Commons:Valued image candidates/Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg/Archive of previous reviews

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search 
MVR Scores: 
1. Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: 0  <--
2. Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: 0 (current VI within same scope)
=>
File:Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: Undecided. <--
File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: Undecided.
--Myrabella (talk) 07:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated by User:Missionary on 2010-10-12 18:05 (UTC).

reason=I'm attempting to revive this discussion, as I believe this is the better image of Dilma Rousseff available on Commons. It was uploaded in the meantime since the current VI, Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg, was promoted. This is a studio picture, thus we should not expect it to contain geocoding information. In this picture, she's facing the camera directly, rather than looking upwards, and is smiling.

 Info -- This is the challenging VI, in a new discussion. Please add new comments and votes below.

 Support - Missionary (talk) 17:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the nominator, you cannot vote. --Eusebius (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Support this is the best. Prowiki (talk) 20:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Support The edges look jagged, but that's only in the thumbnail, not at review size. Otherwise, this picture is superior. --MichaelBueker (talk) 15:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, retracting my support in favor of the third candidate. --MichaelBueker (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Support because she looks really so now, october 2010, and because she selected this picture as the most representative for her electoral campaign, as I've seen at TV.--Jebulon (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image was produced for electoral purposes. It's a election campaign publicity pic , campaign not ended. Partial. -- VIGI-AP (talk) 14:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment "Commons" is international. I'm not brazilian, and don't really care about the final result of the election. I cannot be partial then. She looks so now, and only here between the other pictures of here. That's the point.--Jebulon (talk) 23:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - It's hard for me to see how a image can be seen as "Partial", but, although released under a free license, this image has truly been used for her campaign during 2010 brazilian presidential election. Aside from the "Partial" bias, I agree with VIGI comments, noting that this image would not satisfy criteria 1 and 2. Could satisfy 2 with the scope was "Dilma Roussef in 2010 Brazilian Presidential Campaign". The image does not have to be recent to satisfy these criteria. Flávio, o Maddox go! 16:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support because she looks really so now, at october 2010. Ricco21 (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
MVR Scores: 
1. Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: +1  <--
2. Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: -2 (current VI within same scope)
3. Dilma (2009).jpg: -2
=>
File:Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: Promoted. <--
File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former.
File:Dilma (2009).jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 20:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Dilma_Rousseff_2010.jpg/Archive_of_previous_reviews&oldid=48264702"