Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:20171213 Markus Wallner 850 8541.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:20171213 Markus Wallner 850 8541.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2017 at 11:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Markus Wallner (ÖVP), governor of Vorarlberg
This picture along with many others was taken by me with my own camera and lens on December 13th 2017 during the so called Landtagsprojekt Vorarlberg 2017, a project where six wikipedians organised taking photographs of the delegates of the Vorarlberger Landtag to be published under CC-by-SA 4.0 license and to put them into the delegates' articles. The people involved in taking these pictures were funded by Wikimedia Austria in the form of equipment (e.g. the studio flash lights) and a refund of part of their expenses for traveling to Vorarlberg. Wikimedia Germany sent us their studio flash lights as a backup, but it was not needed. These kinds of projects have been done in the past in many local parliaments in Germany and Austria as well and are ongoing work in progress to be repeated after new elections. The personality rights warning is something I personally stick to all my images of people, regardless where and under which circumstances they've been taken. --Granada (talk) 12:59, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanation which confirms the pure marketing objective of these images. I note that the politician's Wikipedia article has few citations and is basically Original Research which is not normally permitted. Charles (talk) 13:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think this is pure marketing? Normal Wikipedians like you and me kindly asked for permission to take photographs of the delegates to the Vorarlberger Landtag which was granted. I took my own car, loaded it with two other wikipedians and the studio flash equipment of the austrian chapter of wikimedia, drove 650km from Vienna to Vorarlberg, had a hard time setting everything up, photographing 36 delegates and 7 members of the government and driving back to Vienna. I took two days off for this, I have a regular job to do to earn money and in my spare time in the evenings after I looked through the images and uploaded the best to commons. We do this to raise the quality of the images of persons, regardless if they are politicians, sports people or other kinds of celebreties. Wikimedia austria helps me with this work as they paid me the diesel I needed for traveling to Vorarlberg and it is great to have the austrian chapter own a complete studio flash light that can be borrowed for free by any wikipedian who wants to do a project like this. In january our athletes for the winter olympic games will get dressed up and we are in negotiations with the OESV if we could use our studio flash lights to take really good portraits of the sports people heading to South Korea. I can see no marketing objective in doing so. --Granada (talk) 14:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The parliamentary projects have a long tradition. --Ralf Roleček 14:45, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Political marketing has been going a long time! - I agree there may be nothing wrong at all. I just raised the query. Charles (talk) 15:59, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wiki loves parliament is an ongoing project that is even supported by the Wikimedia Foundation itself, not just local chapters. Did you realize that I felt questioned my motives, questioned my integrity by telling me the purpose of taking photographs of delegates to a local parliament was purely promotional? --Granada (talk) 16:56, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Edit conflict) If there are problems with sources in a Wikipedia article, that should be dicussed on that article's WP talk page. It has nothing to do with the pictures being supplied for the article. I also find the talk about this being some kind of marketing very strange. Many countries have wiki technology pools where equipment for taking photos, recording sound or doing other wiki-things, can be borrowed. As for rounding up politicians and photographing them, I don't see how that should be different from other theme-named photo sessions like all the "Wiki Loves XXX". --cart-Talk 16:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I don't get that argument either. Both picture and project are perfectly fine - as is the pertinent article. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likewise I am so confused by what objections are being raised, or why it's being call "marketing". Since when is taking high quality photographs of people deemed notable and encylopedic a problem? Isn't that why many people contribute to Commons in the first place? -- KTC (talk) 13:13, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Abstain PumpkinSky talk 14:55, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - Good portrait, and I don't understand the controversy. We're supposed to question grant money that helps people photograph public figures? These are national politicians, and therefore inherently newsworthy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:52, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose For now. Good portrait, but there's some CA between shirt and jacket and I don't see any reason why this picture is downsampled so much. The D850 offers 45 Megapixels and this picture just has roundabout 15. Both issues are fixable I think and I'll be happy to change my vote later. I don't understand the discussion Charles started above, too. --Code (talk) 19:04, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I must admit I did not see the CAs, I told LR to remove them and uploaded the new version. The image itself is not downsampled at all, I was just standing quite far away and did a quite large photo of all the delegates to have enough space for later choosing an adequate frame. --Granada (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Excellent quality, but nothing special about this guy I'm afraid --A.Savin 00:24, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support In the first place I did not want to support my own picture, but the longer I look at this portrait and other portraits made within projects around wiki loves parliaments, the more I like it to be featured. This kind of portrait in all its simplicity stands for its own and this is the style of portrait I'd like to see in articles about politicians. The neutral lighting, the neutral colors, the relatively neutral facial expression and the chosen format (his right eyeball is exactly in junction of the first third lines from the top left) make this a blueprint for depicting the seriousness a politician at least wants to express in a portrait. --Granada (talk) 07:53, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose A completely ordinary photo of an as yet unremarkable politician. A good addition to Commons, but nothing exciting.--Peulle (talk) 09:14, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the level of importance of the person portrait is relevant for FP, then I'd like Ralf to withdraw this nomination. --Granada (talk) 09:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is, to some extent. A photo that has a high historical value, e.g. a photo of Gandhi during his salt march, would contribute greatly to the 'wow factor' in my opinion. If an ordinary photo of an (as yet) unremarkable person like this is designated "one of the best images on Commons", I feel it would devaluate the FP brand as there are thousands of images like this one. It just isn't a photo that stands out, in my opinion.--Peulle (talk) 09:49, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say, that's a very good argument that gives me pause. If there are truly thousands or even hundreds of equally good portraits of politicians, why should we feature this one? I'll think about whether to change to neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The truth is the contrary: there are hundreds of really bad portraits of politicians out there and that's why I'd like this image to be featured. Even those who opposed this nomination admitted the quality of the portrait. Featuring this could be used as a blueprint for future wiki loves parliaments projects. --Granada (talk) 10:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that this portrait is better than many others, I personally put more weight on the wow factor. When you're saying that this image is of higher quality than other photographs we have here, that suggests to me to be yet another argument in favour of making it a QI, but it has less to do with the FP category. Had it been a photo of a special setting, that would have carried more weight with me.--Peulle (talk) 11:12, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The problem with some of these wiki-loves sessions is that they stick a politician (or food) in front of a grey background, with perfectly ok but not interesting lighting arrangement for a portrait, and then shoot dozens of similar pictures like a factory. Sure the technical quality is fine but I don't see exceptional lighting, exceptional surroundings, exceptional personality shining though, or an exceptional person. Even one of these might make it an FP. These are fine for Wikipedia thumbnails but it has about as much charm as a school photo. It becomes kind of "If we accept this, then what about these four hundred photos too". Plus all the identical official photos of politicians donated by government bodies. I recall when Diliff attended in a previous year he chose just one photo: File:Nils Torvalds MEP, Strasbourg - Diliff.jpg where the subject has some character and there is the novelty that he's Linus Torvald's father. Even then he admitted the difficulties making something "finest". I appreciate the effort taken to attend the event and take high-quality photos for Wikipedia articles, but it seems to me more an exercise in ensuring Wikipedia has an acceptable portrait than about producing a great portrait, photographically speaking, or photographing someone interesting. -- Colin (talk) 14:59, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Wallner ist the governor of the federal state of Vorarlberg and therefore one of the most important politicians of Austria. --Ailura (talk) 09:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 10:27, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:20171213_Markus_Wallner_850_8541.jpg&oldid=273187644"