Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/1896 $1 Silver Certificate

1896 $1 Silver Certificate

An 1896 $1 Silver Certificate.

The obverse of an 1896 $1 Silver Certificate from the Educational Series. The Goddess History instructing a youth, pointing to a panoramic vista view of the Potomac River and Washington D.C. The Washington Monument and the US Capitol Building is visible in the background. The United States Constitution is displayed to the right. Circling around the motif are the last names of famous Americans.

This particular note demonstrates the neoclassical allegorical motif that makes this series unique in US Currency. Very few US notes match the beauty in the 3 note set. The rest of the notes can be seen in the article Educational Series. Plus, I have yet to see Paper Money appear as a FP. Already a few coins have made the list and attempted to get on.

While taken from a commercial site, because it is an image of a product of currency produced by the United States Goverment, the image automaticlly falls under public domain and is not subjected to copyright.

Nominate and support. - 293.xx.xxx.xx 00:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I believe this is too small to be a FP and it also does not show the fine lines clearly - artifacts. sorry. Witty lama 03:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Yes, it is too small. Please see Wikipedia:What is a featured picture? --Tewy 04:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Historical exemption, per the rules. Unless someone can clean it up.--293.xx.xxx.xx 05:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, but since it's a scan, I'd like to see a larger version. (And I'm also opposing per Witty lama) --Tewy 06:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Historical exemption should not apply for a scan of an object that could be found in excellent condition in collections today. There's no reasons someone couldn't make a super high quality scan of a near-perfect specimen. --Dgies 07:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Witty lama. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 04:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, seriously lacking in fine detail. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 06:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. While this may be a rare, historic bill, I imagine there is someone out there that owns this and can produce a better scan. --Andrew c 18:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - resolution and artifacts; historical considerations are moot for items like this where a re-scan is perfectly feasible. --YFB ¿ 23:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too small, not HIDef enough. Sharkface217 19:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I'm sure there is a better scan out there. NauticaShad e s 15:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --YFB ¿ 14:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]