Commons:Valued image candidates/Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg/Archive of previous reviews
Comment You're welcome :-) There is already a VI for Dilma Rousseff: File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg. If you confirm that you want to nominate a challenger, you'll have to open a "Most Valued Review", see Commons:Valued image candidates#How to open a Most Valued Review. --Myrabella (talk) 21:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Support image Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg. Prowiki (talk) 13:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Info MVR set up. --Myrabella (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I find the other portrait more impressive and more natural; it is also more documented and furthermore it is geocoded. --Myrabella (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- Natural? She was wearing a wig! She was receiving treatment against cancer. Prowiki (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oh sorry. I mean that in the other picture, she hasn't a posed attitude. --Myrabella (talk) 07:51, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- She was sick. She was receiving chemotherapy. How can the best picture of a person is when she's sick? Prowiki (talk) 19:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oh sorry. I mean that in the other picture, she hasn't a posed attitude. --Myrabella (talk) 07:51, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
MVR Scores: 1. Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: 0 <-- 2. Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: 0 (current VI within same scope) => File:Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: Undecided. <-- File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: Undecided. --Myrabella (talk) 07:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Nominated by User:Missionary on 2010-10-12 18:05 (UTC).
reason=I'm attempting to revive this discussion, as I believe this is the better image of Dilma Rousseff available on Commons. It was uploaded in the meantime since the current VI, Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg, was promoted. This is a studio picture, thus we should not expect it to contain geocoding information. In this picture, she's facing the camera directly, rather than looking upwards, and is smiling.
Info -- This is the challenging VI, in a new discussion. Please add new comments and votes below.
- Missionary (talk) 17:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Support
- As the nominator, you cannot vote. --Eusebius (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Support this is the best. Prowiki (talk) 20:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Support The edges look jagged, but that's only in the thumbnail, not at review size. Otherwise, this picture is superior. --MichaelBueker (talk) 15:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, retracting my support in favor of the third candidate. --MichaelBueker (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Support because she looks really so now, october 2010, and because she selected this picture as the most representative for her electoral campaign, as I've seen at TV.--Jebulon (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Oppose This image was produced for electoral purposes. It's a election campaign publicity pic , campaign not ended. Partial. -- VIGI-AP (talk) 14:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment "Commons" is international. I'm not brazilian, and don't really care about the final result of the election. I cannot be partial then. She looks so now, and only here between the other pictures of here. That's the point.--Jebulon (talk) 23:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - It's hard for me to see how a image can be seen as "Partial", but, although released under a free license, this image has truly been used for her campaign during 2010 brazilian presidential election. Aside from the "Partial" bias, I agree with VIGI comments, noting that this image would not satisfy criteria 1 and 2. Could satisfy 2 with the scope was "Dilma Roussef in 2010 Brazilian Presidential Campaign". The image does not have to be recent to satisfy these criteria. Flávio, o Maddox go! 16:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Support because she looks really so now, at october 2010. Ricco21 (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
MVR Scores: 1. Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: +1 <-- 2. Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: -2 (current VI within same scope) 3. Dilma (2009).jpg: -2 => File:Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: Promoted. <-- File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. File:Dilma (2009).jpg: Declined. --Myrabella (talk) 20:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC)