Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Swami Vivekananda Baranagar 1887

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Swami Vivekananda and other brother monks at Baranagar Math, 1887[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 May 2013 at 11:09:01 (UTC)

Original – Swami Vivekananda and other brother monks in Baranagar Math 1887
Original – Swami Vivekananda and other brother monks in Baranagar Math 1887
Reason
This is a very important image taken on 30 January 1887 in Calcutta, India. At least 6 people in this image became famous later. The main person in this image Swami Vivekananda (standing third from the left in this photo)– a social reformer — his birthday is celebrated in India as National Youth Day.
Moreover 2013 is being celebrated as Swami Vivekananda's 150th birth anniversary.
More details on the people in the image may be found in the file description page.
Articles in which this image appears
Swami Vivekananda
Swami Shivananda
Mahendranath Gupta
Swami Ramakrishnananda
Swami Abhedananda
Swami Niranjanananda (Niranjan Maharaj)
Swami Saradananda
Swami Trigunatitananda
FP category for this image
History
Creator
Creator unknown (1887 image)
Date request

If passed, can it be featured on 31 May. On 31 May (1893) Vivekananda started his journey for Chicago from Bombay (currently Mumbai)Citation

  • Support as nominator --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Reluctant oppose - While I would love to see a good copy of this image at FP, this is extremely JPEG artefacted, and lowish resolution even before that. If a better copy can be found, I'd love to support it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I can increase resolution (current resolution 1,999 × 1,208 pixels). I can work on image quality too, but I am very much reluctant to do it. This is an 1887 image, so I am interested to keep the "original" version! --Tito Dutta (contact) 12:38, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately, JPEG artefacting is not original. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Reluctant oppose. Despite the important historical value of the photograph, the presently nominated digitized version diminishes the quality of the original picture. A close inspection reveals this to be a very JPEG compressed scan of a halftone print of the picture, likely from a book or newspaper, and not a scan of the original photo. I may reconsider the oppose if it is shown that a better quality version is impossible to obtain. dllu (t,c) 23:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Adam Cuerden. The encyclopedic value of this photograph is indisputably high, but this particular copy of the photograph is not up to FP standards. Spikebrennan (talk) 12:56, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Adding an alternative version! --Tito Dutta (contact) 13:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support alternative. The alternative version is greatly superior. However, please copy the meaningful information in the file description and licensing information to the new picture. dllu (t,c) 18:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I was thinking to delete the second image after finishing this discussion and reupload it as a newer version on the first image.. redundant to each other, at least one should be deleted! --Tito Dutta (contact) 18:34, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment - The ALT seems much, much blurrier at thumbnail size. Why'd you save it as a png? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support alternative, per dlu Tech Addict, Fan-Ficion Writer, and Aspiring Filmaker 19:41, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose both There is a clearly visible raster covering both scans. Are these scans of a original picture, or something that have been printed in for example a book? P. S. Burton (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)