Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpg

File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 22:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
•  Info created by Carl Pietzner - uploaded by Panoramafotos.net - restored, nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 22:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment Not the sharpest. Is there some historical importance here? Daniel Case (talk) 16:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I chose it because it is used in a important number of articles and pages. Ezarateesteban 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

That might make it a VI, but what's the argument for FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Good photo without scratches, artifacts and another issues Ezarateesteban 19:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

That reads like an argument for QI, if the photographer were a Commons user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I know it but I like if anyone evaluate the quality of this picture Ezarateesteban 22:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

•  weak suppoert I took some time deciding this one. On the one hand, Bertha von Suttner is a very important historical figure, so the legitimacy of the nomination is beyond question. It's also a photo from 1906 (read that again, nineteen oh-freakin' six, it's over 100 years old!), so I think we can forgive the overall lack of sharpness. I just wish the resolution was higher, and I'm also not sure about the quality of the restoration. It looks OK compared to the original, but.. hmmmm..... Well, it's borderline, and I may be a bit taken with it since I basically live and breathe history. If anyone else out there want to have something to compare it to, in order to find the standard set for historical FPs, here they are.--Peulle (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment there's part of the border left at the bottom. I think the border should be either removed completely or not removed at all … --El Grafo (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done borderline removed Ezarateesteban 11:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose Certainly VI and useful, not good enough for FP, even for a picture from 1906. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Yann. --The NMI User (talk) 06:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:18, 28 September 2018 (UTC)