Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gilbert Stuart Williamstown Portrait of George Washington.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2016 at 01:00:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media#Portrait
- Info Portrait of George Washington, created by Gilbert Stuart Williamstown - uploaded by Scewing - nominated by Gamingforfun365 -- Gamingforfun365 (talk) 01:00, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - Way too small for a FP of a painting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support 2MP are enough for FP!!! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:32, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - Not for a painting, when we get huge files of paintings, like 24 MP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:36, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Please show me the rule! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- The relevant rule is that each FP is one of the very best pictures on the site. If we have dozens of painting FPs that are absolutely huge, detailed files, I would say that this can't possibly measure up at its small size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Comment @Alchemist-hp: We’ve had the size discussion recently. The rule says, Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information […] reviewers may choose to demand more if the image would benefit from it. So, 2 mpix being the absolute minimum of size, this does not mean that 2 mpix is sufficient in all cases, because nearly any image would "benefit from it". As a general rule, images should have the highest possible resolution (the guidelines say, We can't predict what devices may be used in the future, so it is important that our best pictures have as high a resolution as possible). 2 mpix is tolerated as long as there was no possibility to upload/nominate a higher-res shot, e.g. if a crop had to be made from the exposure. However, this does never apply to paintings which can easily be shot at full resolution. --Kreuzschnabel 20:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support a larger file would be better of course, but if this version of that truly iconic painting is the best we have, fine --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:31, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Therefore a good candidate for VI...--Jebulon (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support 2MP are enough for FP --Ralf Roleček 08:01, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Comment See my comment above. 2MP are not sufficient if the shot could have been taken at higher resolution. --Kreuzschnabel 20:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Too small portrait image for a FP notimation --Zcebeci (talk) 11:40, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose As above. --Karelj (talk) 20:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support iconic image, great detail despite it's relatively small file size Scewing (talk) 17:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Iconic, but way to small.--Jebulon (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per others. Too small. INeverCry 22:46, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Neutral until someone formats the nomination right and we get a category to put it in.Weak support per Martin now. Daniel Case (talk) 05:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- Info @Daniel Case: Fixed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:11, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Fine but too small to be featured, see my remarks above. --Kreuzschnabel 20:51, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 19:08, 22 August 2016 (UTC)