Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Journey

The Journey

Original - "The Journey": illustration by Elizabeth Shippen Green for a series of poems by Josephine Preston Peabody, entitled "The Little Past", which relate experiences of childhood from a child's perspective. Poems and illustration were published in Harper's Magazine, December 1903. Restored digital file from original oil painting.

Reason: Believe it or not, the only example of illustration at children's literature was a small black and white nonfree image until this took its place. Elizabeth Shippen Green was a children's book illustrator and this example seems especially apt: a child peers through a train window and imagines palaces in the air. Scanned from the original oil painting and restored from File:The Journey.jpg. Lower resolution version for slower connections available at File:The_Journey2_courtesy_copy.jpg.
Articles this image appears in: Elizabeth Shippen Green, Children's literature, Josephine Preston Peabody
Creator: Elizabeth Shippen Green

Support as nominator --Durova^Charge! 16:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A propos of nothing, you're prompting me to look for some good hi-res scans of the N.C. Wyeth illustrations for books like Treasure Island. Spikebrennan (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC). I can't upload from where I am, but what about this? [1][reply]
Support This is encyclopedic and relates to the subject very well. An excellent illustration! Mimigu (talk) 03:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent EV and simply beautiful. Makeemlighter (talk) 13:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Mimigu. Fletcher (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - beautiful in detail. Complete and informative caption. —Mattisse (Talk) 20:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Are we certain that this is a picture of an oil painting? I don't know that much about painting and the different media, but this doesn't look like an oil to me. Would someone be able to elaborate? Maedin\^talk 19:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That's what it says in the Library of Congress bibliographic notes.[2] Durova^Charge! 19:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - What is the likelihood that they may have it labelled incorrectly? I'm not certain that the Library of Congress could have got it wrong, but I think it would be very embarrassing to feature a painting as an oil when it might not be. Shame my oil painter friend and I have separated, or I would ask him. Does anyone else think this looks like an oil? Maedin\^talk 20:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - See WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:NOR. Durova^Charge! 20:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thank you, I know all of those. I wasn't suggesting that it be labelled as something else; I was suggesting that it needn't be heralded in the caption if there was some reasonable doubt. I'm not even suggesting that my doubts are reasonable, which is why I was asking for further opinions, which haven't been provided yet. Maedin\^talk 20:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        We have no source as a basis for doubting the accuracy of the caption. There are many styles of oil painting, and a highly reliable source that states this is in that medium. If a new source emerges to contradict that, then of course that would be a different matter. Durova^Charge! 20:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:The Journey2.jpg MER-C 06:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]