Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.

Promoting an image

If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.

The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.

Delisting an image

A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:.If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.

  • Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.


Step 3:
Transclude and link

Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (direct link).

How to comment for Candidate Images

  • Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
  • Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
  • You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

How to comment for Delist Images

  • Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
  • Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
  • Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
  • You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
Please remember to be civil, not to bite the newbies and to comment on the image, not the person.

You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.

Editing candidates

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Highlight test image.svg
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Colortest.png
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
To see recent changes, purge the page cache.
FPCs needing feedback
Enceladusstripes cassini.jpg Enceladus
Assassination of President Lincoln (color) - Currier and Ives.jpg Delist and Replace: Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
John Lorimer Worden - Mathew Brady - right photograph.jpg John Lorimer Worden
Alex White by Kyle Cassidy L1000194.jpg Alex White
Emma Smith DeVoe by James & Bushnell - No photographer stamp.jpg Emma Smith DeVoe

Current nominations

Chartist mass meeting on Kennington Common

Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2018 at 20:36:34 (UTC)

Original – Chartist gathering on Kennington Common on 10 April 1848, by photographer William Edward Kilburn.
Reason
Historic mass gathering demanding political reform organized by the Chartist movement in 1848 on Kennington Common. Has been the lead image of the Chartism article for ten years. This is a second nom, the first nom didn't get much participation from the regular contributors.
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 nominatorBammesk (talk) 20:36, 16 December 2018 (UTC)



Hester Jeffrey

Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2018 at 13:26:30 (UTC)

OriginalHester C. Jeffrey
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 nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 13:26, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 16:51, 16 December 2018 (UTC)



Soldiers patrolling wheat field in Afghanistan

Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2018 at 11:57:58 (UTC)

Original – Special Forces Soldiers from the 3rd Special Forces Group patrol a field in the Gulistan district of Farah, Afghanistan with Afghan National Army commandos from the 207th Kandak, April 12, 2009.
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 nominatorMiG (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 6.2% of all FPs 13:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)



Indian Rat Snake

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2018 at 17:37:50 (UTC)

Original – Indian Rat Snake - Yellow and Grey in one frame.
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 nominatorDreamSparrow 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 6.2% 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)



Ida Tarbell

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2018 at 03:20:00 (UTC)

OriginalIda Tarbell, investigative journalist
Alternative – tighter crop
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 nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% 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 6.2% 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)



Ebola virus

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2018 at 20:50:45 (UTC)

Original – Colorized scanning electron micrograph of Ebola virus particles (green) found both as extracellular particles and budding particles from a chronically-infected African Green Monkey Kidney cell (blue); 20,000x magnification.
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



Delist and Replace: Grey square optical illusion

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2018 at 23:11:47 (UTC)

PNG Version
Reason
Proposed SVG version

The previous delist nom had issues, mainly with handling color breaks between lines. This version does not have that issue. The file size is over 10 times smaller, and the file format is SVG (preferred by many).

Articles this image appears in
Cognitive science, Color constancy
Previous nomination/s
Original promotion: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image:Optical.greysquares.arp.jpg
First delist nomination: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Grey square optical illusion
Nominator
Pbroks13 (talk)
  • Delist and replacePbroks13 (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I think there's a lot to like about your new version, but could you have a look at the shadow? It's a little odd. I mean, I know it's stylised, but it seems to have a slightly odd double-light-source look. The shadow is more subtly done in the PNG, which adds something to the illusion, as it's easy to almost not notice the shadow when looking over the two squares. The larger letters are a nice touch. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 00:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I see what you mean, and I completely agree. I've fixed the light-source issue and blended the shadow a bit better. Granted, it's not identical to the png. Of course, if wikipedia could render Gaussian blurs properly, I'd be much easier to match. If you believe the subltleness of the shadows is still an issue, I can spend more time adjusting them. Pbroks13 (talk) 04:31, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
      • Delist and replace Thanks for that! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 04:45, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Question: The proposed image is not yet in any article - does it have to be, before it even can be nominated? If not, then I support replacing. --Janke | Talk 10:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Janke No, it doesn't need to be. If the original is used in articles, than the closer (me) will change everyone to use the replacement image. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
      • @Janke and Armbrust: I'm pulling this to WT:FPC. I do NOT want to derail a nom with off-topic discussion, but want to discuss this. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 05:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks for the answer, Replace. --Janke | Talk 15:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Replace. MER-C 15:30, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – it is recommended here (not required) that SVGs pass the W3C validator. I ran the check [1] and got 2 errors, not sure how significant that is though. Bammesk (talk) 01:34, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Actually, yes, it is in this case. I forgot to convert the "A" and "B" from text to path, which could cause rendering issues. Nonetheless, the problems are fixed, and now does pass the validator. Pbroks13 (talk) 04:43, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist and replace TomStar81 (Talk) 18:47, 15 December 2018 (UTC)



Emma Smith DeVoe

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2018 at 03:02:39 (UTC)

OriginalEmma Smith DeVoe
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



Alex White

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2018 at 09:16:39 (UTC)

'OriginalAlex White is an American author of science fiction. Their books include a series named The Salvagers, published by Orbit Books, and the Alien novel Alien: The Cold Forge, published by Titan Publishing Group.
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 nominatorJosh 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 6.2% 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 6.2% 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)



Replace: Under the horse chestnut tree

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 18:11:11 (UTC)

Under the horse chestnut tree
Proposed replacement
Reason
Replaced in articles with higher resolution version. If you're wondering about the colors: at least 162 originals were made through the drypoint printing process. Both images are competent reproductions from different originals.
Articles this image appears in
Mary Cassatt, Mona Bismarck American Center, List of works by Mary Cassatt
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Under the Horse Chestnut Tree
Nominator
MER-C
  • ReplaceMER-C 18:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Replace Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 19:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Replace – per museum website: [2]. Bammesk (talk) 18:20, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Replace – per above. --Janke | Talk 22:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Replace GMGtalk 00:52, 12 December 2018 (UTC)



LED matrix (2)

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 17:36:31 (UTC)

Original – Composite image of a 11x44 LED matrix name tag display using SMD LEDs. Top: A little over half of the 21x86 mm display. Center: Close-up of 0.8x1.6mm LEDs in ambient light. Bottom: LEDs in their own red light.
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 nominatorMER-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 6.2% 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)



Skibobbing

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 17:22:56 (UTC)

Original – Austrian National Championship 2018 in Skibobbing. Skibobbing is a winter sport involving a bicycle-type frame attached to skis instead of wheels and sometimes a set of foot skis. Sarah Gruber from club ASKÖ SBC Linz doing the giant slalom.
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 nominatorTomer T (talk) 17:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - That is one nice action shot. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% 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)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - incredible! Chetsford (talk) 07:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)



John Lorimer Worden with the Tiffany & Co sword

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 07:50:00 (UTC)

OriginalJohn Lorimer Worden, with the Tiffany & Co. sword given to him after the battle of the Monitor and Virginia which was stolen from the Naval Academy in 1931.
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 6.2% 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 nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% 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 6.2% of all FPs 05:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)



Delist and Replace: Assassination of Abraham Lincoln

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2018 at 03:42:01 (UTC)

Current FP
Suggested replacement: Restored by Adam Cuerden, in colour.
Reason
The Library of Congress have a large, clearer copy of this available... but it's still the black and white image we see here. I think it's time to accept what's already standard practice on Wikipedia: The coloured version is by far preferred. I have not replaced any of the original image. I HAVE replaced the suggested replacement with a restored version, as I felt I should do the bit of work needed to really make it excellent.
Articles this image appears in
Current FP: None for at least a few months (See WT:FPC. Suggested replacement: Assassination of Abraham Lincoln, John Wilkes Booth, +1
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Currier & Ives - Lincoln is the only one, as far as I see.
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs
  • Delist and replaceAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 03:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Replace. MER-C 10:04, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Original better Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:19, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I'm afraid, per the rules, that's not actually an option if it's not used in articles. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 18:30, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • ReplaceBammesk (talk) 00:37, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


Enceladus (mosaic)

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2018 at 06:48:36 (UTC)

Original – South polar vantage of Enceladus's anti-Saturn hemisphere, using a false color scheme in which fractured areas show up as blue
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 nominatorThe 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 6.2% 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 6.2% of all FPs 23:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
      • Agreed. MER-C 17:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak support per above. Cassini-Huygens has been decommissioned, and there is no better equivalent image on [3]. MER-C 17:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)



Millicent Fawcett

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2018 at 02:19:15 (UTC)

OriginalMillicent Fawcett, suffragist, governor of Bedford College, London, co-founder of Newnham College, Cambridge, president of the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies, and, 1901 she was appointed to lead the British government's commission to South Africa investigating conditions in the concentration camps that had been created there in the wake of the Second Boer War. Oh, and she was the first woman to get a statue in Parliament Square this year.
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 nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 02:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 02:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportDreamSparrow 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 6.2% 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 6.2% of all FPs 20:19, 15 December 2018 (UTC)



Nominations — to be closed

Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.

Older nominations requiring additional input from users

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2018 at 18:47:32 (UTC)

Original – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
Retouched by Alexis Jazz, third version – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
Retouched 2 by Bammesk, second version – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
Reason
iconic photograph. After a long debate, it finally appears that the copyright was not renewed.
Articles in which this image appears
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator
Joe Rosenthal
  • Support as nominatorYann (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose this jpeg version due to strong artifacts, either from editing or jpeg compression. The sky is heavily speckled - compare with the png or tif versions. --Janke | Talk 20:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I removed the jpeg artifacts. The nom image has a lot more detail than the png and tif versions. Support (revised my vote below) , iconic and good quality for a 1940s war photo. Bammesk (talk) 01:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is a decent version of this iconic photograph: the EV is huge. Nick-D (talk) 08:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support this new version with less noticeable grain & artifacts. --Janke | Talk 11:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • comment what is the source for the copyright not being renewed?©Geni (talk) 14:40, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Reading the arguments on Commons [5], [6], [7], [8], no one has established that copyright was renewed. The summary of Commons arguments are: copyright might have been renewed and that such renewal could not be confirmed in the renewal records [9]. Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
    On a sidenote: the photo was published without a copyright notice in a 2016 book [10] [11] of 100 influential photographs by Time magazine. 32 of the 100 photos have a copyright notice and 68 do not, the Iwo Jima photo does not: [12]. This gives additional credence to the public domain arguments on Commons.
  • @Geni: Also this LoC copyright notice. Alexis Jazz (talk) 08:48, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support -- KTC (talk) 10:02, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 12:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support -- The NMI User (talk) 01:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - I've not yet looked closely at the copyright arguments, and will defer to Commons folk to sort that out. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:10, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support GMGtalk 14:34, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support all versions, I'll leave it to others to decide which is best. Alexis Jazz (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've collected links to the copyright discussions on c:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima. Alexis Jazz (talk) 16:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Retouch discussion

  • Comment the retouched version from Bammesk should be uploaded as a separate file (c:COM:OVERWRITE). While it looks better overall, some details were also lost, so the original needs to be kept as a separate file. If Bammesk uploads the restored version as a separate file and we're voting on that, you can count a support vote from me as well. I'll vote more clearly above. Alexis Jazz (talk) 08:48, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I found another version with less compression artifacts. The sky still looks speckled, I suspect the photo was saved as a .gif at some point. Alexis Jazz (talk) 09:23, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I added a retouched version. Alexis Jazz (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Yann, Bammesk, Nick-D, Janke, KTC, MER-C, The NMI User, Rhododendrites, and GreenMeansGo: An alternate image was added the nominations. Please update your !vote to indicate which version(s) you support. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:45, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh cool. I see lots of dust spot removal, which I wasn't going to fuss about given the nature of the photo. Is there anything else I'm missing? GMGtalk 21:02, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: the sky was blurred. Alexis Jazz (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I uploaded another retouch, Retouched 2, made from the higher quality original that Alexis Jazz gave us here. Both retouched noms are worthy of support. My upload has less artifacts and is a bit sharper along soldier/background boundaries, smoother left valley, smoother background between soldier's arms/legs, and I touched up the lower left edge. Also touched up a couple of spots based on the negative image here: [13], [14](no longer so, see below). I Support both retouches but prefer Retouch 2 (revised vote below). Bammesk (talk) 04:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Either of the versions are OK for me, but Retouched 2 is slightly better. --Yann (talk) 13:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've improved my retouched version a bit. You may have to refresh the page/image in your browser. Alexis Jazz (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Well I'll say that I prefer some retouched version to the original, but my retouching expertise is mediocre at best, and so I don't pretend to have an authoritative opinion on which version is better. GMGtalk 14:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I prefer retouch #2. MER-C 18:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
@MER-C: can you say why? Perhaps I can improve my version. Alexis Jazz (talk) 00:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Retouch 1 has sufficiently improved over #2 in the time since I wrote that comment. I now prefer #1 as the specs that were there are there no longer. MER-C 15:34, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Revisiting this after the dust has settled, I prefer #2 due to the white streak on the side. MER-C 11:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I suppose I prefer #2, but two comments: (1) why is the [rivet?] on the helmet of the soldier on the right noticeably brighter in just that version? (2) in both retouches there's a space between the leftmost and second leftmost soldiers, around waist level, that looks to be actually a gap between them rather than a blemish on the photo itself, but it's smoothed out... (in case that isn't clear I've added an annotation to that image on Commons here. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
That's not a gap but actually light that is reflected off of the handle of a holstered knife, more easily seen in File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal.jpg. I've corrected my version accordingly. Alexis Jazz (talk) 00:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Rhododendrites, I don't understand your first question? About question 2: as I said above, I used the negative image here: [15], [16] as a guide. The gap is smaller in the negative, that's what I went by. However looking at the negative more carefully, it has bleeding (or diffusion) because it is old, which would make the gaps smaller. So I did a recheck of all gaps, and compared the print gaps to the negative gaps, and it turns out all print gaps are a few pixels wider than the negative gaps. So going strictly by the negative is not a good idea (because of the bleeding). I redid the gap and did an upload (also redid another tiny gap/spot at shoulder level, plus helmet of left soldier, the things I had relied on the negative for). Thanks for the question! Bammesk (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Rhododendrites: Can you say what you mean in your first question? Nothing “on the helmet of the soldier on the right” is “noticeably brighter” in any version! Bammesk (talk) 12:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I've been following and I'd just like to say that maybe this discussion is not yet ripe to be closed. The images are evolving, which is ultimately for the good of the project(s), and this is an iconic image of the type we don't often see discussed. GMGtalk 22:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: I agree. I'm not sure if we are done retouching (unless someone points out flaws in my version, I am) but if we are it still leaves us with three images to pick from. Since I created one of them, I support all three. There are arguments for sticking to the original and between the retouched versions it'll largely be matter of taste. Bammesk filled in the gaps one way, I did it another way. Alexis Jazz (talk) 10:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
  • For reference, Commons promoted the original. MER-C 14:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Actually 16 of 18 votes on Commons here were for a restored version uploaded at 02:11, 29 August 2018. Bammesk (talk) 03:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC) . . . Obviously the higher quality original uploaded later at 09:16, 4 September 2018, is more deserving of promotion, but not when there is a cleaned up version of it, IMO. Bammesk (talk) 03:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • So how exactly ought we go about finding some resolution to this nomination? GMGtalk 21:37, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
    @GreenMeansGo: Everyone, who already voted, should indicate which version(s) they support. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:01, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
    I swapped my preference to retouch 2. Putting my admin and ex-FPC closer hat on, I would now close this as promote retouch 2 if I hadn't had voted - the choice is between the retouches, and #2 has more first preferences than #1. MER-C 11:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Re-pinging participants. This has been open now for almost two months, and we do need to try to find some type of resolution.
    @Yann:@Janke:@Bammesk:@Nick-D:@Geni:@Alexis Jazz:@KTC:@The NMI User:@Rhododendrites:@Armbrust:
    GMGtalk 12:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: As I said, I support all three. But I will say this: when I added to/updated Wikipedias, I used the original. Leaving it to the Wikipedias to switch to a retouched version. No Wikipedia (zero, not Norsk Wikipedia) (zero, the number, not Wikipedia Zero) made the switch. - Alexis Jazz 18:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support retouched1 I think this is an improvement on the original, and retouched2 looks a little bit washed out Nick-D (talk) 07:41, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
I think I very slightly prefer Retouched 2, because of the area to the right of and below the leftmost soldier's right foot looks a lot better in this one. I think that tilts the balance to let this be closed. @Armbrust:? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 17:09, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Looking at this some more, I withdraw my support for "both" and now support retouched 2 only. A) The original and retouched 1 have a white strip on the lower-left edge of the image. This is fixed in retouched 2. B) In retouched 1, the noise reduction (blurring) of the sky area is uneven, some areas are heavily blurred, other areas not at all. For example, in retouched 1 the sky area near the lower-right edge of the image, and sky areas adjacent to soldier's bodies have no blurring and are identical to the original image. In retouched 2 the sky noise is blurred uniformly everywhere. C) Looking at the original image, the background field (the far hill behind the foreground rubble) has similar noise/grain as the sky. That area is slightly denoised in retouched 2, not in retouched 1. D) The original has a scanning artifact along the edge of the flagpole (bottom portion of flagpole), visible when enlarged, say at 200%. The artifact appears as a white line along the pole's left edge. There are similar artifacts elsewhere along the edge of soldiers' clothing. These artifacts are removed in retouched 2, not in retouched 1. Bammesk (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


Closing procedure

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  3. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the December archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  4. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
  5. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

When promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
    • Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
    Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Add the image to:
  3. Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
    The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
  4. Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
  5. Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
  6. If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
  7. Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  8. If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  9. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  10. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the December archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  11. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Delist closing procedure

Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  3. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  4. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Retained section of the archive.
  5. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.
  4. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  5. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} page to the bottom of the Delisted section of the archive.

If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
  6. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  7. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Replaced section of the archive.

Recently closed nominations

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Robert Edward Lee

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2018 at 22:07:39 (UTC)

OriginalGeneral in Chief Robert E. Lee
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 nominatorWalk 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 6.2% of all FPs 22:47, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - the original is here,but I think [17] 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 6.2% 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)

Not promoted 1 support, 1 oppose..No Consensus..--The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)



Carrie Chapman Catt

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 nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 17:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportDreamSparrow 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 6.2% 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 6.2% of all FPs 20:41, 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)



Replace: The Coronation of Napoleon

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2018 at 03:33:19 (UTC)

Proposed replacement
Reason
Superseded by higher resolution scan.
Articles this image appears in
The Coronation of Napoleon etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Coronation of Napoleon
Nominator
MER-C
  • ReplaceMER-C 03:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Question The source is just given as "art database": How certain can we be about these colours? Otherwise, other than reflections (which are normal enough for this sort of reproduction, but very slightly less prominent in the old), this seems quite a bit superior Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 05:15, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
    For comparison, I offer [18] and [19]. This reproduction seems to be between the two in terms of yellowness. MER-C 06:27, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • ReplaceBammesk (talk) 16:23, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I'm no expert, but FWIW the French Wiki article uses the darker version. – Sca (talk) 16:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm cool with either one. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:14, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
@TomStar81: To be clear for purposes of closing, that means you would support a delist and replace, OR keeping the original? Kind of like a support either vote? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.2% of all FPs 17:18, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Correct. TomStar81 (Talk) 17:20, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Replaced with File:Jacques-Louis David - The Coronation of Napoleon (1805-1807).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 06:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)



Bush Lying in State

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2018 at 07:28:00 (UTC)

OriginalGeorge H.W. Bush lays in state in the Rotunda of the United States Capitol on December 3, 2018.
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 nominatorChetsford (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 6.2% of all FPs 04:46, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:13, 12 December 2018 (UTC)



Suspended nominations

This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.

Kailash Satyarthi

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 01:30:39 (UTC)

OriginalKailash Satyarthi is an Indian children's rights activist. He is a Nobel Peace Prize recipient and founder of Bachpan Bachao Andolan (lit. Save Childhood Movement), the Kailash Satyarthi Children’s Foundation, Global March Against Child Labour, and GoodWeave International.
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