Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:KnutSteen.1.jpg

Image:KnutSteen.1.jpg, featured

•  Info created by Nina-no - uploaded by Nina-no - nominated by Kjetil r --Kjetil r 20:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Kjetil r 20:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Jeblad 20:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support We need more of this. --Jarvin 21:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Nsaa 21:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Apple farmer 21:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support -- SLB (no) 21:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Harry Wad 21:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Yes! --MichaelMaggs 22:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --AngMoKio 22:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Great portrait. Finn Rindahl 22:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Exellent! --Frode Inge Helland 19:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment - Of the 10 support votes so far, 8 come from Norwegian speaking users. Independently of the subject and merits of the picture under evaluation, I don't sympathize with national voting. In the present case, the picture doesn't deserve and does not need such practise. - Alvesgaspar 23:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Seems like all are users on Commons, some are fairly big contributors, and some are even sysops. I don't see any problems. Jeblad 23:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support Not because I'm Norwegian, but because I know this person and this picture reflects his personality perfectly. Alvesgaspar: it's natural that the votes come from Norwegians when the portraited person is from Norway, because I don't think people from other countries have heard much about him. We know him better than anyone else. Haakon K 00:01, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

@Haakon K: it's maybe natural that the votes come from Norwegians, but I strongly suspect the reason is more that Jeblad posted the news on your forum, the tinget. After all it took just 65 minutes for the first seven votes and some of the users haven't been here in month. So it was rather obvious that the Vikings are on their way. Still, I like the picture, especially since portraits are something I consider as rather difficult to make. Worst case is my passport where I look like a criminal.  Support -- Cecil 07:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

We all have mug shots in our passports, don't we? --Kjetil r 08:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

You can only vote in votations that you know about --Haakon K 00:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Neutral I really like the expression, but I'm not supporting due to the overexposed sections that can be easily overcome on such an image (just going -0.05 gets rid of it without darkening the image, and it's not that difficult to do) if you have the raw file. While you're at it, the levels can also be adjusted a tad. You've already got a great shot, why not put in a tiny more effort? Dori - Talk 03:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support. Kjetil 08:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC) Only one vote, please - Alvesgaspar 11:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Thats User:Kjetil, not to be confused with user:Kjetil r... ;) Finn Rindahl 11:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support --Sir48 12:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment - So, as far as I understand, the only (assumed) purpose of these newcomers from Norway is to promote this particular picture to FP. Otherwise they would care to stay a little longer and contribute to the project by reviewing the other nominations :-(( Alvesgaspar 13:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I suppose I would have raised an eyebrow or three if a lot of newbies/ not very active users turned up to give their opinions on one specific article at Featured Article review at no:wiki, but please: even if these "votes" may seem biased or not very qualified, I'm happy that a) this very good portrait was nominated and I sincerely hope that everyone review the picture based on its own merits and not based on prior votes, and b) that lot's of Norwegian users has discovered the FP section at Commons. They may not do more on these subpages than I normally do, which is looking at very good pictures and wondering what the technical discussions among the "professional FP-reviewers" really is about, but it's still one of the better places in the wikimedia world to hang out. Regards, Finn Rindahl 13:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support Vassil 18:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Based on its merits and not because Norway was once a part of Denmark ;-) -- Slaunger 20:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Fingalo 20:18, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support As I spontaneously suggested the picture to Kjetil r as a candidate when I saw it, I add my support even though I'm Norwegian. It might be that a tiny adjustment would make the pattern in the white scarf visible, and the picture prefect, but to me it is more important that the picture has life in it. This is a person, not just a face. It is a picture the photographer can be proud of. One that Commons and Wikipedia are lucky to have and should be proud of too. Haros 23:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Leafnode 05:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support A very good portrait taken by a very good photographer! A strong support from me. — H92 (t · c · no) 19:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Pile on support. I'm supporting this despite the borderline resolution. -- Ram-Man 03:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Blue Elf 08:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice portrait. /Daniel78 21:53, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Ben^hello! 11:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support despite the somewhat lacking sharpness --Aqwis 18:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Haemmi 07:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Alexanderkg 14:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Out of principal (against national voting) and also a bit because of the small size for which there is no compelling reason. Lycaon 17:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
  •  Comment Not that your vote is likely to influence the final result, but what has national voting got to do with the review of photo itself? I too, disaprove of national voting, but the subject here is the photo. Of course, if the relative small size alone makes you oppose the photo it is a different matter, and the oppose vote is perfectly justified. In this case national votes do probably not influence the final result either. If it did, I think the validity of the national votes should be discussed as a seperate subject and consensus should be reached concerning their validity (this could be reached among admins), and whether the votes could be considered human sockpuppets or not. Opposing solely in an attempt to out-balance national votes is IMHO not the way to do it. -- Slaunger 15:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
    • No it is not likely that it will affect the outcome, if I really wanted the picture not to be featured (which I don't, cause I think it is quite good), I could have rallied support from all my friends to shoot this one down. this would however be at least as unfair as the voting which is going on right now. So just count my vote as a protest vote. Lycaon 13:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support - Husky ^{(talk to me)} 22:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Conditional  Oppose Sorry, great photo, but size. SIZE! Is there a slightly bigger version? I'd support if someone were to upload one that hits or surpasses the cutoff (2Mpx)... it's like 30,000 pixels off. Is there just a slightly larger crop out there? Doodle-doo Ħ 22:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
  •  Comment 2Mpix is not a cutoff, but a guideline. Having said that you are of course free to come to the conclusion that for you the low resolution cannot be mitigated. Often I expect larger resolution than 2M for easier subjects such as buildings and landscapes. For portraits, I personally think resolution is not one of the primary qualities - rather the composition, sharpness, lightning, and most importantly; the expression of the subject. Having said that, I agree that a larger resolution photo (which is not just upsampled) would be an added benefit. -- Slaunger 15:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Chrumps 18:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

result: 21 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer 15:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)