Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Je suis Charlie Strasbourg 7 janvier 2015 02.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Je suis Charlie Strasbourg 7 janvier 2015 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2015 at 11:27:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Man holding a candle at a demonstration supporting Charlie Hebdo in Strasbout following the shooting of 7 januart 2015
  •  Info Man holding a candle at a demonstration supporting Charlie Hebdo in Strasbourg following the shooting of 7 januart 2015. Created by Ctruongngoc - uploaded by Ctruongngoc - nominated by Rama -- Rama (talk) 11:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Rama (talk) 11:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I'm really not sure that we should be examining a reporter's photograph, of an event less than 24hrs old, to see if meets the "featured pictures" criteria. We aren't the picture editors of a daily newspaper. This one can sit a while so an unemotional assessment of its qualities can be made. My 2p. -- Colin (talk) 12:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Well either the photograph is good, or it is not. The context changes nothing to that, and I trust people to have enough maturity to assess the image for its value rather than for some irrelevant criterion. I happen to be rather reserved on the hommages to Charlie Hebdo, which I have never liked, and to think that this is an excellent and exceptional photograph. Emotion is indispensable to assess the overall quality of the image, and irrelevant for everything else. Rama (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not as simple as "good or not". As a photograph in isolation, the image has some technical and artistic weaknesses, though the candle light on the guy's face is interesting. It doesn't clearly demonstrate there is more than one or two protesters never mind the scale of the crowd. It might have extra value (an FP criterion) when regarded as an image of a historical event. For for that, it needs to be "historical". It isn't about having "enough maturity" to judge this today, when the news and current-affairs conversations talk of little else: you'd have to be some kind of Vulcan. Please let this image deserve its FP status at a later time, rather than having any perception that votes are somehow influenced by recentism and emotion. Surely if it is "exceptional" then it will still be exceptional in six months. What is the rush? -- Colin (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Conversely, if the image is exceptional, it is irrespective of the context. So as much as I agree that the image will remain exceptional in six months, I think it is whatever the context is. We are not going to give featured status out of pity for the fate of other people not on the image. Rama (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, your argument is illogical: I'm arguing we can't reliably judge it today, not whether context matters to its exceptionalness. As an image of a person lit by candle, it is unexceptional and has technical issues. Perhaps as an image of this event it might gain value, but not today. -- Colin (talk) 20:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are contradicting yourself: you cannot state first that it is not possible to judge the image, and then that it is "unexceptional and has technical issues": you are judging the image. Which is absolutely fine, but the entire construct about "today" is empty. Rama (talk) 08:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Read what I said. Do you spot the word "reliably". You'll have to take my unreliable "oppose" since you won't accept that today is not a good time to be doing this. -- Colin (talk) 09:36, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(I think you have one negation too many in your sentance)
If I understand you correctly, you are positing that the context should be taken into account to judge whether minor defects in a photograph should be overlooked or not. I have never observed that line of reasonning in FPs; much to the contrary, I have seen quite a number of candidates rejected on technical grounds when the chosen settings were the best possible for the shot (e.g. "too much noise" for a distant action shot in a covered arena with limited lighting). Rama (talk) 12:12, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
*sigh* My grammar is fine. No you don't understand me correctly. I have better things to do with my life than continue this conversation... -- Colin (talk) 12:39, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Sète Harbour Sunset.
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Je_suis_Charlie_Strasbourg_7_janvier_2015_02.jpg&oldid=148080464"