Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Machado de Assis by Marc Ferrez.jpg/2

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2024 at 16:21:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

I don't think it is clever to renominate again and again the same FPCs that get 5 supports or 6 supports, until you get the 7. If a picture gets lack of participation, it is usually an indicator of moderate or low wow. Then it's better to try a different candidate. Otherwise you will exhaust the participants with repetitive visuals. And we will support only to get rid of these patterns. Apart from that, this image is of low quality, in my opinion, even for the period.
See also Commons:Featured picture candidates/File: PARQUE ESTADUAL PAULO CÉSAR VINHA - VITOR B. BARBOSA - FOTO 01.jpg
and Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:HabitanteComunidadQoM(CDI-CA-MM-00005)-restored.jpg -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With all respect, Basile, if I had done it, you'd have every right to complain, but I didn't renominate it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:15, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Low quality for 1890? This can be explained in part due to the process of "whitening" Machado de Assis (many photographers at the time perhaps did not want to show the fact that the country's greatest writer was pardo/black). ★ 21:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I worked very hard to try and get the skin tone as close to correct as I could with this image. I found a report calling him a "light-skinned mestizo" - I believe the term is much more acceptable in South America - so I'm not sure what's perfect, but I did my best. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The jacket is ok but not the face -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With all respect, Adam, you're not responsible. But ArionStar had been warned several times in the past, with quite clear messages. I understand this is your picture and want it promoted, since you nominated it the first time. But both of you had voted already last week. So what do you expect? Many of us may get tired with such repetitive tasks, if it gets a norm. Let's maintain FPC as an enthusiastic and emulative voting place instead, with diversity.
If a picture fails, no problem, just accept the consensus and try something better! See the list of similar candidatures which didn't pass last month, only because one or two votes were missing:
score 5-0, score 6-0, score 5-0, score 7-4, score 13-7, score 7-4, score 5-2, score 6-1, score 5-2, score 6-0, score 5-3, score 5-0. Imagine all of them nominated for a second round, hell :-) "Okay, bad luck, I'll try again next week" :-)
We had related discussions in previous nominations and the FP talk page, and I remember most of the people consider we have to wait a relatively long period of time before renominating a picture, unless there are modifications made since the last time. Which is not the case here. Best regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you show that discussion? ★ 01:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eagle Nebula from ESO.jpg/2. Just read the comments -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the problem I have is I normally do wait at least 6 months (if at all), but making an example out of this makes that very hard. When was the last time a /3 nomination passed, or existed? Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Frans Post - Gezicht op Olinda, Brazilië.jpg/4. ★ 16:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn one month earlier for lack of participation! Fortunately 9 years ago. First nomination 15 years ago -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is similar to Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Couillet - chevalements de la mine du Pêchon - 7.jpg/2 also nominated by the same user ArionEstar = ArionStar = ★ with the reason "Per 6 supports × 0 opposes.". This result may impact the voting process in the future. Adam Cuerden is certainly aware of this "tacit rule" since he made this suggestion in the FPC talk page in 2019 . @Ikan Kekek: proposed to wait at least 12 months here. Like Daniel Case's procedural oppose, many participants agree. What others think? -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the issue. Yann (talk) 06:00, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. We might have been misled by the comment associated to your template here, then? Thanks for your comment -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, i was too late to notice the previous nomination and did not have time to vote in support first nomination. This renomination corrects my oversight, and i do not see a serious problem with the renomination. -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(My nominations usually become a forum.) ★ 07:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
💡 Nice to know. Thanks for your response, George. Then it's just that FPC is currently evolving towards unpredictable directions. Will follow this case with the greatest interest! All the best -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 06:48, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1890-1899
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Machado_de_Assis_by_Marc_Ferrez.jpg/2&oldid=911603780"