Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Beethoven opus 101 manuscript.jpg

Image:Beethoven opus 101 manuscript.jpg, not featured

•  Info created by - uploaded by Durova - nominated by Durova. Restored version of Image:Beethoven sketch op. 101.jpg and Image:Beethoven sketch op 101a.jpg (combined file of a two page manuscript). Durova (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Durova (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Question If they are from the same manuscript (assumed), then why do they have a different colour? Or are they just combined to make the size (only just) featurable? Lycaon (talk) 21:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • As the linked source files show, two centuries of aging have resulted in a different appearance for the two pages of this manuscript. I suspect part of the explanation may be chemical: both originals were stained. I minimized this difference during restoration. Due to the scanning resolution there were technical limits on how far that could go. Durova (talk) 08:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment -- I like very much the last Beethoven sonatas (especially op.106 and 111) but am not sure this should be a feature picture. Abstracting the fact that the manuscript is almost unreadable(at least for me), due to the terrible quality of Beethoven handwriting, is there anything is in this image justifying a promotion for "graphical" excelence? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Yesterday morning when I worked on these files I chuckled at the thought of some schoolmarm giving Beethoven a bad grade for penmanship. When I was a child and first saw artistic studies by Picasso in a museum, I thought there were kids in my class who could draw better. In both cases you're seeing the mind of a genius at work. Durova (talk) 08:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Document a haute valeur encyclopédique --Luc Viatour (talk) 10:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Translation: Document has high encyclopaedic value[.] --96.251.134.253 23:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Inspiring image!--Sensl (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Single images of the composition far to small for FP. In this particular case adding two (different coloured) pages from the manuscript adds no extra value (as e.g. in here or here). EV is not questioned. Lycaon (talk) 11:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose As Lycaon. --Karelj (talk) 19:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Image has high value for encyclopedia, indeed because of who Beethoven was, but not a high enough resolution for FP. To me personally the image has no value, for I don't know the content. --Ltz Raptor (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. naerii 08:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)