Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/VanGogh Bedroom Arles
Bedroom in Arles[edit]
- Reason
- Great painting that we all know and love. Nice size, quality reproduction. Lots of color and easy to look at.
- Articles this image appears in
- Bedroom in Arles
- Creator
- Blankfaze
- Support as nominator --Bobshoe (talk) 20:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose A bit small (yes, it barely fulfills the minimum at 1024 px), but a larger scan should not be impossible to find. Also, there's a dark shade on top edge. --Janke | Talk 20:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: I added a wikilink for "Articles" and fixed the red wikilink in the caption. :) Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Conditional oppose I would love to support this one, but 225k is just too low resolution to do it. Please upload a better version so I can change to support. DurovaCharge! 06:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Too small. Clegs (talk) 19:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose A rather un-remarkable scan of a painting of a bedroom. As I do not know or love this painting, perhaps the nom could explain what is so exceptional about this that it warrants featuring. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Van Gogh is a first-rate artist and this is one of his better known works. Certainly worth featuring IMO if we get a good enough reproduction. DurovaCharge! 22:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, this painting is definitely known in its own right, so whether or not it's exceptional to you doesn't really affect its encyclopedic status. Thegreenj 00:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- The fact that it appears only in the rather thin article about itself does, however affect its encyclopedic value. This is such a well known work, that it warrants only a passing mention in van Goghs rather lengthy article. It certainly does not accurately represent a bedroom. Yeah, I'm not convinced this is anything more than another crazy painting by a crazy dutch painter. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 21:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm... If you google "Bedroom in Arles", the two out of the top three non-Wikipedia hits mention that it's one of his best know. This (along with Starry Night) is the first picture that I think of when I think of van Gogh, but I suppose that's just as irrelevant as your belief that this is a "crazy painting by a crazy artist." FWIW, this is not one of my most-liked van Gogh's; I'm partial to Wheat Field with Crows, though that one is not particularly famous in its own right, save the mistaken belief that it were his last. Just trying to make a distinction between what you find interesting and what is encyclopedic. Thegreenj 22:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Truly shocking... Still, the top three non-wikipedia results for Vincent Van Gogh fail to mention the painting anywhere outside a detailed listing of his works. VanGoghMuseum.nl gives it only brief mention it in their biography section for the period of his life in Arles [1]. The nom, the article and preferably both are going to have to demonstrate the notoriety of this work. I'm just trying make the distinction between encyclopedic value and a fondness for an absurd painting. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 02:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, if you've realised that it's absurd, you're already on your way to understanding why it was influential. 87.165.198.178 (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Truly shocking... Still, the top three non-wikipedia results for Vincent Van Gogh fail to mention the painting anywhere outside a detailed listing of his works. VanGoghMuseum.nl gives it only brief mention it in their biography section for the period of his life in Arles [1]. The nom, the article and preferably both are going to have to demonstrate the notoriety of this work. I'm just trying make the distinction between encyclopedic value and a fondness for an absurd painting. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 02:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm... If you google "Bedroom in Arles", the two out of the top three non-Wikipedia hits mention that it's one of his best know. This (along with Starry Night) is the first picture that I think of when I think of van Gogh, but I suppose that's just as irrelevant as your belief that this is a "crazy painting by a crazy artist." FWIW, this is not one of my most-liked van Gogh's; I'm partial to Wheat Field with Crows, though that one is not particularly famous in its own right, save the mistaken belief that it were his last. Just trying to make a distinction between what you find interesting and what is encyclopedic. Thegreenj 22:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- The fact that it appears only in the rather thin article about itself does, however affect its encyclopedic value. This is such a well known work, that it warrants only a passing mention in van Goghs rather lengthy article. It certainly does not accurately represent a bedroom. Yeah, I'm not convinced this is anything more than another crazy painting by a crazy dutch painter. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 21:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - Low resolution, but there's no incredible EV to back it up. —Sunday | Speak 22:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 10:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Note for the record: A higher-quality version of this image is now available at File:La Chambre à Arles, by Vincent van Gogh, from C2RMF frame cropped.jpg, if the nominator wishes to nominate it. Dcoetzee 19:28, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
