleted? Was there an overall discussion that "History of" categories are outdated? It is common use to sort those categories like this... I look forward to your feedback. Best regards, Fantaglobe11 (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Fantaglobe11: There have been various discussions on using "History" or "Historical" as a descriptor and every time there's almost unanimous agreement to have these phased out in favor of "by year/decade/century". History is not a good defining term for categorizing media, as there is no clear cut-off period when something is considered history or historical, and when it's not.

COM:Categories for discussion/2023/04/Category:History of Africa by century

COM:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Historical speeches

COM:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Historical images

The categories I tagged in particular only contained one subcategory, the "year of" metacat, so I moved that to the main category and cut out the middleman. For instance Category:History of Oosterhout, North Brabant only contains Category:Oosterhout, North Brabant by year, which in turn has subcategories for 2020 through 2024. This ties into the issue of "when is something history?". If I was looking for pictures of Oosterhout made this year it would make sense to look under "Oosterhout by year > Oosterhout in 2024" rather than to first go to "History of Oosterhout". The same reasoning applies to Category:History of Alphen-Chaam and Category:History of Baarle-Nassau. These categories were not made to make media more findable, nor to diffuse a container category that was getting too crowded. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:33, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello ReneeWrites, thank you for your detailed answer. I understand the difficulty with the term "history". At all Wikimedia projects, we are used to avoid the term "now". For this reason, everything is history or future. There is no present, because tomorrow today is past. As long as categories like Berlin by year or Amsterdam by year are a subcategory of the corresponding "History of" category, there seems to be no agreement at all that "by year" categories should not be a subcategory of the "History of" categories. Moreover, it is not forbidden for categories to have one subcategory. Unless you can prove me wrong. Have a good Monday tomorrow. Best regards, Fantaglobe11 (talk) 19:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Fantaglobe11: you're right that I misread the conclusion of the discussion. "History of" categories are fine, though categories like "Historical images/photographs" etc. should be phased out. ReneeWrites (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Fantaglobe11: now that I'm pinging you anyway, you too have a good day tomorrow! And the remainder of today! ReneeWrites (talk) 19:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Griffioen (Hans van Bentem), sculpture in a niche atop the facade of the former Breda Courthouse.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, also can be nominated for QI -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
De Korenbloem, Ulvenhout - front facade.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:38, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Watertoren, Wilhelminasingel, Breda - oblique front view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:58, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

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

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Ettensebaan 10, Breda view from the street.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Watertoren, Speelhuislaan, Breda.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Little green men

Category:Little Green Men (Toy Story), is the name used on https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Little_Green_Men. Sahaib (talk) 10:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)