Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pulitzer2018-mia-farrow-20180530-wp.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Pulitzer2018-mia-farrow-20180530-wp.jpg, featured
[edit]Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 13:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Andrew Lih, uploaded by Fuzheado and Indopug, nominated by Yann
Support -- Yann (talk) 13:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Portrait photo of a woman. --Prototyperspective (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Oppose
- And how that is a valid reason for opposing? Yann (talk) 16:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A very interesting statement … You don't like portraits? Not portraits of women? How should I see this rating? Do you reject all portraits of women across the board? --XRay 💬 16:36, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Mysterious reason. Could you please try to point it out more precisely? August Geyler (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A human may be interesting but not photos of them as feature pictures. That's what Wikipedia's featured articles are for if anything but not featured pictures, which are about pictures not so much the subject. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- And what about Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait? Yann (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have any issues with community-rating them as high-quality or even "Featured picture", I just oppose them being featured on the Main page, the rss feeds, and the Wikipedia app. Most of the images on the page I think would be unsuited for these three things, however many also show special things that may make them worthy of FP since they are not about the person but the peculiarity of (e.g. the activity of the person etc) the image such as those:
- And what about Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait? Yann (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the above. How is a woman's portrait photo a valid reason to oppose? Is it because there's no wow? Zzzs (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Portrait photos are unsuited for featured pictures why would they be suited for it? It's not about the wow, it's about the quality/characteristics of the image, portrait photos are inappropriate. See explanation above and it could be elaborated further despite that I don't know why people seem to find it surprising. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Prototyperspective, images converted to links. Please do not display other images at a nomination. The FPCBot will read them as 'Alternatives' and this will complicate things for the nom closing. --Cart (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Portrait photos are unsuited for featured pictures why would they be suited for it? It's not about the wow, it's about the quality/characteristics of the image, portrait photos are inappropriate. See explanation above and it could be elaborated further despite that I don't know why people seem to find it surprising. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Undid vote for the reasons given here, a FP doesn't have to be a POTD and my points if anything are now only about which kinds of images (not) frequently nominated as FP but not about whether or not it should be FP. --Prototyperspective (talk) 15:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Support In some contexts, it has happened to me that I write something but not completely because the other part remains in my head (I think this is the case). Another possibility is that the author of the negative vote comment has a native language other than English, and when translating, something that might have made sense does not entirely make sense, or due to their limited way of explaining and giving arguments. --Wilfredor (talk) 18:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- You seem to refer to my comments without addressing any points outlined broadly in it but do not provide any rationale as to why this photo of a human should be a featured picture shown on the Main page. There's nothing special about it, it's a portrait photo of a notable human and people are better learning about people by looking at their Wikipedia article, e.g. via Featured Wikipedia articles, than at a photo of them. Why should this be a FP, please explain. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- I get the impression that you are confusing Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. However, the criteria for what an FP means are different. --XRay 💬 04:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- I was pointing out that you are basically confusing WMC with Wikipedia by putting portraint photos of notable people on the Main page which is something the featured articles on WP are for, not photos here.
- Still no addressing of any points or explanation for why this would be good to be FP. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Where do you get this idea that articles about people should be featured on Wikipedia, but not images on Commons? Why would we not want to feature portaits? Kritzolina (talk) 15:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Prototyperspective, It is WMC that supplies the different Wikipedias with images, images of all sorts of subjects (including people), and it is on our interest to show what really good images should look like (including portraits of people). This is how we set standards for excellent photos: through examples. No images here are promoted simply for being on the front page of Commons, they are all selected because they are suitable for the different Wikipedia projects. And as for getting on the Commons front page, is in fact rather uncommon for a portrait to end up there since there are about ten times 365 FPs promoted each year. I think that your notion about people on FPs, is at the wrong forum. Here we only assess what photos are excellent; if you have a problem with them appearing on Commons front page as Picture of the day you should discuss that at that project's talk page, not here. --Cart (talk) 15:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes indeed, that's why I recently struck my vote – didn't know not all FP are included there and thanks for pointing to the best suited place to discuss this. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- I get the impression that you are confusing Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. However, the criteria for what an FP means are different. --XRay 💬 04:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- You seem to refer to my comments without addressing any points outlined broadly in it but do not provide any rationale as to why this photo of a human should be a featured picture shown on the Main page. There's nothing special about it, it's a portrait photo of a notable human and people are better learning about people by looking at their Wikipedia article, e.g. via Featured Wikipedia articles, than at a photo of them. Why should this be a FP, please explain. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment It is a very poor portrait with an unfortunate facial expression. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Oppose This is so boring. I don't see anything that is worth featuring. I mean, if the subject was in a better environment or doing something interesting, I might have supported. Wolverine XI 19:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 23:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Support Appealing portrait in good quality. Honestly I do not understand most of the objections in this discussion. We may say that this isn’t a very innovative or creative kind of portrait; but a portrait must be adequate in style and technique to the character and mission of the person it shows, and IMHO this does apply here. – Aristeas (talk) 12:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is a high-quality portrait but why should it be featured on the Main page? And as for your rationale, there are millions of high-quality portraits, everybody with access to the Internet has seen lots of them. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment First I do not vote for an image because I want it to appear on the main page etc.; IMHO that’s a minor matter. I vote pro/contra images in order to help to select the featured pictures. Second, maybe there are millions of high-quality portraits, but (it’s a pity) only very few high-quality portraits with a free license – browse Wikimedia Commons and you will see that 99.9% of our portrait photographs are of low or modest quality. Third, after reading about Mia Farrow and browsing photos of her, I have the impression that this photo is a very fitting portrait that matches her character. It would be inappropriate to portrait Farrow e.g. like Dalí. You see I do not just vote “yes”, but I have taken about one hour of research before casting my vote. So you have every right to disagree and to vote against this photo, if you follow other arguments, but you do not need to quarrel with me about my vote – I have given valid reasons for it. – Aristeas (talk) 13:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is a high-quality portrait but why should it be featured on the Main page? And as for your rationale, there are millions of high-quality portraits, everybody with access to the Internet has seen lots of them. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Support A charming portrait of excellent quality. And if I look at the other FIs from that gallery, I prefer this one to many others. As to the point of why portraits in general should be featured ... I don't understand the distinction from any other kind of images. There are also millions of high quality images of animals, plants, landscapes and buildings out there. We are showing the best of what we have in all kinds of topic areas as featured images and in my opinion, this one stands out for the reasons Aristeas also points out. This person is photographed in a way that seems very fitting. --Kritzolina (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Support ★ 18:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Support Per Kritzolina and Aristeas. --Terragio67 (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Weak oppose Wonderful portrait with very good light and DoF. But for me the tight crop at the bottom spoils the composition. --August (talk) 09:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women