User talk:Thermos

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. 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. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Jon Harald Søby 18:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! per your comments on the FP nomination page, I've located the original image and uploaded it. It's less striking as a thumbnail, though the added resolution and surrounding whitespace probably help the larger version. Please check again to see if this new image satisfies the requirements. If not, I'd appreciate any comments on how to improve the image (or any direct help!), since I'm fairly inexperienced at this, and don't have a particularly good eye for composition, or any Photoshop skills to speak of. :) GeeJo 23:24, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

Another successful promotion well done your contributions are appreciated Gnangarra 07:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HirundoRusticaFlight.jpg is a cool picture. You must have splendid reflexes. Wsiegmund 03:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Very glad to hear that you like it : )--Thermos 07:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SternaHirundoCatchB.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

A well timed image, the sequence in the description for the image is fantastic. Gnangarra 09:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gnangarra. : ) --Thermos 16:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the nomination of my picture of a horse by Ercina Lake on QI, it has been accepted. Francisco M. Marzoa 15:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • You are welcome. You certainly desrved the nomination. Glad to hear it went throug. --Thermos 17:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LarusRidibundusJuvenileFlight.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

- Alvesgaspar 20:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FinlandParliament.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

The arrangements for the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition are almost complete, and voting will take place between 1st and 28th Feb. All the featured pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As the creator of one or more images nominated for the election we invite you to participate in the event. Alvesgaspar 23:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the picture for FP. I hope you dont mind. Greetings --Simonizer 07:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was quite a catch-up you did there. All manually? I'm asking because of this... --Dschwen 17:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Continued here.... --Dschwen 18:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Windenergy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

- it isn't my photo Lestat 18:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, corrected. Thank you for notice --Thermos 18:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why You delete it ?? -->

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Widok ze wzgórza Chełm 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 {{{3}}}

--Lestat 18:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Sorry. Tried to do too much of housekeeping in too short time. Just a mistake. --Thermos 19:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CygnusOlorNaturalHabitatMorning.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ParusCaeruleusNaturalHabitat.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:CygnusOlorNaturalHabitatMorning.jpg, which was nominated by Simonizer at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:CygnusOlorNaturalHabitatMorning.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 08:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, This is not about this image, it's the page with this name only. I think it's in the wrong namespace.

Deadstar 12:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just looked at the original page you had on the helpdesk and see it had some useful info to help people improve their photos, why did you have second thoughts? Is there somewhere else that presents this sort of info? --Tony Wills 07:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, nice writeup. Only the title might be misleading, as a helpdesk is a place to ask questions. We already have that at Commons:Photography critiques. --Dschwen 09:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then I should probaply revert back to it. When I wrote the original version, I thought that perhaps someone could do a better job, but apparently nobody did. In addition, just as Dschwen said, I felt this might have been a bit weird for helpdesk. Anyhow, when I reread it now, the ISO-thing is probaply something that I would change quite a bit. At the time of writing, for some reason I was too high ISO-shy for some bad experiences. However, after that I have had very good results with rather high ISOs like 800. Regarding colour or DOF, I would write it as before. Let me see what I can do, probaply should modify it by giving even simpler advice.--Thermos 09:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Parthenon from south.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Parthenon from south.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 07:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Some of photos which have IQ are on the page Commons:Quality images/Subject/Animals, but not all, Why? :( best regards Pleple2000 17:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They should all be there. However, for some reason the image of Thai ridgeback apparently wasn't, so there has been an administrative error, a human mistake. In any case, I added the image in the subject line to appropriate place in QI gallery. However, if your image is (as in this case) nominated as QI, you can add it to gallery by youself too. --Thermos 18:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MergellusAlbellusTakeOff.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! EmberizaSchoeniclusNaturalHabitat.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Image-MergellusAlbellusTakeOffv2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Image-MergellusAlbellusTakeOffv2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 10:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thermos - yes, Accipiter gentilis. An immature, because of the tear-drop black streaks on the breast. Accipiter nisus does not have these, it has horizontal barring across the breast; so does adult A. gentilis. Also saw you have this photo: Image:BirdInsect.jpg, it is Sylvia communis. May I add a request, always to include the location of photos on the image description! Thanks! - MPF 19:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There really is no need to thank me although I appreciate :). Again, great shot and I wish I could take similar pictures myself... Benh 07:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FringillaCoelebsFemale.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:FringillaCoelebsFemale.jpg, which was nominated by Benh at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FringillaCoelebsFemale.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 09:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Rapsfeld 2007.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Rapsfeld 2007.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 09:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:CampanileGiotto-01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:CampanileGiotto-01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 08:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for retouching my photo, it's much better now, I appreciate it :-) –Dilaudid 20:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, glad if I could help. --Thermos 14:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re the QI nomination and review, Thermos as you've been working on this image, perhaps you could have a go at removing the chronic coloured fringing on some of the gravel around the Kea's feet (so we don't add generational artefacts by working on the uploaded version) --Tony Wills 11:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let us see if I can do something about that. Not sure, but I can certainly give it a go. --Thermos 14:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the new version of Kea is up. --Thermos 14:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-), We'll see if that keeps the critics happy :-) --Tony Wills 07:57, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope so, I like the Kea picture. However, if there is still too much opposition, I can try to enhance it further. This was just a quick and dirty modification with Adobe Lightroom's "Chromatic aberration" tools. --Thermos 11:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 09:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted image Image:MergellusAlbellusTakeOff.jpg to the original version (as this is the version that was actually promoted as a Quality Image), there is a revised version Image:Image-MergellusAlbellusTakeOffv2.jpg that was promoted to Featured Picture on commons.wikimedia, and now its discussion page makes sense again. I have uploaded the new version as Image:MergellusAlbellusTakeOffv3.jpg and adjusted other wikilinks to point to this version. You might want to nominate the revised version for QI and FP. :-) --Tony Wills 01:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've taken some pretty amazing hawk pictures! I'm curious, how do get and maintain focus (any details such as whether you use auto focus, manual, IS, tripod, etc. would be appreciated)? Thanks, Dori - Talk 03:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dori and thank you for compliments,

I will try to provide you with some information behind my bird pictures. However, as the subject is rather lengthy, I write it as a tutorial and post it later on appropriate section of Quality Images section as I suppose that this subject might interest several photographers and on my talk page it might be difficult to find. I hope to get firts version of the tutorial up later today. --Thermos 07:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. The tutorial may actually get more time to get up than I thought. As short answers to your questions:

I viewed your gallery and noticed that you use Canon's Rebel XT/350D. As I also use a Canon camera, I try to give you answers which should be as directly applicable as possible. However, as the model I use is 20D (and I am not familiar with XT/350D), I am not sure if all this is directly applicable. In any case, I hope that this information is beneficial.

If I think about basic settings, I always shoot RAW because of the adjustability obtained through that format.

In addition, as basic setting I usually use AV, or apreture priority setting. For my shooting style, where I try to separate the subject our of background, I think that the ability to control depth of field through apreture value easily changed is rather beneficial.

When focusing is considered, I always shoot with auto focus. However, as there are several AF modes, perhaps few words about them is beneficial.

Usually I shoot wild life while hiking around certain reservois, where more interesting subjects can be seen. Because of my shooting style, I consider appropriate usage of various AF modes important. While choosing AF mode, I approach the issue by considering what kind of subjects I am most likely to meet in various situations. In this respect, there are two modes I utilise.

When I am hiking in open spaces, I always engage full automatic focusing, intended for moving subjects. In 20D this is called "AI Servo". The reason for this is that while I am on open spaces, the subject I am most likely to shoot, is flying bird. And if flying birds are considered, I think that AI servo is most appropriate AF setting.

However, while I am within forests, the situation is quite different. In my experience, the subject I am most likely to see, is bird in a tree. Although there is always some amount of movement while the birds are considered, essentially they are "still" subjects. Therefore I use a mode called "AI Focus", which is a halfway house between one shot focus and "AI Servo" mentioned above. With this AF mode the camera engages normal one shot focusing as a default, but if the subject begins to move enough, the camera automatically engages "AI Servo"-focusing (this might be a setting which does not exist in XT/350D). This mode enables the selection AF points as in one shot mode and for better composition and is quite appropriate when photographing birds that are relatively still. And if they fly a way, the moving subject focusing is automatically engaged. Anyhow, if this mode is not available, I would use one shot focusing. It should be appropriate. And if birds flying within forests are considered, they are very hard or impossible to photograph because branches and foliage usually prevents clean view to subject.

When AF issues are considered, one shot AF doesn't need any further explanations. On the other hand, moving subject AF is a different thing. To acquire AF lock on moving subject, the method I use is that I simply take the subject in the view, half press the shutter to focus, let the camera to obtain an AF-lock and then shoot.

One thing that should be mentioned, is that I always use continous shooting mode. As birds move as fast and in unpredictable way, it is difficult to estimate what kind of images you finally get. Therefore, just shoot away. In bird photography, it is not uncommon to shoot something like 500 shots per day. Although many of those will be out of focus, badly composed, shots of birds behind foliage or simply uninteresting, to get "the shot" you simply have to shoot a lot of frames.

Regarding IS, no I do not use it. The equipment I use is either 400 mm or 70-200 mm (although this might be too short for wild birds) non-IS lenses and as my DSLR doesn't have internal IS, I am without it. However, this doesn't mean that I would consider IS useless or something like that. There are benefits in IS, when taking photos of birds in shadowy forests. However, it doesn't help you to freeze the motion, which is quite important in bird photography, as birds often move fast and unpredictably. The only thing that will help you in this respect is fast shutter speed (say 1/500-1/1000 sec or faster). And often, to capture feather detail, you will need this kind of shutter speeds.

Regarding tri- and monopods, although I have both, I mostly use monopod. It certainly helps when taking pictures of badly lit subjects (where IS would also help). Actually, it is quite amazing how slow shutter speeds can be used with monopod. I think that the squirrel picture below is a good example. It is taken with 400 mm lens, effective focal length being 640 mm, which according to conventional wisdom would require shutter speed which is less than 1/640 sec. However, as you can see from the image information, the shutter speed used is 1/125 sec. Which should be unuseable with this kind of focal length. Hence, monopod certainly helps a lot in these situations. Then, if differences between mono- and tripods are considered, because I mostly take this kind of pictures while hiking, I rarely carry my tripod (the tripod I have is extremely large and heavy, which compromises movement while hiking). In addition, monopod is light enough to easily lift with camera, if one needs to quickly change focus for flying bird or something like that. With tripod, such manouvers would be quite a bit harder. The monopod, however, is rather light and not too much of hinderance. And if monopods are considered, the model I have is Manfrotto 334B, which is widely used by professionals. The distinctive property of that monopod is its clever adjustment mechanism, where the height adjustment is made by squeezing the handle instead of adjusting screws or something like that. With that mechanism height adjustment can be made in split second, which is desirable while photographing wild life.

Other things that come to my mind, well, focal length might be mentioned. Although this may be self-evident, when photographing wildlife, it is often hard to approach the subjects and subjects may be rather small. Therefore, every extra mm you can get of focal lenght is beneficial.

Also, to obtain high shutter speeds, use higher ISO-values. Although one may get critisised in QI and FP nominations for noise when using high ISO-values like 800-1600, noise noticeable in full sized image on screen is seldom as apparent if one makes prints about the size of A4-paper. Hence, I wouldn't be afraid to use high ISOs to ensure fast shutter speeds. Earlier on I missed a lot of shot opportunities by being too shy of higher ISO. Nowdays, I would simply ramp up the ISO much more.

Finally, if you wonder where to find interesting subjects, check your local wildlife resources, web pages of birders and such. You should be able too obtain a lot of useful information about species and locations from such sources.

Hope that the above answers at least some of your questions... Yes. I should try to get the information written in more comprehensive and structured manner. --Thermos 13:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the photo, take a look on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Rogers Center and CN Tower.jpg ! Thanks --Beyond silence 21:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• It is a good photo and you have my support. Thank you for fixing it. --Thermos 14:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure! ;)--Beyond silence 15:28, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi, thanks for your review. ;)

Look like you love middle 50 cars, so have a look at my other submission if you want. ;)

Cheers, Acarpentier

Hi Thermos,
I really like this image, but I thought it could use some level adjustments. I tweaked the levels and I think the result is better . If you agree, feel free to update your nomination and I'll support it.
Best regards,
Darren

• Hello Darren. Thank you for the edit you made. You certainly achieved a nice glow. However, let me consider this. For the moment, I am not going to update the nomination for the fear of confusing the vote. But let us see what happens. In any case I appreciate your work. Thank you very much. --Thermos 18:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thermos,
Lycaon was OK with it but did mention the darkness, which I would agree does not disqualify it from being a QI. Congrats! - Relic38 23:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks! --Thermos 05:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thermos, Nice shots - 100-400 IS L? --Fir0002 www 07:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello Fir. Glad to hear that you like my shots - always appreciated your shots and as fellow 20D shooter I was obviously interested in your lens and setting choices.

• Regarding my bird shots, no, not the 100-400L, but the so called "Forgotten 400", i.e. 400/5.6L prime. If you are not familiar with that lens, see this link [1]. Although perhaps 90% of my shots are about sports and people, and not eligable for project without hassle, once in the while when I hike with my equipment, I always carry the 400 prime with me. At least in my experience for my usage, the 400L is perfect choice. It is wery light and manageable for hiking. Although it does not have an image stabilisation, with monopod or higher ISOs one can well achieve great results with it on "reasonable" cost. In addition, that lens has been designed for birds in flight with rapid auto-focus (you can actually hear "clack, clack"-sound, when it focuses).

• And if I consider 100-400, it may well be worth the money. However, before I went to supertele-lengths, I already had a 70-200/2.8 (non-IS) and 1.4 converter, wherefore the versatility of 100-400 was not an issue for me. Obviously I do not know exactly what you have, but if you intend to shoot wild-life I would go with 400 prime. After all, it gives you a nice effective focal length of 640mm and what I have heard, in any case, 100-400L is mostly used in 400 end (for shorter focal lengths in between, I use 17-40L, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8).

• • Thanks for the tip re:the "forgotten 400" because it looks like a very nice piece of glass for the price, and I would fully agree if I ever did get a 100-400 I'd only ever use it at 400. And eventually I wouldn't mind getting one, but at the moment I'm saving and waiting for the Canon 5D MkII which should be a superb body. It might take a while, but I'm willing to wait even if it's just got the dust cleaning feature which I think would be a huge bonus. If you are interested I could go more into my lens/setting choices later - but I've still got another week of exams I'm studying for ;)

OK, good luck to your exams. Let's get back to this. --Thermos 06:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CygnusOlorJuvenile.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anas Platyrhynchos Male.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you. Siebrand 16:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:MIT Dome night1 Edit.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Female Mallard wiki.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

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

Benh 13:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! EvzoneTsarouhiKaltsodetes.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cygnus olor juvenile flight2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you. Siebrand 19:41, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:MIT Dome night1 Edit.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:MIT Dome night1 Edit.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Benh 22:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CrashedMotorcyclingRacingShoulderPanel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

Hello Alvesgaspar,

For a long time, I have been wondering if Commons should have a Wikimedia Common Photography guide. However, the more I think about it, the more I realise that most could be achieved with collaborative writing.

As for your contribution, I was wondering if you would be interested in participating in such project by writing section related macro photography with theme something like "Arthropods and flower - macrophotography view". Or something like that. After all, you hacve so many QIs and FPs in those categories and should be able to guide those interested in those subjects.

Would you be interested in such project? I.e. there would be some general pohotography guide in beginning, but also subject oriented sections like macro mentioned above. Interested? --Thermos 20:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll be glad to participate though I'm really a newcommer to macrophotography (and to digital photo as well). You should also contact Richard Bartz, who is a specialist in the field and a better photographer than me. Are you sure it is possible to host that kind of guide in Wikimedia Commons? -- Alvesgaspar 09:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Put it in the Commons: area or even under Quality Images if people object, perhaps even under Help:. Probably no use putting it on wikipedia as the wisdom of our in-house experts would be considered original research :-) --Tony Wills 10:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Photography would seem to be appropriate (like Commons:Software), be bold :-) --Tony Wills 10:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you have noticed by now that it has been restored to the commons: namespace, I have notified all the people you invited, hopefully you haven't lost too much momentum here :-) --Tony Wills 23:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I noticed it and I will try to create some flesh over the bones. Actually, I am currently workin over Depth of Field section. However, construction work which was done on my home street managed to cut my connections for almost two days, wherefore I have been unable to contact the site for a while. Anyhow. Thank you for heads up and especially for noting the people on the invitation list. I truly appreciate that. --Thermos 21:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thermos. Thank you for your proposal. I've no problem to "share my knowledge" but I have some problems doing it in English. As you can see, my English is poor! It took me a lot of time to write these two lines and probably I did a lot of mistakes. --LucaG 22:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have knowledge to share, why not share it in your own language, and we can find a translator :-). If the whole page is useful, others will presumably want to create different language versions of the whole thing as well. --Tony Wills 10:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea Tony. I would certainly want Luca's contribution. --Thermos 15:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you already see this? Excellent! -- Alvesgaspar 21:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up... However, please notice that "Broadway tower" is not originally my picture and to be honest, now I am not sure if I really cropped it (although I sometimes try to enhance other user's pictures with little tinkering like cropping as the image description says). --Thermos 18:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to work out exactly where Vanhankaupunginlahti, Helsinki, Finland as referenced in your photo Image:MergellusAlbellusTakeOff.jpg is, I think it is nearer 60°12′10″N, 24°59′50″E than 60º12’N 024º54’E mentioned in your photo description. Am I right or is it west of there as per original co-ordinates? --Tony Wills 10:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tony,

Sorry for not getting back sooner, I have been passive with Wikis for a quite some time.

I looked the coordinate you mentioned in Google Maps and found it to be quite interesting.

The coordinate you gave, certainly lies in general water area of Vanhankaupunginlahti, as the water area we are discussing about is quite large for a conservatory area near downtown. Yes your coordinate as well as the ones in a lot of my images are from various points of that area. Hence, Vanhankaupunginlahti would be correct term for this general area (However, the text "Vantaa" in Google's map is incorrect, Vantaa is something like 5-10 kilometers from that point. At the very least it should refer to River Vantaa, which ends where the habited area on the north end of the bay ends.).

However, if you are more interested about the area, click "satelite" view on Google maps. I believe that it is quite revealing.

In Google's satelite view you will then see some solid small islands (suppose the term is still right to apply), but what should be more interesting are the large greenish areas between the actual isles. These areas area covered by rather high reeds and although they will look like a land in satelite image, there's no way you could walk there or use a boat for that matter. The area is impassable, which is the reason why this area is so suitable for various birds. And in addition, it would actually be prohibited to walk on that area due to conservatory status and applicable legislation. With some exceptions.

In Google's satelite images you can see few faint light lines in the greenish area. These lines are duckboards, i.e. footpaths made from two to four planks supported from below, which can be used for purposes of passing the area. And ofcourse, you are allowed to use them. And yes. On some of these duckboards passing people will require some acrobatics.

Anyhow, for some additional images and a map, see this link form City of Helsinki service:

http://kartta.hel.fi/opas/main/?l=1&m=3&o=1&n=77783&e=54356&z=?434,273

It is interesting to see that some of the area in Google Maps marked as land, is not considered as such by City of Helsinki (areas insidee dotted lines).

Also, for an aerial image of the general area, see this link:

http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?node=11342&lan=FI

That is by Finland's ministery of environmental affairs (sorry, only in Finnish). On the left side of the page is text "Hankealueet", under which you can find other areas which are considered comparable to Vanhankaupunginlahti - also, it nicely shows that the areas appear to have same general appearance than Vanhankaupunginlahti.

Anyhow. It was good that you rised a question about this location. I looked about it at the Finnish Wiki (http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanhankaupunginlahti) and considering the importance of the area, it certainly deserves its own article in English Wikipedia. I just have to bring my wide angle with me next time I visit the place to get some additional imagers of the place and begin the article. --Thermos 03:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oryctolagus cuniculus Helsinki.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 composition (shadow not cut!), proper sharpness, background depicting environment --Leafnode 06:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Passer domesticus detailed.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 Sharp enough, ok for QI --LC-de 20:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Vendeuse d'arachides.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vendeuse d'arachides.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 10:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CelliniBust.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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}}}

Many thanks for the nomination of my first FP promotion. Why didn't I have a template advising me of the promotion in my user talk page ? Romanceor 23:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw you have it ; was it an error or the author of the pictures isn't advised by templates ? Romanceor 23:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds weird. Really. You should definitely get the "FP Promotion" tag on your talk page, which incorporates a thumb of your image and says something like:

"The image has been promoted to Featured picture

The image Image:FringillaCoelebsFemale.jpg, which was nominated by Benh at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FringillaCoelebsFemale.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so."

Actually, If you look above, you can see that kind of tags on two of my images, which were nominated as FP by other Commons users (see FP tags of Chaffinch from 10 May 2007 and Mute Swan from 20 March 2007). So, appropriate tag definitely exists.

Perhaps yous should wait something like a week and if the tag doesn't appear, contact some Commons administrator? At least I didn't ask for the tags myself, they simply appeared one day. I suppose that verifying process is not too quick in this respect. --Thermos 04:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for this complete answer ; I'll wait a week or so and advise a common admin if I still have nothing. Romanceor 16:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are starting the discussion on POTY 2008. Would you like to join? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would surely like to join to these discussions, although I have been unable to contribute too much this year... --Thermos (talk) 14:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

---

Hello, Thermos!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Image:Laser dinghy winter.jpg is uncategorized since 9 March 2009. BotMultichillT 06:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hilton_Athens-01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Iconoclast (talk) 05:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear You Your picture caught my attention. It would go very well together with an article in our Paracelsus magazine. Therefore I would like to ask your permission to print this picture in the magazine. Paracelsus magazine is a product of global cooperation, with people from Europe, North and South America, and India volunteering their time and working without pay. The objective of the magazine is to blend ancient and modern wisdom of medicine and holistic healing. The magazine is published monthly in three different languages: German, Spanish, and English; it is read all on every continent of the world. It reaches physicians, alternative practitioners and ordinary people. Although we sell the magazine, we are a non-profit organization and the printing coasts are hardly covered. Would you be so generous and give us your permission to print this photograph? If yes, could you tell me how you would likt to be mentioned. E.g. © We thank you in advance for your consideration and reply and send you our very best wishes. Anna Beutler Coordination PS: For more information please visit our homepage: www.paracelsus-center.ch Paracelsus.magazine (talk) 11:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spectacular photo! Thanks for sharing it! --75.67.211.62 21:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Thermos (talk) 22:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this image is so beautiful. We are producing some signs for a Naturewalk at Myddelton Grange Retreat in Ilkley, West Yorkshire UK.

I am writing to check about using the image.

Is it okay to use the image on one of the signs??

Is it okay to write under it: Image by Thermos, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 license

Thank you in anticipation Duncan Baines St. Mary's Catholic School Menston

By all means, please just use it as you see appropriate. --Thermos (talk) 14:25, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thermos,

My name is Rita Neves.

I work in Câmara Municipal de Lisboa, that is a Public Organism in Portugal. Actually, we are working on a road book of Biodiversity of Lisbon, for which we are going to produce a panel and a brochure. We found your photos on Wikimedia Commons and liked specially one of them very much, so we would like to know if you could allow us to use your photos, for free, to publish on this project, knowing that the brochure of will be for free distribution to everyone.

The photo we are considering to use are the following:

Anas platyrhynchos - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anas_Platyrhynchos_Male.jpg

Parus caeruleus - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ParusCaeruleusNaturalHabitat.jpg

The brochure will have four brackets. - Broochura a pocket to take the route - A brochure to present the day of inauguration - Schedules for species identification - Panels that will be fixed in the Land

As i said the Free Access will be everything :)

If you are the author and provide us that photo, we will refer your name in the bibliografy and we need to know what´s the name you want on the bibliography? Thermos ?

If it´s possible, please respond to ritasoraia2001@hotmail.com or rita.neves@cm-lisboa.pt or here on Wikimedia Commons.

Thank you very much. Our best regards

Rita Neves

Hello Rita,

You are free to use the images for free.

As for credit, Thermos@Wikimedia.org or the like would be fine (and assuming that you are going to use other Wikimedia images and plan to use other constant style of crediting like "Thermos - Wikimedia Commons" or the like, that would also be fine. Just include my Wikimedia user name).

With respect to bibliography, I am perfectly happy with a simple reference like Thermos - Wikimedia Commons or something like that.

Kind regards,

--Thermos (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anas Platyrhynchos Female Portrait.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 Ok to me, but contrast could be a bit better. --Quartl 08:14, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fringilla coelebs eating.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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 not perfect but good docu --Mbdortmund 00:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Insulator railways.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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. --Kae 19:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC), grossartig! Wenn rechts die Befestigung noch zu sehen wäre, wärs ziemlich sicher ein FP. --Ikiwaner 20:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Phasianus Colchicus Natural Habitat Female.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed 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  CommentGood image, but slightly underexposed. -- Archaeodontosaurus 14:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]  Info I uploaded a new version --Carschten 20:03, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I have use one photo of Carduelis chloris in my free software educational proyect "Animalandia" (http://herramientas.educa.madrid.org/animalandia)

You can see directy in the follow link and click over each thubnail:

http://herramientas.educa.madrid.org/animalandia/ficha-imagenes.php?id=1567

Thank you for the licence and, of course, for your splendid photos!! In the future, I sure that I go back to use some of your photos...

Regards! Fernando Lisón

I would like to use your picture of the Porch of Maidens in the Erechtheion, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Porch_of_Maidens.jpg in a textbook. If that were OK with you, please let me know if there is any name/location/URL/whatever you would like it to be credited other than Wikimedia:Thermos. I can be contacted at thechabon a t hotmail d o t com.

Quite a few great pictures, by the way. Thanks for your work.

Hi, again!

This time I used a photo of Haematopus ostralegus from wikimedia in my free software educational proyect "Animalandia" (http://herramientas.educa.madrid.org/animalandia)

You can see directly in the follow link and click over "Siguiente" ("Next") twice times:

http://herramientas.educa.madrid.org/animalandia/imagen.php?id=34355

If you wish, you can send me some letters or/and a photo for your "contributor card" in Animalandia:

http://herramientas.educa.madrid.org/animalandia/autor.php?nombre=Thermos

This is my "contributor card", for example:

http://herramientas.educa.madrid.org/animalandia/autor.php?nombre=Fernando%20Lis%F3n%20Mart%EDn

I will continue using your splendid photos..

Thank you! Best wishes! Fernando Lisón

--Fernando.lison (talk)

Dear Thermos,

I'd like to ask you if I could use this great photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AngelCaido.jpg to illustrate a physics conference's poster to be held in Madrid. And, if so, how to credit your authorship, if appropriate.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ffergtt (talk • contribs) 11:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]