Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Covid-19-Handshake-Alternatives-v3.gif

Handshake Alternatives[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2020 at 23:20:03 (UTC)

Reason: 1. Good quality. 2. Funny. 3. Socially important. 4. Well illustrates the article.
Articles in which this image appears: Social distancing, Handshake (since 19 March 2020‎)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Other
Creator: Siouxsie Wiles and Toby Morris

Support as nominator – Andrei (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This appears to have been added to its article on March 31, well short of the 7-day waiting period for stability suggested in Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria #5, on an article that is currently very unstable. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:37, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know that there is a rule, but with all bureaucracy first featured content will be possible as early as May, and that will be irrelevant by then.--Andrei (talk) 23:49, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose Again, like with the other cartoon by the same animator, there is little EV to be gotten from this...err, display. Is the reader supposed to learn new "methods" of greeting people that don't involve physical contact? Is this a guidebook for Martians or something? Besides that, the quality of the animation is amateurish. -- Veggies (talk) 23:43, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is a guidebook for people, who keep shaking hands despite the fact it is not a good idea to do so now. It is a good visual aid, which can help in promoting the topic. The quality of the animation is within the general style of the artist. --Andrei (talk) 23:47, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not only a website for scientists. It is one of the main sources of news for normal people. And its style must appeal to them, including children. We should not be speaking only in charts and tables if we want people to understand us. --Andrei (talk) 23:56, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then I think you misunderstand the purpose of a FP. It's not to 'promote' a topic. The image and its animation have to have some measure of EV that illustrate the article (Social distancing) in a comprehensive, compelling way. This (ahem) "guide" only involves salutations, does not cover the topic of distancing in public settings by strangers, and does not explain at all the purpose of social distancing. Without any of that, it is of little encyclopedic use beyond a quasi-humorous visual aid for people who have never lived in a modern human society before. -- Veggies (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand perfectly the idea of FP, and I do think it does the job. This image gives a direct context and illustrates well the section of the article, the paragraph about avoiding physical contact. Not everyone is a Wikipedia editor, not for everyone an image by Vincent of Beauvais will be useful, despite the fact it probably has a bigger value. But when my children or my mother will google 'what is social distancing' they will end up on that Wikipedia page, and this image will help them to understand the subject, relate to it and form visual associations with what they read about. --Andrei (talk) 00:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I'm struggling to see any encyclopedic value in this image at all (as it doesn't depict what it claims to, and is basically a lame joke), and its execution is pedestrian at best. Nick-D (talk) 04:57, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Silly. – Sca (talk) 14:29, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is a cartoon. It's not a particularly good illustration. Natureium (talk) 17:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all. This seems more appropriate for Buzzfeed than Wikipedia. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:06, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't understand the strong bias against cartoons here. Regardless of the format of the illustration, it does have high EV for Social distancing as it illustrates in an easy to understand manner various alternative forms of greeting which are discussed in the text. Who cares if it looks "silly"? It conveys information well, which is the purpose of Wikipedia. Kaldari (talk) 15:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Incomplete, where's that famous elbow touch? ;-) Seriously, it's OK for an article, but not for FP. --Janke | Talk 20:27, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I agree with Kaldari. Also per David Eppstein the Social distancing article is being worked on. I would support if it stays in the article and is renominated later. Bammesk (talk) 01:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very well done animation of alternatives to handshakes. Note that the elbow bump is NOT pictured. That is because despite persistent misunderstandings by political figures among others it is not appropriate as it brings you too close. Yes in a pandemic even little things matter. And no not everything needs to appear dull to be "encyclopedic". Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not fully comprehensive selection of alternatives to handshakes, also only specific to one area(it was only the mention of hongis that alerted me to the fact it was relating to New Zealand)-there are many other alternatives in different cultures and customs that are not included. Also does not relate in any form to social distancing or the necessity for the alternative to the handshake. Lemon martini (talk) 14:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]