Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Thomas Keene in Macbeth 1884 Wikipedia crop.png

Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2009 at 09:42:33

Info created by W.J. Morgan & Co. Lith. - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info Renomination, old nomination had 4 support, no opposes. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info Modified slightly from the original: Cropped, and touched up slightly to allow the crop. This is to remove distracting elements to make it more useful in illustrating scenes from MacBeth. Original, uncropped form is at File:Thomas Keene in MacBeth 1884.png. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think this is a plausible candidate for Valued Image for Category:Macbeth, but is not appropriate for FP. Downtowngal (talk) 23:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Any reason? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment - The image doesn't have FP wow. The tonal range is narrow and the composition is clunky. It's designed to be informational, not convey an overall emotion or be an example of excellent photography. The image is interesting historically and as you say, valuable for illustrating programs, websites, etc., of productions of Macbeth. My understanding of the FP criteria may be inadequate, so I welcome any comments. Downtowngal (talk) 23:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The FP criteria are somewhat photograph-biased, but it's usually accepted that informative illustrations are fine =) Adam Cuerden

Obviously the photographic quality of the file is fine. The underlying graphic design of the illustration is not FP quality. Downtowngal (talk) 16:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think the crop is an improvement. Maedin\^talk 20:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 21:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For several reasons. One is that I can't understand why should it be a featured picture? Because its so old? Another thing is that there are so many billing for theatrical plays all over the world. Will most of them eventually get FP status too? Like Downtowngal said, I may not fully understand the FP status, but I think that it should be given only to outstanding pictures or illustrations, that are one of a kind. And this one I don't find nor beautiful nor unique. --Ahnode (talk) 13:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per Ahnode --Ernie (talk) 09:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Maedin\^talk 14:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]