Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Stalin-Lenin-Kalinin-1919.jpg

Image:Stalin-Lenin-Kalinin-1919.jpg - featured edit

A triple portrait of Stalin, Lenin and Kalinin, 1919.

Info uploaded by WikedKentaur - nominated by AlMare 20:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)]][reply]
Support --AlMare 20:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --WarX 06:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good, old photo Sebastianm 14:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - MPF 15:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Rodge500 16:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --Tarawneh 15:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose check license --Tarawneh 23:11, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral --- gildemax 12:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can we please have a german or english image description? I can't vote unless i know, what i see there norro 16:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I cannot read russian language. Maybe anybody out there can translate the russian text.. -- AlMare 17:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
file name translates left to right Gnangarra

Oppose until we have an image description. I can deduce the persons from the filename, but i don't know anything about the photograph itself. This way it's just a photograph of well-known people in a not too god quality and resolution norro 23:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now there is an english image description: Stalin, Lenin and Kalinin (photo from the VIII Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, March 1919) -- AlMare 09:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- i'd like a higer resolution someday. -Quasipalm 18:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me too ;-) AlMare 22:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Gnangarra 03:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Miljoshi 09:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- JPEG artifacts, resolution. Howcheng 16:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, Howcheng don't expect too much. This is a photo from 1919! Even The Leica wasn't evented at that time. -- AlMare 20:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Considering there are plenty of fantastic pictures from even before 1919 (see here, here or here, all of which are FPs on en-wiki), I don't see why we should support one with so many technical imperfections. Note that the problems I cited are all correctable with a better scan. We're not hard up for FPs here AFAIK, so our standards should not drop so low. Howcheng 21:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are right Howcheng, there are lots of pictures with better quality from this time (for example Nadar's which I have scanned and uploaded recently), but obviously this is no scan. The uploader took this photo from a russian website Source, and unfortunately they don't have a higher resolution there. -- AlMare 08:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose historically important image, however there seem to be problems with the license template, and until that issue has not been clearly solved I don't think the image should be nominable in that case. Gryffindor 09:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is pre1923 image. To my mind, need other template. --Yakudza 14:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose 100% OK with Gryffindor. El Comandante 21:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very important picture to have on commons and Wikipedia. Grafikm_fr 23:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Per reason above. --Kuban kazak 13:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ~~The Soviet propaganda.~~ -- Yakudza 14:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Shouldn't propaganda be documented? -- AlMare 21:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Simply I do not like these persons --Yakudza 19:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Nor do I. But it is a historical item. We have to have these photos on wikipedia! -- AlMare 20:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - I Find Yakudza's attempt to suppress historical figures because of dislike rather funny but typical of this editor who helds his personal likes and dislikes higher then historicity --Irpen 21:11, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support while I don't like these people either. --Irpen 21:11, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Morpheios Melas 10:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Anatol 22:06, 27 May 2006
Oppose --Marcela 03:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC) the License is not correct[reply]
Comment How can be featured an image with a problematic license??? El Comandante 18:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- As long as there is a license - where is the problem? -- AlMare 20:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

13 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral --> Featured MGo 10:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]