Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Didn't know you can type in black and white as well (Ho ho ho).
Incidentally. Your user-name should represent you as an individual, not your company or organization as a whole. Please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Plain_and_simple_conflict_of_interest_guide#Advice
Your current user name could be construe as being self promotional. Please read: Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. If you wish to change your user name we can help you. It could be your real name or a pseudonym such as (say) BlueBox . Oh and that's another thing. Why for heaven's sake can't the Doctor get his chameleon circuit repaired? Today a blue port a-loo would blend in better. I could fix it in 5 minutes for him with no more than a soldering iron and a paper-clip. He has more than enough Degrees in physics, maths, astronomy, symbolic logic etc. to get a job as a thermometer but when it comes to sorting out something practical, like most Doctors – is utterly hopeless. Would like to see how he copes when the batteries in his sonic screw driver finally go flat.... Anyway welcome.--Aspro (talk) 00:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello :) Babelcolour isn't a company. Nor an organisation. It's my on-line nickname, in forums and on YouTube. It's not commercial, just who I am when I log-on. I wouldn't say it is self-promotional either, since there is another wikipedia user called "babelcolour" and another called "babelcolour5" - it was hard to find one I could use for myself! :)
- Hi,TheBabelColour. You have put me in the position where I feel I am feeling I'm am now preaching to the converted -so forgive me for that. I know your computer lit but I wanted to to underline: that because Wikipedia is so vast now, there are a lot of editors that are just skimming through, looking for possible non-notable self promotional articles and want to delete them. That often causes the original editor a bit of hassle to re-establish his legitimacy. We get an awful lot of that. So its better (in my experience to avoid) that was my only point. However, as your happy with the synonym TheBabelColour so am I. If you have any other images to contribute (to which you have sole copyright) then do please consider uploading them to out sister product Wikimedia Commons, so that they can be made available to the whole world. We love images there and most editors have dabbled in a little bit of colourization themselves. Colorizing one image is easy peasy. I do it often. Though doing what you have accomplished is extra-ordinary. It is like you have the Claude Monet sense of colour and yet you do it from just B&W images. Also, if you add [[User:Aspro|Aspro]] (replace my name with any other editor) in you reply and it will automatically show up on any editors widget who have you on their watch list. So it would be like Hi, Chaotic Galaxy and the next time he logs in he will see in the very top right of his page that someone has mentioned him and look your comment up. Gosh, I hope I am not giving you too much info for you to take in as a new contributor. Enjoy Wikipedia and welcome.--Aspro (talk) 21:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello Aspo. It's very nice to hear from someone who's seen and enjoyed the colourisation work! So glad you've appreciated it and most kind of you to say too :) I understand what you say about the username - there's certainly a logic to what you point out, though I don't imagine I will have much time or inclination to contribute too much to this grand site. Other people are making such a better job of things than I would. I'll be leaving matters very much up to them! :) BabelColour (talk) 22:48, 26 March 2016 (UTC)