Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Manuela Schwesig 2.jpg

Manuela Schwesig[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Feb 2015 at 14:12:21 (UTC)

Reason: High quality and EV (Info: This picture is a valued and quality image in commons)
Articles in which this image appears: Manuela Schwesig and Federal Ministry of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: User:Jean11

Support as nominator – Alborzagros (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Not nearly as dynamic as most of our featured portraits. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 21:40, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
request Could you please introduce a dynamic portrait as you mean? what is the meaning dynamic in FP? Alborzagros (talk) 05:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hayley Williams down the page is one. Neil Gaiman. Noel Coward. These all have character, a certain spark, which is lacking from this (technically well done) portrait. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Have you viewed the Noel Coward image at full size? Oh my god, what little sharpness there is seems to be centred on his tie. It has character, granted, but it has very little else going for it! The Neil Gaiman image is good though. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 10:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - For the Coward image, I've given that a pass since it was 70s technology, and there may be a scanning issue (don't know if A. W. was scanning negatives or prints...). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- In more concrete terms: note how people bear themselves. Most of the featured photographic portraits are a) not head on and b) involve a tilt of the head. Such things, as well as the background (used really well in this portrait of Alexz Johnson; can you imagine her in that outfit sitting in a field of pink flowers?) add to the dynamism of the portrait. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:40, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support We shouldn't impose standards on a notable person's personality. Being a goody-two-shoes or otherwise straight-laced should not preclude a person from having their portrait featured. We've featured a number of "undynamic" (by Crisco's definition) portraits in the past, including other political figures. Being Family Minister comes with a certain amount of restraint, so if you're inclined to look at it that way, the pose is in fact encyclopaedic. Samsara 16:58, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, we have. But if you look at Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political you'll notice that most of our FPs of politicians are not straight-on. Even a plain background can be done well (File:Nils Torvalds MEP, Strasbourg - Diliff.jpg comes to mind). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:25, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And where do I say that "being a goody two shoes" makes one's portrait ineligible for FP? Seriously. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:42, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I think the pleasant lighting, good technical execution and straightforward composition give it the edge, and it's not so different to my portrait that Crisco mentioned. I guess Nils Torvalds does have a bit more of a spark though. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 10:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 07:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough support for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]