Comment : good and useful but...If I think geocode isn't important for a portrait, I'm sure the date is. There was a discussion here about portraits and dates last January or February. For instance : your picture is very good for 2004, but there's a very good one (imo) for 1995 too -- and they're very different. So I think it would be nice to add the date for all your (nice) portaits. I hope I'm not too nitpicking and, of course, I'm not the only reviewer. --JLPC (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2014 (UTC) .[reply]
Do you mean changing the scope to "Gabriele Salvatores in 2014"? Having (potentially) one VI per year would certainly make sense for Obama, or the Pope, but I am not sure it makes sense when we have such a little number (3) of photos. My photo (which was taken a few days ago and not in 2004, but I guess it was a typo) and the one taken in 1995 are certainly different, but I believe it should be possible to decide which one is the most valuable, and I would certainly not be offended if it was the other one ;) --Jaqen (talk) 10:09, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
a/Sorry for the typo. -b/Mentionning the year is important for the Pope or Obama, because there are lots of pictures for them. Here (as for some dead writers scarcely photographed), it's important for an opposite reason : we've only got three (very different) pictures of the same man. -c/ It's not a matter of choice but a matter of equity : some pictures have been featured in one way, why should we feature some others with different criterias ? -- I'll let another user answer. Friendly. --JLPC (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
