Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/George-W-Bush
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2013 at 13:51:48 (UTC)
- Reason
- Official portrait of the subject with no defects and the subject is the primary focus of the picture. It appears to meet all the criteria
- Articles in which this image appears
- Far too many to link, they are visible at File:George-W-Bush.jpeg
- FP category for this image
- link to category from WP:FP that best describes the image (check categories first)
- Creator
- Eric Draper
- Support as nominator --★★RetroLord★★ 11:50, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
- We considered this before at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/George W. Bush and it got no support except the nominator. It's underexposed, resulting in chromatic aberration and other noise (look closely at the hair in particular). I don't know why the White House would issue an underexposed official photograph of the president, but they did. Chick Bowen 19:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
- Also nominated Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/gbush there as well. — raekyt 10:30, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose — As pointed out by Chick, there are too many artifacts in this photo. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 21:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
- Comment — Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this photo File:GeorgeWBush.jpg technically superior to the currently nominated photo? If anybody believes it is of sufficient quality for FP, maybe they could nominate it? Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 02:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- Very "offical" cookie cutter portraits like that have a history of almost never being promoted. — raekyt 03:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- You'll notice that although I helped RetroLord fix his issue with the missing }}s at the end of his nomination template, that I did not support the photo myself, nor did I nominate the alternative that I noticed. It's the same reason that I spent well over two hours researching, expanding the description for, and annotating File:Carina_Nebula.jpg in Commons without adding my support vote. Sometimes I like helping people out, even if I can't see voting for their cause. (For example, years ago, I helped out with the construction of the New Vrindaban temple in West Virginia, because of a friend. It's a long story...) Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 08:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- Wow! You must really like helping people out! Thanks for letting everyone know! If you hadn't told me about your extensive research for the caption of another picture, I never would have known! Can you believe that?
- Most of the effort was trying to get oriented so I could annotate it properly. The ESO photo is in the infrared, while most photos of this region are in visible light, so the relative magnitudes of the stars, shape of the nebula, etc. are completely different. Some photos cover only a 15'x15' square area without stating so, while the ESO photo covers several degrees without stating so, so I couldn't even figure out relative scale. Astronomical photos may be oriented north-up, north-to-the-right, or in a completely arbitrary fashion. Eventually I discovered the The STScI Digitized Sky Survey and that finally enabled me to tell which star was which. Thanks to this site, my future annotations should be a lot easier. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- Wow! You must really like helping people out! Thanks for letting everyone know! If you hadn't told me about your extensive research for the caption of another picture, I never would have known! Can you believe that?
- You'll notice that although I helped RetroLord fix his issue with the missing }}s at the end of his nomination template, that I did not support the photo myself, nor did I nominate the alternative that I noticed. It's the same reason that I spent well over two hours researching, expanding the description for, and annotating File:Carina_Nebula.jpg in Commons without adding my support vote. Sometimes I like helping people out, even if I can't see voting for their cause. (For example, years ago, I helped out with the construction of the New Vrindaban temple in West Virginia, because of a friend. It's a long story...) Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 08:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- Very "offical" cookie cutter portraits like that have a history of almost never being promoted. — raekyt 03:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Next time, don't advertise your "help" please. Adding a }} to a page as an excuse to write an expose on User:Stigmatella_aurantiaca's life of martyrdom and charity isn't contributing much to the wiki. ★★RetroLord★★ 11:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- You're right. I should keep quiet. But I liked doing what I could to help. Incidentally, I've emailed the AV Specialist at the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum asking if a high resolution version of your original nomination photo exists that doesn't have the JPEG artifacts. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 12:50, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)