Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ettelaat13571026.pdf

The Shah Is Gone[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2022 at 09:35:18 (UTC)

The Shah Is Gone (Persian: شاه رفت, romanized: *Šâh raft*) is a headline that appeared on the front cover of the Iranian newspaper *Ettela'at* on Tuesday, 16 January 1979, when the Shah left Iran, a few days before the fall of the Pahlavi dynasty and the 2500-year-old Iranian monarchy. The title contains the word *shah* (king) instead of *shahanshah* (king of kings) to refer to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, which was very rare during his reign. It is described as the "most famous headline in the history of Iran"

Reason: encyclopedic and high quality
Articles in which this image appears: The Shah Is Gone
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others
Creator: Ettela'at (newspaper)

Support as nominator – Alborzagros (talk) 09:35, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The fact that it's in Persian/Farsi would seem to limit its intelligibility for readers of English Wiki. – Sca (talk) 13:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are thousands of pictures with non-English text in English Wikipedia articles. This is not a convincing reason. By reading the description of the photo, the reader can easily find out the subject of the photo. Alborzagros (talk) 07:49, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So why run the image if readers have to consult the article to understand it? Circular reasoning, IMO. -- Sca (talk) 13:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's a notable event. That said, I'm not that convinced by the reproduction, though: The attempt to give a pure white background has absolutely destroyed the photos. If this was a good copy of the newspaper, I would enthusiastically support it, but look at the upper photo, even at thumbnail you can see the lines going through it, and the artifacting gets far weirder if you zoom in - what's with that very strange smear on the man's back? Newspaper reproduction of photos could be quite bad, but this is beyond that, so, unless we can get a better copy, Oppose. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.1% of all FPs} 14:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. That smear looks like a failed cloning attempt to remove some splotches: [[1]] (low res). --Janke | Talk 06:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – It's not a picture, it's a PDF. – Sca (talk) 12:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's entirely an issue, as they can be displayed like pictures, but, yes. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.1% of all FPs} 16:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:40, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]