Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hrh Princess Elizabeth in the Auxiliary Territorial Service, April 1945 TR2832.jpg

File:Hrh Princess Elizabeth in the Auxiliary Territorial Service, April 1945 TR2832.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2022 at 04:16:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People_at_work
Info created by Ministry of Information - restored and uploaded by Angerey - nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 05:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 07:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unbelievable! The world was already colourful in 1945? --Granada (talk) 08:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Turned so a few years before: [1] --Kreuz schnabel 12:42, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Forget about who the subject is for a minute: This is a really awkward composition. The vehicle facing out of the frame like that with lots of dead space behind, her facing the opposite direction looking at something more interesting. This almost feels like a "behind the scenes" shot of her doing a photoshoot while there's another photographer standing somewhere on the left taking the real portrait. Or maybe it was supposed to be cropped - do we know if this was scanned from a print or a negative? --El Grafo (talk) 09:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Valued yes, FP not so. Even for that day there are much better shots. --Mile (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose VI but no FP in any way. --Milseburg (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose This is The Queen, so we have to FP pictures where she appears. No. The image hasn't the wow expected for FP. Per others for VI. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:44, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment For the record, I would have supported this photo if the woman in it was an American WACS member. What I see is a well-lit color photo of a female World War II enlistee in uniform standing in front of her medical services truck. I think that would be a good and interesting enough historical photo to feature if this were not a well-known enlistee, and the fact that it's Elizabeth is just an additional bit of history to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:56, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Ikan and El Grafo. Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment But I support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose not FP --Lupe (talk) 22:51, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 08:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too tight at the bottom, in my view. Need more space under the feet -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per El Grafo and Basile. Poor framing → strange composition, plus model looking away from camera. --Kreuz schnabel 12:38, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too tight on the bottom. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:42, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Don't think there's much point keeping this running. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:50, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]