Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Flickr - moses namkung - M.I.A. 7.jpg

M.I.A. (artist)[edit]

Reason: Great picture of the genre-spanning artist and activist performing.
Articles in which this image appears: M.I.A. (artist), Outside Lands Music and Arts Festival, Music festival, List of festivals in the United States, Sunglasses
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: Flickr user moses_namkung / Moses

Support as nominator --Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 1. Dynamic, captivating, I like it! The quality isn't bad, either. ~~May I request some form of noise removal?~~ Thanks. NauticaShad es 14:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy, with chromatic aberration, doesn't show the subject properly. Luca (talk) 18:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Noise is subject to the downsampling argument - if downsampled to minimum requirements, the noise will be negligible. Besides that, it should be fairly easy to fix. As for the CA, I'm not sure there's any. I think those lights might actually be purple because there are properly white lights right next to them without the same phenomenon, if that's the place you're thinking of. Otherwise, if you can point out where the CA is, something might be done about it. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 18:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 1 - Noise reduction. Jujutacular ^T · C 23:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. The image does not appear to be very sharp. With NR necessarily comes a loss of detail. At just 95 mm, a slower speed (as opposed to 1/320) should have been chosen, allowing a lower ISO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't the lack of sharpness excusable, given the size of the image? NauticaShad es 00:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - The lack of sharpness is noticeable even at low resolutions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Here's the 1000px resized version: [1]. Central subject is perfectly in focus. If you just want to suggest a different image from the same set, there are plenty of alternatives. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 09:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The encyclopedic value of this is as a lead illustration. For a living person (especially a high-profile entertainer), we'd expect a shot that shows her face more clearly. I'm sympathetic to the artistic intent here, but it isn't enough to overcome that problem. Mostlyharmless (talk) 07:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Added to Outside Lands Music and Arts Festival, Music festival, List of festivals in the United States where it has EV that is not restricted to the living person. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - How does this picture demonstrate those articles though? This could have been taken on any stage at any venue in any country... I oppose the picture per Mostlyharmless but also request that it is removed from the articles you have added this to... I for one don't look at that picture and immediately think "ooo music fesival" - I think "ooo artist on a stage"... To demonstrate those articles I would expect a picture of the venue to be used not a random artist in a picture taken at an angle that could be on any stage... Gazhiley (talk) 13:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - - EH? What you talking about "WP:BB"? I wouldn't have the first clue about editing articles - I struggle with talk pages! I was just annoyed that you have crowcared this into random articles that there's very little reason for it to be in and think you should reverse that... But it's just my opinion lets see if anyone else agrees... And please stop being so patronising - I wasn't trying to be funny... it appears your response was removed, so this response no longer is applicable Gazhiley (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Although I can tell some of you disagree, I'd argue that this image does depict the subject well. Rather than a standard portrait, this photograph shows M.I.A. in action, which in my opinion is far more valuable than a studio portrait. With this image, we get a sense of M.I.A.'s concerts, her style, etc. Is that not more important than making sure to have all her face clearly visible? NauticaShad es 14:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose The angle and sunglasses don't afford a very good view of her, IMO. And sharpness isn't great. Fletcher (talk) 22:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Added to sunglasses. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 09:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sunglasses is already well illustrated - don't see what this adds to it. Fletcher (talk) 11:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion that is actually fairly relevant to the "EV" of this nom

Hear hear... PLW why are you crowbaring this particular picture into as many articles as you can (losely) justify? This surely is only relevant to M.I.A.? Gazhiley (talk) 12:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You see, now we're getting people to actually admit that the other articles weren't previously illustrated at all. Interesting, isn't it? Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 12:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't understand sorry - who's admitted articles aren't illustrated? the only person who's mentionned an article being illustrated either way is Fletcher and that was to say Sunglasses has already got enough... No-one else has said that an article needs further illustrations... I'm confused... Gazhiley (talk) 13:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think he is saying the music festival articles weren't illustrated before he added the image to them. The problem is that this image, being a close-up of a single artist, has very limited EV for music festivals. Fletcher (talk) 13:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - That's why I was confused - I thought the same but had already stated this further up... here's a bunch of straws - fancy clutching at them?! Gazhiley (talk) 13:55, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Not sure who you're trying to address, but it seems the one who's most thoroughly embarrassed themselves here is you, by failing to suggest alternatives to the image placements, and using FPC as your personal soapbox for demanding changes being made to articles. Furthermore, you're kind of sabotaging this nomination by littering it with unnecessary discussion that, thank God, has now been folded away. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        I think it's fairly obvious who I'm trying to address here PLW. And let me assure you that there is no embarrassment either. Mainly because I haven't for ONE SECOND said I could come up with better alternatives for the articles you have "crowbarred" this picture into, other than to say that a better picture to illustrate a music festival would be a picture of the festival... Rather than a picture of a random artist who may or may not have appeared in one, especially as the picture itself could have been taken anywhere... To say that this picture is adding "EV" to the articles OTHER than M.I.A. is like saying that (for example) a picture of a swan provides EV to an article about the Thames river, just because at some point in time there MAY have been a swan spotted on the Thames... Or (again for example) a picture of me in an article about a football stadium cause I MAY have once been in that stadium... A picture of an artist DOES NOT demonstrate a music festival, it demonstrates an artist... To demonstrate a music festival you need a picture of a music festival! How can I put this any clearer?! And this is not sabotaging an article either - this is me stating my opinion about why I think this has low EV for the articles other than M.I.A. Gazhiley (talk) 15:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        You're still missing the point. There's no "crowbarring" if the article was previously entirely unillustrated. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 23:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; I agree with those above. The EV is highest in MIA, but it's hardly the best illustration of the subject. J Milburn (talk) 12:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for low EV. As per J Milburn, it's highest in MIA, although even that's not alot - we see more of her chin than her face, but not really at all in the others. Against the black backdrop of the stage, you can barely see the sunglasses, and we only really see one complete lens, and that's at a poor angle. We can assume that she's on stage outside somewhere, but it's impossible to tell from the image that it is a music festival, so doesn't really illustrate any of the three music festival pages. Matthewedwards : Chat 22:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very awkward portrait. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 01:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 07:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]