Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Insanity

Insanity

Thought I'd try this and see what people think. A high-resolution image of a small detail of a famous painting, I think it really enlivens the otherwise bare Insanity article.

Nominate and support. - zafiroblue05 | Talk 23:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, high res version looks great. Frightening every time I see this image. Really conveys the message well. Phoenix2 01:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Fine image, but it doesn't portray insanity. See Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If by insanity you mean Insanity as a capitalized, symbolized concept, parallel to Truth or Time or Folly, then it probably doesn't portray insanity. (But it might - the article states that the image is unidentified, but may symbolize syphilis, which can cause insanity!)

If by insanity you mean not a corporeal symbol of it but the state of mind, the mental disorder - well, insanity is not a concept in the discipline psychology or psychiatry. It's a everyday term (or a legal one), and, in this respect, the image also fits. I think it's fair to say that the person depicted is clearly, in popular parlance, insane. zafiroblue05 | Talk 03:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The common interpretation seems to be jealousy rather than insanity. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 06:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The incredibly high resolution and detail add considerably to the Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time article, where this image now resides. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very good detail and amazing clear Bertilvidet 15:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks insane to me... --Lewk_of_Serthic _contrib ^talk 21:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Look, I don't dispute that the image could be USED to illustrate insanity. But, quite frankly, doing so would constitute Original Research. The image is an allegoric representation of Jealousy, NOT insanity. This makes it inelligible as an FPC for insanity. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Not to be a jerk, but I've removed this image from the insanity article and replaced it with an engraving by William Hogarth. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Perfectly reasonable. ~MDD 46 96 00:18, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough. As it happens, this image was originally on the German featured version of the Insanity article, with the same usage. Should it be removed from there as well? zafiroblue05 | Talk 00:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Probably. I'd suggest that someone who is "fluent enough" in German do it so that they can explain the reasoning. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 17:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would prefer to see the entire painting, unless someone can make the point that there is some encyclopedic value to examining this portion of it only. Also, this image does not currently support an article. ~MDD 46 96 00:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support why isnt it on the Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time page? -Ravedave 03:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It is now. ~MDD 46 96 04:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support if placed in an article which represents the usual interpretation of the emotion in the portrait, which according to above, is not insanity. Also, I would support if it was in a section discussing the individual at Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-03-23 17:46
Support Since it now appears to have found its home. –Joke 17:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support now. Staxringold 07:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It doesn't give me much of a feeling. -- Mac Davis] ⌇☢ ญƛ. 12:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wouldn't Edvard Munch's 'The Scream' be the natural candidate to fill this niche? --Philopedia 22:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I think that'd fit better under Existential crisis than Insanity. But that's my personal opinion - at any rate, this image isn't on Insanity anymore, it's on Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time. zafiroblue05 | Talk 22:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pet peeve warning. The more "scholarly" interpretations of Munch's piece are that the Scream referenced is not any sound made by the figure, but rather a scream to which the figure is reacting (a metaphorical scream resounding throughout the world). Also, as stated, the figure isn't represented as insane but as filled with despair, anxiety, and angst. YMMV. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 07:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Not wowed. sorry.--Deglr6328 00:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Scary. A great illustrator of the subject. —This unsigned comment was added by Spizzma (talk • contribs) 01:33, 26 March 2006.
Oppose I find it unattractive and disturbing.--Andeee 22:58, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Quality Art. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 03:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Angelo Bronzino 003.jpg --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Not promoted This was a huge oversight by me. This nomination should not have been promoted. 11/16 is NOT a consensus. I will make a much better effort to avoid mistakes like this in the future, but it is still good for others to double check closed nominations. Thank you Mdd4696 for catching my error. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

condiitonal Support. If slight zoom out is possilbe. furthermore it's far better than the current article's picture.