Comment I totally disagree with Archaeodontosaurus. If you read Commons:Valued images you will see the text: "Valued images, on the other hand, are those that are the most valuable of their kind for use in an online context, within other Wikimedia projects." In the case of portraits, I take this to mean the best portrait to illustrate an article about the individual concerned, whether it be drawing, painting, etching or photograph, all competing with each other. I therefore contend that the scope is correct (though I would prefer the use of the word "portrait" (singular) rather than "portraits" (plural)).
Comment@DeFacto: The section Commons:Valued image scope#Works of art is quite clear "A scope is justified for instance if the work is the most significant work (or one of the most significant works) of an artist having an article on its own on any Wikipedia, or if it is a seminal work in some way." In this case, if this is a seminal work by Nutter or Hardy, then the scope should be linked to the artist, not the subject. If the scope is linked to the subject, then, as far as the scope is concerned, the artist is of no consequence. Martinvl (talk) 21:19, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
