Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sue Gardner

Sue Gardner edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2018 at 23:29:07 (UTC)

 
OriginalSue Gardner in February 2013
 
Alt 1
Reason
I think the only objection I could see to this excellent photograph is whether it's too Wikipedia-focused. This is easily dismissed: A. She's had othe major positions outwith Wikipedia. B. She was ranked the 70th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes. C. We have a fucking featured picture of Jimbo, so, that's an objection now?
Articles in which this image appears
Sue Gardner, Criticism of Wikipedia, Gender bias on Wikipedia
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Business
Creator
Victoria Will
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs 23:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I think the acute angle to her face is unencyclopedic. Something like the image in this article is much better. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Both poses (or are they candid 'action' shots?) by a commercial photographer seem rather odd. Also, WP:NAVEL. – Sca (talk) 14:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think that if we have a picture of Jimbo in FP (we do), it would be odd deny Gardner on WP:NAVEL grounds. I think that might be a case for considering not putting her on the Main Page, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs 16:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt 1 – for lead image in her article. Bammesk (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both I don't think that either image is FP-worthy. The original is a striking portrait (and the best choice for the infobox, IMO), but doesn't have FP-level EV as it doesn't clearly show her face and is too posed. Alt 1 is clearer, but also isn't a great portrait due to the facial expression. Nick-D (talk) 04:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]