| Featured picture tools |
|---|
Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2018 at 23:07:05 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality image. Important for articles.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Chimborazo
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
- Creator
- dabit100
- Support as nominator – Dabit100 (talk) 23:07, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - the foreground and the clouds are distracting. Only about 30 percent of the picture is the subject. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:41, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - inconsistent WB and focus/sharpness throughout the image. Probably overprocessed. The image is, inexplicably, divided into three regions horizontally. MER-C 10:55, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose – Fuzzy. Sca (talk) 15:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:15, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2018 at 22:59:30 (UTC)
- Reason
- While I'm waiting for my Carrie Chapman Catt image to settle into articles a bit, how about this one? It's always been one of my favourites, but the last nomination seemed oddly fixated on personal appearance of her over the encyclopedic value of illustrating her article. She's a scientist, not a model.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Janet Niven
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Science_and_engineering
- Creator
- MRC National Institute for Medical Research, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:59, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- Withdraw for the moment - there's an issue with the original file I want to sort out first. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 15:48, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:56, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2018 at 17:30:33 (UTC)
- Reason
- Night photo of a cyclone shows the calm and clarity of
insidethe eye region. Used in the article to depict the eye in the "Eye and center" section. Earth's surface (ocean) is visible and clear through the eye – enhanced because the photo is illuminated by lightening near the eye. It wouldn't be as vivid or dramatic in a daytime photo, examples [1], [2]. - Articles in which this image appears
- Tropical cyclone
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
- Creator
- NASA Expedition 42 crew (denoised by Bammesk)
- Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 17:30, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – Needless to say it's awfully dark, and as a composition it's not readily apparent what the subject is. Sca (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- Obviously I don't see your points as substantial. 1- It's a night photo, it is not unusual for night photos to be dark. It isn't awfully dark if your screen brightness is set properly, for review purposes, at medium. 2- For science related images, "being readily apparent" is an irrelevant thing to look for. See our FPs here to understand what I mean. Bammesk (talk) 16:59, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- Being readily apparent, i.e. generally identifiable, is a necessity for a TFP. The Main Page is not a science portal. Sca (talk) 14:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- The FP nom process is for choosing images that best enhance articles, not images that enhance the main page. Read the FP criteria. By the way "apparent" and "identifiable" are two different things, anyway, see our FPs here to understand what I mean. Bammesk (talk) 00:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's okay, though not ideal, for the article. On the Main Page it's basically a dark rectangle of little general interest. (I've long disagreed with the criteria on that point, for the obvious reason that the Main Page is pitched to a general audience.) – Sca (talk) 15:49, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- If you disagree with the criteria, propose amending it here, not in individual noms. My opinion: encyclopedias exist to satisfy specific inquiries, not general interest. The main page shows the potential of what's inside, be it of general interest or not. Bammesk (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- No thanks – I've been down that road. Sca (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Sounds like that road didn't go anywhere. And now you participate in noms so you can have some editorial influence on the main page, is that it? Bammesk (talk) 02:11, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- Sca, about this diff, replies to this nom belong in this nom. Bammesk (talk) 04:43, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- No thanks – I've been down that road. Sca (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's okay, though not ideal, for the article. On the Main Page it's basically a dark rectangle of little general interest. (I've long disagreed with the criteria on that point, for the obvious reason that the Main Page is pitched to a general audience.) – Sca (talk) 15:49, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Being readily apparent, i.e. generally identifiable, is a necessity for a TFP. The Main Page is not a science portal. Sca (talk) 14:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - right idea, but needs higher resolution and a crop. Currently, File:Hurricane Michael (30294529587).jpg is a better image for illustrating the eye because of its resolution.
100x100250x250 isn't really sufficient for illustrating calmness. If you can get a shot that has calm water in it, that would have even higher EV. MER-C 11:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- I get your point if it was just about the calmness and clam waters, etc. Here is one of the best day photos we have showing earth. It is impressive but I think the nom image has more impact, just my opinion. For instance it shows the eye in the overall scale of things. Bammesk (talk) 01:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- I would support a wider view too, as long as the resolution is there to see the details (an inset might help). (Also adjusted the dimensions - the eye is 250x250 but the point still stands.) MER-C 10:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- Wide view and higher resolution means two or more compositions (with or without inset). It would be possible in a day photo, but almost impossible or really hard at night, because of lightening. Just opining on the possibilities. Bammesk (talk) 02:07, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2018 at 02:05:21 (UTC)
- Reason
- A fine example of early-20th-century sporting artwork. Didn't make quorum last time, which is probably because FPC was having numbers issues back then.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Stade Français, Racing 92, Georges Scott, Pierre Guillemin
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Sport
- Creator
- Georges Scott restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 03:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC) ... sidenote: a restored version has been uploaded on top of the original.
- Support. Addressing comments from previously: "If you want to illustrate the rugby team, a photograph would be more relevant." - disagree. A photograph of the current team will complement this image, not replace it due to the passage of time. This isn't about just the jerseys - the composition of the team and the grounds and crowds are also different. "It is also in a player's page, but the image doesn't specify which player is him." - agreed, but not substantive. Should be addressed, though. MER-C 05:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- I missed that nomination when I was reviewing before this one. Yeah, that one went in weird directions. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support per MER-C: this is an interesting and well executed work, with good EV as a time capsule. Nick-D (talk) 21:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support - The NMI User (talk) 06:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Stade Français history - Restoration.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 03:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Added image to Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Sport instead. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: Makes sense. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 07:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2018 at 01:08:28 (UTC)
- Reason
- A fine image of a highly notable woman. Suffragette, author of Susan B. Anthony's biography at her request, journalist, and the sort of person every movement needs: someone who knows how to promote the cause, in this case, women's rights.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Ida Husted Harper
- FP category for this image
- Probably Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Aimé Dupont's Studio, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support – but there are a couple of small spots at around x,y=60,1340 that need cleanup. Bammesk (talk) 04:26, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Bammesk: Should have double-checked the borders again. Was focusing on the photo itself. In any case, fixed; thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:54, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 12:21, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support : DreamSparrow Chat 07:35, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Looks good. Mattximus (talk) 17:09, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support, excellent image clean-up, good EV. Kaldari (talk) 00:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Ida Husted Harper photograph by Aime Dupont.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 03:43, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2018 at 13:00:01 (UTC)
_2017-08-16.jpg)
- Reason
- This image of the Danish royal yacht was featured unanimously on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- HDMY Dannebrog (A540), Royal yacht
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
- Creator
- Colin
- Support as nominator – MER-C 13:00, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support Looks good! Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support : DreamSparrow Chat 07:35, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose While a useful photo, side on or three quarter views generally produce much better results for photos of ships. This waterline view is a bit awkward, and the ship appears somewhat stretched. I suspect that the colours are also slightly over-saturated. An angle such as the one in this photo of the same ship (but with an uncluttered background) would be preferable. Nick-D (talk) 10:21, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – From a historical point of view it's arguably an interesting vessel, but quite a bit of sky and waves could be cropped out – and the colors do seem overly intense. Sca (talk) 14:05, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose – agree with Nick-D about this photo and the unrealistic projection. Bammesk (talk) 16:14, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support (as creator). Wrt angle of view that Nick-D mentions: you rarely get everything perfect. I took several shots of the yacht as we went past and this is the best. This angle elevates the boat so that it is framed by sky (and water) rather than a cluttered mess of buildings. You can't get that from higher up unless on the open sea or a very featureless stretch of land -- if you examine many of our ship photos, they have cluttered backgrounds. I don't understand Bammesk's point about "unrealistic projection". The lens is an equivalent of 24mm on a full frame camera, which is very standard wide angle, not ultra wide at all. So this is a natural projection and a view of this long thin boat from another boat is surely a natural way to see any boat. On the positive side, the weather is lovely and the low evening sun is angled just right to make this yacht pop out in the frame -- important as that will make the article reader want to click on the thumbnail to look in detail. The white hull is evenly lit and the yellow curved poles and funnels are pleasingly 3D. Compare this photo which has terrible flat light and terrible weather. The image isn't over-saturated, it really was a colourful and beautifully lit evening. As a bonus, the frame includes several Danish flags flying nicely, which the Danes are very proud of, and is an important feature of a photo of a Royal Yacht. -- Colin°Talk 08:44, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2018 at 07:28:00 (UTC)
- Reason
- This is a well-composed, non-manipulated image that is used on two pages — one of which is high-trafficked — and captures an important historical moment. The last event of this type was in 2006 and did not produce an image of this caliber. The event was well-documented and the content of the image verifiable.
- Articles in which this image appears
- State funerals in the United States, Death and state funeral of George H. W. Bush
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
- Creator
- Maria I. Alvarez
- Support as nominator – Chetsford (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - overly compressed, noticeable JPEG artifacts. MER-C 10:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose – Far too distant viewpoint. A much closer shot dominated by the coffin might be usable (although personally, I've already seen too much about Mr. Bush's decease). – Sca (talk) 14:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Withdraw as nom ... I think the above two comments are observant ones and, given that there are several other good photos of this event out there in the ether, I'd like to withdraw this one and evaluate options for a better submission. Chetsford (talk) 16:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Chetsford: Thank you! It's certainly an event worth reporting on, but the dark areas are very messy. I'm sure there's a good one, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 04:46, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:13, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2018 at 17:48:43 (UTC)
- Reason
- I have a vague memory - remembering I have been on wikibreak for two years - that last time I checked, there wasn't anything really good for Carrie Chapman Catt. Now there's loads and loads. I can only presume that the Library of Congress went back and uploaded higher-resolution scans of things. This isn't the lead in her article, because facing right is awkward for a lead image. I might go back and do the lead image as well sometime, but I do think this is the best image of her out there, full of character and liveliness.
I have taken the liberty of changing it from awkward truncated oval to rectangular - given the chiascuro lighting effects popular around 1910-1920, this really doesn't involve much guesswork; everything fades out to darkness at the bottom anyway, and there's basically no detail there anyway.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Carrie Chapman Catt, National American Woman Suffrage Association. I'm sure it could be used elsewhere.
- FP category for this image
- Any objections to Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political? It's going to be some subdivision of People, anyway.
- Creator
- Joint Suffrage Procession Committee(?), restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 17:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – DreamSparrow Chat 11:28, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment If you think it's the best image of her, would it not be better places as a the lead image in the main article? Mattximus (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Mattximus: There is the idea that faces should be looking towards the article text. This means a right-facing image ideally should be on the left-hand side, which precludes it being the lead image. But there are reasons for it to be the lead as well - it's the clearest and easiest to interpret picture I could find of her. I'll leave it to others where it ends up, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 02:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Would a horizontal flip help? MER-C 20:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Pretty sure that's explicitly forbidden in one of the guidelines. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 20:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Would a horizontal flip help? MER-C 20:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Mattximus: There is the idea that faces should be looking towards the article text. This means a right-facing image ideally should be on the left-hand side, which precludes it being the lead image. But there are reasons for it to be the lead as well - it's the clearest and easiest to interpret picture I could find of her. I'll leave it to others where it ends up, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 02:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 20:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2018 at 22:07:39 (UTC)
- Reason
- High resolution and lede image for a key figure in the American Civil War. Taken in 1864.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Robert E. Lee
- FP category for this image
- People/Military
- Creator
- Photographed by Julian Vannerson, restored by Orionist
- Support as nominator – Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I like most of this, but what on earth happened to the background? It's very posterised. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 22:47, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - the original is here,
but I think [3] is a better choice as a lead image for this subject. MER-C 18:21, 7 December 2018 (UTC)- @MER-C: Really? I always favour photographs over sketches like that, where possible. Too much idealisation/simplification. I don't mind paintings as much,especially contemporary ones, as they give details like hair colour that aren't in photos. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 18:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- I had missed that aspect; I was focusing on the background content. However, I agree with your observation about the background of the nominated image. Also, the tie has been butchered by blocky artifacts. MER-C 21:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- @MER-C: Really? I always favour photographs over sketches like that, where possible. Too much idealisation/simplification. I don't mind paintings as much,especially contemporary ones, as they give details like hair colour that aren't in photos. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 18:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Not promoted 1 support, 1 oppose..No Consensus..--The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2018 at 02:19:15 (UTC)
- Reason
- Another fine, well-sourced image that vastly improves on what was there before, to whit, [4]
- Articles in which this image appears
- Millicent Fawcett and (in no particular order as she seems fairly prominent in all of them) August 1901, Conservative and Unionist Women's Franchise Association, International Alliance of Women, List of suffragists and suffragettes, National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies, South African Wars (1879–1915)
- FP category for this image
- WP:Featured pictures/People/Political, maybe? She was kind of a lot of things.
- Creator
- Bain News Service/Elliott & Fry, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 02:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – DreamSparrow Chat 04:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - insanely high resolution, good EV. Kaldari (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 04:08, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Per nom. Mattximus (talk) 22:49, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Bammesk, Mydreamsparrow, Kaldari, MER-C, and Mattximus: Just for the record, it's rare we know the photographers Bain News Service worked with, but a little investigation of a clue left in the TIFF identified it. This is by Elliott & Fry. (This does not cause the slightest bit of difficulty, just thought it neat to know.) Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 19:37, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Bammesk, Mydreamsparrow, Kaldari, MER-C, and Mattximus: And sorry to ping you again, but per a comment at the Commons nomination, I've made a small contrast tweak to bring out detail in a small part of her hair. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 20:19, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Millicent Fawcett.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2018 at 06:48:36 (UTC)
- Reason
- Good EV, high resolution
- Articles in which this image appears
- Enceladus, etc.
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
- Creator
- NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute
- Support as nominator – The NMI User (talk) 06:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- While there are a bunch of stitching errors, this being an official NASA image rather indicates we're unlikely to get better, so Support, with possibility of a delist and replace if better ones emerge. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 14:15, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support halfheartedly per Adam. Being a mosaic from NASA, true, we can't ask for more. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Why is this not the lead image in the main article? Mattximus (talk) 22:46, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Mattximus: I think the natural colour one makes sense for the lead. This is false colour and used to illustrate an aspect of Enceladus. If the article was, say, Cracking of Enceladus's surface then it would be the lead. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 23:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. MER-C 17:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Mattximus: I think the natural colour one makes sense for the lead. This is false colour and used to illustrate an aspect of Enceladus. If the article was, say, Cracking of Enceladus's surface then it would be the lead. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 23:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Weak support per above. Cassini-Huygens has been decommissioned, and there is no better equivalent image on [5]. MER-C 17:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2018 at 02:31:27 (UTC)
- Reason
- A high resolution quality image with good composition. Already featured image in Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Indian tea culture, Temi Tea Garden, Namchi, Sikkim, History of tea in India and others
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
- Creator
- by Subhrajyoti07 talk 02:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support as nominator – Subhrajyoti07 talk 02:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose – A lovely picture, but unfortunately the Cherry Resort isn't mentioned in the text of the Temi Tea Garden article or any of the other target articles (one of which, Sikim, doesn't even include this photo). Sca (talk) 14:08, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Subhrajyoti07: I'm inclined to agree with Sca, but think this is fairly readily fixable. I'd suggest pausing or withdrawing the nomination for a week or so, and adding a little more to the relevant articles, because this is certainly an image that can be featured so long as the value-to-articles requirement is met.
In the meantime, nominate this at commons:Commons:FPC, where it will pass easily, I'd think.Never mind, it is featured there, and quite rightly too. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 15:30, 17 December 2018 (UTC) - Withdraw Ok I will do accordingly. I am withdrawing the nomination for this photograph - Subhrajyoti07 talk 16:27, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 08:25, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 07:50:00 (UTC)
- Reason
- Illustrates a major section of his article, providing context not available without this image. By the way, sorry there's a lot of nominations. Part of it is that I am pretty productive, part of it's that having a crazy drunk shouting in your hallway all night gives you a lot of free time to do something with, and part of it's coming back after a long wikibreak, and eyeing over all the nearly-finished projects from before and wanting to clear it out. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 07:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Articles in which this image appears
- John Lorimer Worden
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Military
- Creator
- Mathew Brady, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 07:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Great photo with strong EV, and a successful restoration. The cat under the chair is a bit random! Nick-D (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 11:27, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – we have a FP in the infobox, same setting, attire, pose, more resolution and sharper on subject himself. I assume this nom is for the sword section of the article. The sword is somewhat out of focus though. Bammesk (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- There doesn't appear to be any other pictures of him with the sword, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 05:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment We already have a featured picture of him. I don't think we need 2. Is this one superior to the other one? Mattximus (talk) 23:13, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- That's not a reason to consider opposing. Other people like Theodore Roosevelt and Thomas Edison both have multiple featured pictures. --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 02:02, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 02:02, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 08:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
- Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 17:22:56 (UTC)
- Reason
- why you think it meets the FPC criteria and should be featured (check criteria first)
- Articles in which this image appears
- Skibobbing
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Sport
- Creator
- Isiwal
- Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 17:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - That is one nice action shot. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 19:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. Great shot. I don't consider JPEG compression having a hard time in some areas to be substantive. MER-C 20:46, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Awesome one : DreamSparrow Chat 15:13, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - incredible! Chetsford (talk) 07:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Great EV. Mattximus (talk) 23:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:2018 STM Austria Skibob Hochficht GRUBER Sarah-2779.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:31, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 17:36:31 (UTC)
- Reason
- Didn't meet quorum last time (ended up as 4-0), but I still feel this merits the star. The original nomination reason was "Very high EV, good quality bellows macro photo (no DOF problem), shows even the minuscule LED chips and gold bonding wires inside the tiny 1.6 x 0.8 mm transparent surface-mount packages. Also shows a wider image of the matrix, as well as LEDs in their own light.".
- Articles in which this image appears
- Light-emitting diode, Surface-mount technology
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Materials science
- Creator
- Janke
- Support as nominator – MER-C 17:36, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Honestly, the only issue I could see is that it might be better composition as two seperate images, or as a different sort of inset, but it's clearly worthy. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 17:46, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support by author of photo. Thanks for the re-nom. We seldom see purely "technical" FPCs... --Janke | Talk 13:42, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – good detail, well done. Bammesk (talk) 18:00, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support GMGtalk 00:48, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Macro photo of LED matrix.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
- Added image to Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Electronics instead. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2018 at 09:16:39 (UTC)
- Reason
- A professional portrait of a notable individual.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Alex White (author)
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Kyle Cassidy
- Support as nominator – Josh Milburn (talk) 09:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose not notable. Recently created article of insignificant author. Probably advertising. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:14, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Well, the article passes WP:GNG, so we really should be considering this on the image. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 18:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Other than some odd bits of lint (which I'm so tempted to photoshop out), this looks great. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 18:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support I agree that the subject is borderline for notability, but probably is on the right side of the line. This photo is a great portrait: it clearly shows the subject, is well executed and visually interesting and gives viewers a hint of their personality. Nick-D (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – White's 400-word article is little more than a stub. Sca (talk) 14:31, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Sca: Traditionally, as long as there's no real question of it passing WP:GNG or the like, that's not an issue we consider at FPC. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 15:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- ∴ this is a comment rather than a vote. But in reality it's an issue we should consider, IMO, à la WP:ITN/C. (FWIW, this particular nom. strikes me as possibly promotional.) – Sca (talk) 16:16, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- It's worth saying that articles with featured pictures are often expanded as a result, so I think WP:GNG is a good threshold. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- ∴ this is a comment rather than a vote. But in reality it's an issue we should consider, IMO, à la WP:ITN/C. (FWIW, this particular nom. strikes me as possibly promotional.) – Sca (talk) 16:16, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- I definitely don't doubt the nominator's good faith and am not suggesting that this is covert advertising (something which I have quite a lot of experience dealing with as an admin), but I do agree with the concerns raised above. MER-C 16:38, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: I had never come across the subject until I was sent the picture, and I created the article. The photographer, on the other hand, has been donating pictures of notable individuals to Wikipedia for years. The other user who contributed to the article (Proserpine) is an occasional but long-time contributor who, from a glance, has editing interests that match those of someone who would be interested in a sci-fi author. In my view, there's no advertising problem here. The article is short, but could be expanded. The subject isn't famous, but is notable. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support : I do not feel that its an advertisement. Though the article is a bit small, the person is notable enough I think. DreamSparrow Chat 13:00, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
- Be that as it may, the flesh tones look a bit too pink, to me anyway. Sca (talk) 21:01, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:07, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 01:30:39 (UTC)
- Reason
- Good shot, great EV in both the articles used
- Articles in which this image appears
- Kailash Satyarthi, List of Indian Nobel laureates
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
- Creator
- Aditi Mukherji
- Support as nominator – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:30, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Nominated for deletion as a copyvio - the EXIF suggests the uploader is not the creator (Bachpan Bachao Andolan). MER-C 10:14, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Armbrust, nom withdrawn. Please close it...The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 01:28, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Image was deleted on Commons. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:28, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2018 at 03:02:39 (UTC)
- Reason
- I should probably mention right now that we're moving towards the hundredth anniversary of the passing of the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution (which passed in 1920), so I'm trying to help us prepare to be a resource beforehand, since all those articles are about to become a lot more trafficked. So.. you know. ANYWAY! Emma Smith DeVoe was one of the big suffragettes in the western states, and one of the leaders of the campaign in Washington that got women there suffrage 10 years before the rest of the country (Suffrage more or less worked its way went west to east). So, important. The state of our articles are actually rather chaotic, by the way. Take Women's_suffrage_movement_in_Washington which is horribly incomplete, or Women's suffrage in states of the United States, which leaves out half the states. Well, as I said, it's a work in progress.
Anyway, my point, efore I got sidetrackked is this appears to be the best image of her, especially as the archives of the Library of Congress collect a lot of the suffrage movement organizations' archives. - Articles in which this image appears
- Emma Smith DeVoe
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
- Creator
- James & Bushnell, Seattle; restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 03:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Chetsford (talk) 07:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Yeup..The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:01, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support JJ Harrison (talk) 05:42, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Emma Smith DeVoe by James & Bushnell - No photographer stamp.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:16, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2018 at 20:50:45 (UTC)
- Reason
- Stunning image with high EV. Featured on Commons this year. Bear in mind that this image was taken at 20,000x magnification before you complain about the noise.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Ebola virus, 2018 Kivu Ebola outbreak
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Other (!!)
- Creator
- BernbaumJG
- Support as nominator – MER-C 20:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – It would be nice if the image had a scale (like this). Also wouldn't a jpeg version be more accessible? Article says Ebola strands are about 80nm wide, so 1um is about 312pixels. May be the file description can say something about the scale of things, magnification alone doesn't do much good! Bammesk (talk) 01:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support but I'd probably at least add an explicit link at the top of the description to https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/Ebola_Virus_-_Electron_Micrograph.tiff/lossy-page1-3604px-Ebola_Virus_-_Electron_Micrograph.tiff.jpg to allow easier in-browser viewing. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 07:12, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support per above. JJ Harrison (talk) 04:18, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - DreamSparrow Chat 09:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Ebola Virus - Electron Micrograph.tiff --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:48, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2018 at 03:20:00 (UTC)
- Reason
- An impressive amount of detail. Does do the 1900s-1920s thing of the fadeout, but that's the style of the time, and it has superb detail.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Ida Tarbell, Muckraker, a crop is used in a few more.
- FP category for this image
- WP:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- James E. Purdy, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support either as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 03:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – but prefer the cropped version. Bammesk (talk) 03:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Bammesk: I'll add that as an alt. I think I prefer the uncropped one given the fadeout looks better to me with a bit more space around it, but... it's not an extreme crop, so... Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 10:52, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support but prefer alternative. MER-C 19:17, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support alt and *weak support original. Alt looks more of EV than first. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:05, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support either Both look great to me. Mattximus (talk) 23:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – either but favor Alt. Sca (talk) 14:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Ida M. Tarbell crop.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 03:28, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- The alternative (cropped) image has a bit more support, and three of the users, who support both, prefer the cropped version. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:28, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2018 at 17:37:50 (UTC)
.jpg)
- Reason
- A rare combination and very difficult to get both grey and yellow in same frame. There is a slight amount of motion blur at full size due to the low lighting conditions but IMO it does not detract much from the picture. Otherwise good composition and very good encyclopedic value.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Ptyas mucosa, Ptyas, Colubridae
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
- Creator
- Mydreamsparrow
- Support as nominator – DreamSparrow Chat 17:37, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support The value of having one image that shows the variation makes up for the image's shortcomings, IMO. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 19:18, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – The detail isn't great, but this is a captivating image: One can almost hear the pungi in the background. Sca (talk) 15:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Blurry, but it has good EV. Mattximus (talk) 23:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support per above. MER-C 14:34, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Indian Rat Snake (Grey and Yellow).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2018 at 11:57:58 (UTC)
- Reason
- Good quality, striking composition and contrast of both the subjects, their camouflage, the wheat field in the foreground and the mountainous backdrop. Public license. Content wise it shows soldiers on a foot patrol, which I assume is representative of a significant amount of time out in the field in Afghanistan.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Special Forces (United States Army), United States Army, Gulistan District, MultiCam
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Military
- Creator
- Spc. Joseph A. Wilson
- Support as nominator – MiG (talk) 11:57, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- I've been kind of waiting for others to comment. That looks very vividly-coloured, but it is a beautiful image, and it's not actually unbelievable for young wheat. Support. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 13:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- I was wondering if the color temp was a bit too yellowy, but I don't know. Sca (talk) 14:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- That was the one minor question mark I had as well. My first assumption was local lighting conditions (maybe dust in the air, judging from the shadows the sun isn't particularly low), however if you zoom in on the wheat in the foreground, the yellowish haze seems concentrated in the kernel areas, the blades themselves are green (cfr the distinctive wheat patches at knee height to the right of the frontmost soldier). -- MiG (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- The 'haze' is haloing from excessive use of tone mapping, probably from a highlight reduction tool in an image editing program. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:34, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- That was the one minor question mark I had as well. My first assumption was local lighting conditions (maybe dust in the air, judging from the shadows the sun isn't particularly low), however if you zoom in on the wheat in the foreground, the yellowish haze seems concentrated in the kernel areas, the blades themselves are green (cfr the distinctive wheat patches at knee height to the right of the frontmost soldier). -- MiG (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- I was wondering if the color temp was a bit too yellowy, but I don't know. Sca (talk) 14:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose based on the haloing mentioned above. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2019 at 09:34:34 (UTC)
- Reason
- Is a high quality image depicting guacamelee gameplay as well as metroidvania and beat-em-up elements. Its a free image thanks to WP:OTRS
- Articles in which this image appears
- Guacamelee!
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
- Creator
- Drinkbox studios via WP:OTRS
Support as nominator– I love rpgs [please ping me!
] 00:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Blocked sock. MER-C 03:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Transcluding nomination. MER-C 09:32, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose and speedy close - too small. MER-C 09:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- What's the game's native resolution? That matters here. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 13:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- I suspect the image has been downsampled due to its odd dimensions - the aspect ratio is right for 1080p, but the dimensions aren't one of these. MER-C 05:20, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- What's the game's native resolution? That matters here. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 13:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose – Cluttered visual cacophony. Sca (talk) 22:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
- PS: – Nominator's user page has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of User:Eltomas2003, which also has been blocked indefinitely. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 22:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:15, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator was blocked as a sockpuppet. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:15, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2018 at 13:26:30 (UTC)
- Reason
- There are two downsides of this image: Firstly, it's froma printed version, and secondly, it's been cut out to the oval shape it was printed in, leaving out the surrounding paper. However, this appears to be the only image of Hester Jeffrey - one of the most important African-American suffragettes - and, so far as I can tell, only the printed versions remain in existance, and this seems to be of substantially better quality than most printings, e.g. An Authentic History of the Douglass Monument: Biographical Facts and Incidents in the Life of Frederick Douglas (Guess who worked to make that monument happen, as well as one to her friend Susan B. Anthony? Oh, and guess who was the only non-clergy allowed to speak at Anthony's funeral?). As such, I think it's highly featurable, despite not being ideal. And, hey, if it isn't featureable, it's still worth having been done.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Hester C. Jeffrey
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People - I'm not sure of subdivision
- Creator
- unknown, lightly restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 13:26, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 16:51, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Good historical capture of a clear-eyed woman of vision. Sca (talk) 14:13, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – DreamSparrow Chat 18:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Aoba47 (talk) 00:07, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Hester Jeffrey.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:34, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure either, so I placed it in Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:34, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: Thinking about it, should it be Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political, under the logic that the suffragettes were seeking political change? We've put a few suffragettes in there, but a lot of those were much more overtly political - formed political parties, ran for government, actively lobbied politicians themselves, so it's arguable. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 23:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Good point.
Done. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:52, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
- Good point.
- @Armbrust: Thinking about it, should it be Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political, under the logic that the suffragettes were seeking political change? We've put a few suffragettes in there, but a lot of those were much more overtly political - formed political parties, ran for government, actively lobbied politicians themselves, so it's arguable. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 23:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2018 at 20:36:34 (UTC)
- Reason
- Historic mass gathering for political reform organized by the Chartist movement in 1848 on Kennington Common. Has been the lead image for ten years. Article describes the event here. This is the second nom, the first nom is here.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Chartism, William Edward Kilburn, and others
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others
- Creator
- William Edward Kilburn, restored by Bammesk
- Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 20:36, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose – Good historical artifact, but image doesn't convey a particular theme or message. Sca (talk) 14:10, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Numbers matter, and this is sufficiently early to also be notable as a photograph of a crowd taken with particularly poor camera tools that nonetheless came out pretty well. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 17:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:13, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2018 at 20:26:47 (UTC)
- Reason
- A very high-quality image, with loads of detail, of literally the first American congresswoman. Before the 19th amendment passed. She literally said that she wished to be remembered as the only woman who voted for women's suffrage.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Jeannette Rankin
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
- Creator
- Bain News Service, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 20:26, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – Pretty decent for 1917. Did you consider a tighter crop, or is the environment important to the overall theme? Sca (talk) 14:49, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Sca: I mean, you could crop at the top... but only width really matters on Wikipedia.... you could crop it in towards her on the sides, but you'd lose her legs and knees, or make her uncentred... I think, if we're not using it in galleries or lists, this is a nice, natural-looking crop, and it would be less so if it were tighter. And it's a rather nice, relaxed pose, which you tend not to get so much at the time. And if we're talking about reuse off Wikipedia, the wider focus makes it a lot easier to crop to fit arbitrary dimensions in a layout. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 15:31, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- You're the restoration artist. My brutal journalist's instinct would be to get rid of some of the indistinct jumble at the top, but ... either/or. I do appreciate these historic portraits of women and 'others' – ha! Sca (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Other thing to consider is that we have {{css image crop}} - or whatever it is - so we can make arbitrary crops anyway. Admittedly, the top bit had text notes on it before this, so it's probably not as meaningful. But then, File:Jeannette_Rankin_LCCN2014704010.tif - an alternate photograph of the same pose exists, so... who knows, really? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 15:46, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Sca: Honestly, it was a realisation about mid-2016: I looked at my featured pictures, and noticed how overwhelmingly white and male they were, and, well... you know. It's in my power to do something about that. And if it means my list is heavily biased to women and people of colour for a while, I'm fine with that. Hell, given I was on wikibreak for most of 2017 and 2018, I've barely started. For comparison, for the 48 FPs of 2015, I had five women, and two people of colour. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 17:21, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- I find portraits of certain Native Americans captivating. Faces of character. (Recommended reading: I Will Fight No More Forever, the story of Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce.) – Sca (talk) 18:58, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- You're the restoration artist. My brutal journalist's instinct would be to get rid of some of the indistinct jumble at the top, but ... either/or. I do appreciate these historic portraits of women and 'others' – ha! Sca (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 20:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support – though a bit out of focus, EV, historic. Bammesk (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support for EV and historical value. Renata (talk) 23:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - per above supports. Jusdafax (talk) 02:34, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Aoba47 (talk) 00:07, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Promoted File:Jeannette Rankin, Bain News Service, facing front.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2018 at 06:55:57 (UTC)
.jpg)
- Reason
- A former township, situated on the slopes of Signal Hill above the city centre and a historical centre of Cape Malay culture in Cape Town.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Bo-Kaap
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Creator
- Moheen
- Support as nominator – ~Moheen (keep talking) 06:55, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- It really is a gorgeous photo, but it's only used in a gallery, which traditionally excludes it from consideration here (if you haven't, though, do nominate it at commons:COM:FPC, where that requirement doesn't exist). I'm not sure if, out of the images in the gallery, this is the one I'd pull out as one of the main illustrations, though, since it only shows the front of the house, and others show full buildings. That said, it's clear you're a talented photographer and deserve featured pictures, so perhaps a different one? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 14:14, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – Pretty but lacks EV. Sca (talk) 14:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed with the above - this photo is definitely worth nominating at Commons FPC, but lacks the necessary context to add significantly to its article. MER-C 15:36, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice picture, but it has no EV. Mattximus (talk) 17:13, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2018 at 23:29:07 (UTC)
- Reason
- I think the only objection I could see to this excellent photograph is whether it's too Wikipedia-focused. This is easily dismissed: A. She's had othe major positions outwith Wikipedia. B. She was ranked the 70th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes. C. We have a fucking featured picture of Jimbo, so, that's an objection now?
- Articles in which this image appears
- Sue Gardner, Criticism of Wikipedia, Gender bias on Wikipedia
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Business
- Creator
- Victoria Will
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 23:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - I think the acute angle to her face is unencyclopedic. Something like the image in this article is much better. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- @JJ Harrison: How about the alt? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 10:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support the alt. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- @JJ Harrison: How about the alt? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 10:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – Both poses (or are they candid 'action' shots?) by a commercial photographer seem rather odd. Also, WP:NAVEL. – Sca (talk) 14:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- I think that if we have a picture of Jimbo in FP (we do), it would be odd deny Gardner on WP:NAVEL grounds. I think that might be a case for considering not putting her on the Main Page, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 16:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support Alt 1 – for lead image in her article. Bammesk (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose both I don't think that either image is FP-worthy. The original is a striking portrait (and the best choice for the infobox, IMO), but doesn't have FP-level EV as it doesn't clearly show her face and is too posed. Alt 1 is clearer, but also isn't a great portrait due to the facial expression. Nick-D (talk) 04:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)