Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Nadar - "Hermaphrodite" (Seventh Gallica image).jpg

File:Nadar - "Hermaphrodite" (Seventh Gallica image).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2019 at 13:10:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Nadar - "Hermaphrodite" (Seventh Gallica image).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Nadar - "Hermaphrodite" (Seventh Gallica image).jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
•  Info created by Nadar - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:10, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:10, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment For some context on this: w:Hermaphrodite_(Nadar), this is one in a series of photographs which are “probably the first medical photo-illustrations of a patient with intersex genitalia”, and a “milestone in the history of sexual medicine”. I can't vote now because I'm not familiar enough with this to judge the importance of this photograph and the superiority against the others of the series. Regarding the restoration, it's all too washed out for me. – Lucas 16:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@Lucasbosch: I believe (it's been a few days) the colours are original, and unchanged. The restoration removed blobs and damage. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:06, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose Sorry, this is no doubt a historically important photo and also the best in the series IMO since there are no hands of a physician getting in the way of the subject. Still, even for such important photos I'd want a bit of artistic composition and perhaps better quality in the photo for an FP. This is the same position you get in a gynecologist's chair and there is nothing artistic about that position, only practicality and intrusion. --Cart (talk) 21:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose quality etc. Charles (talk) 22:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Support - Yes, it's a clinical photo, but it seems interesting and important enough to me to merit a feature. That said, if it does not get featured, it certainly merits VI designation in a suitable scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Cart -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:59, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Cart--Boothsift 00:47, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Cart Daniel Case (talk) 03:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

• Daniel, please provide a reason. Vote struck until then. – Lucas 07:32, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Lucasbosch: Sorry about that. Daniel Case (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

•  Neutral 159 years old. Special archive in its kind. Used and useful. But not very glamorous -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:24, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:36, 11 July 2019 (UTC)