Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/George A. Romero

George A. Romero

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 02:11:22 (UTC)

Reason: With George Romero's resent passing, looking at his image I thought it meets the criteria for Featured Picture status.
Articles in which this image appears: George A. Romero, It (miniseries), Millennium (The X-Files), +2
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: Flickr

Support as nominator – GamerPro64 02:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor photo (framing, etc.) --Z 12:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Romero has been nominated for listing only under Recent Deaths on WP:ITN/C. There has been some discussion at ITN about running mugs with notable RD listings, but so far the idea hasn't been accepted. If it were accepted, that's where this pic. (much cropped) would be appropriate. Looks like this 2009 pic. has been in the infobox at George A. Romero for quite some time, so it's not really "adding" any EV now. Sca (talk) 15:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Z. Shame we can't get anything better now (unless we reach out to a professional photograph who did work with Romero) but this is too far below the quality threshold. I have no idea what Sca's rambling has to do with the FP criteria; ITN has nothing to do with this process, and Romero's physical appearance did not change too much between 2009 and his death. Length of time an image has been in an infobox is generally viewed as a positive, rather than a negative. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Please see WP:NP.

Criterion No. 5 – Adds significant encyclopedic value to an article and helps readers to understand an article.

Note that adds is a present-tense verb. The criterion does not say added. As mentioned above, the photo is eight years old, and it needs cropping. Sca (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood that criterion. If it has been in the article for quite a while it adds to the EV because it's stable, and hasn't been replaced suggesting no better alternative has been found. It's a good thing if it's been there for so many years, it indicates that it is likely the best photo we have at the moment. Mattximus (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Sca misunderstood the criteria. "Adds significant encyclopedic value" means compared to no image being present, not "compared to ten years ago" or "compared to last month". In fact, stability is often used as evidence of encyclopedic value at FPC, something that Sca -- who has commented at this venue frequently for at least three years now -- should know.

Compare the similar wording at WP:NFCC: "[images] ... significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." The only difference is that the NFCC is explicit with the clause "its omission would be detrimental to that understanding", whereas the FP? considers itself already clear. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• No one is proposing removing the image from Romero. Thus, to speak of the article without his pic. is a red herring. And yes, FP's should be images that are new or recent to English Wikipedia. This reflects the basic reader-interest factor of timeliness.

• In this case, the nominator may be a fan of Romero's work who felt moved to nominate this photo when he died (on July 16). This is speculation on my part, but if correct it's not a valid reason, IMO, for nominating the photo as a main page feature. Among other considerations, it's likely that, if promoted, it would not appear until some weeks or months after the subject's death – in which case it would not be timely topically either. (Hence, there's been discussion of running mugs with RD-only listings at ITN.)

• As to ITN having nothing to do with FPs, au contraire: Both are fixtures on the main page of Wikipedia – our front page – seen by millions daily. Sca (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"FP's should be images that are new or recent to English Wikipedia" this is simply not true, nor has it ever been true, nor do I see it becoming a rule in the future. Where did you get this information from? Mattximus (talk) 00:27, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with Mattximus; Sca, I think you're way off here. There is no requirement at all that "FP's should be images that are new or recent to English Wikipedia", just as there is no requirement that FAs, FLs, and so on need to be new to the English Wikipedia. That's not part of the criteria and it's not something I've ever seen playing a factor in discussions here before. If you feel it should be part of the criteria, you can propose it, but I can't see the proposal getting far. (Also, FP and POTD are separate; there's nothing stopping us promoting images to FP status but holding them from the main page if there is a genuine worry.) Josh Milburn (talk) 12:49, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not properly cropped. --Marvellous Spider-Man 05:05, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:48, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]