Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Arsen Avakov

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2015 at 08:02:50 (UTC)

Reason: An important figure in today's Ukrainian government. The EV is good, especially considering that the Ukrainian conflict is still ongoing.
Articles in which this image appears: Arsen Avakov, Ministry of Internal Affairs (Ukraine)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Виктор Г. Алексеев

Support as nominator – Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Bland, official-looking portrait of serving politician & govt. official. Rather dark due to 'official'-looking pinstripey suit. Sca (talk) 16:05, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ - Unnecessarily political and may be perceived as Wikipedia taking a position on current issues. HullIntegrity^\ talk / 12:13, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Surely that can't be a consideration here, can it? 81.141.231.231 (talk) 21:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, then we should be delisting all political peoples as FPs. Étienne Dolet (talk) 16:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That should be argued case by case (as we are now). My thinking is that the PoD/FP should be different from the "Hot News". Ukraine is as as hot as you can get right now. Why go there? It will come off as an endorsement and just invoke backlash the Admins will have to deal with. Are the FPs intentionally political? No. Should the incidental politics be considered? Oh my, yes. Nice photo. Good looking smart guy. I support Ukraine. But just no. HullIntegrity^\ talk / 17:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I do not understand your point, and I presume you are not accusing anyone here of breaking not censored for expressing opinions about the possible political inclinations of certain photos. But I do wonder, how is discussion and the process of reaching consensus, automatically "censuring"? My personal (non admin) opinion is that having this photo, or one of Putin for that matter, on the main page (just now) is inherently, and unnecessarily, argumentative. I, as an editor, get one vote/recommendation and "Oppose" is how I am recommending, and the reasons for the recommendation have been fully explained, or at least I believe so. HullIntegrity^\ talk / 18:42, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up Comment - Will Hillary Clinton (or any other political candidate) appear on the Main Page before elections? If so, then I am dead wrong about this and will recant. HullIntegrity^\ talk / 19:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According a picture FP status and putting it on the main page are two different things. One does not necessarily entail the other. Consideration of the sensitivity of pictures presumably takes place at the time they are selected for the main page. 86.188.80.40 (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HullIntegrity, the IP has a point here as well. But Wikipedia has specific policies in regards to this. One of them being WP:NOTCENSORED, which makes it clear that we shouldn't edit or disapprove of anything on Wikipedia because it'll harm someone's beliefs. But, in all honesty, you may be right about the main page. After reading this: Wikipedia:NOTCENSORED and the Main Page, I think content that is deemed offensive should be excluded from the main page. But again, this doesn't mean that this photograph has to be on the main page, neither does it mean that a simple photograph such as this should offend anyone. But then again, I'm just a neutral observer. Étienne Dolet (talk) 23:49, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]