Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William Blake

William Blake

Original - Poet and painter William Blake, self-portrait from Songs of Innocence and Experience, published 1794.

Reason: Self-portrait in profile from Songs of Innocence and Experience, published 1794. Retained the slightly out of frame coloration of the original; Blake reputedly did such work by hand himself. Restored version of File:William Blake.jpg. Note that the pencil note on the unedited file is dated 1863, hence not by Blake himself.
Articles this image appears in: William Blake, Etching#Variants:_aquatint.2C_soft-ground_and_relief_etching
Creator: William Blake

Support as nominator --Durova³⁵¹ 19:25, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose current use~~ Support. The Thomas Phillips portrait is much more appropriate for the lead infobox. Why can't this image be used elsewhere in the article instead of replacing the Thomas Phillips portrait? Kaldari (talk) 20:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The edit summary provided a detailed rationale. If you disagree, feel free to move to a location you consider more appropriate. Durova³⁵¹ 20:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - The copyright issue is non-existent. The photograph isn't even from the NPG site (although it incorrectly stated that it was). I've moved your image further down the article (to illustrate a section that mentions the book). Kaldari (talk) 21:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks, sounds fine then. Durova³⁵¹ 23:35, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but fails size criteria, and that is before a possible cropping of the useless white border. Also, IMO no amount of restoration could help bring out the illustration, which as faded severely. Too many issues. Nezzadar [SPEAK] 01:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually our size criteria require only one axis to be 1000px or larger. So this is a valid nomination. Not sure what you mean by the claim of severe fade; this is actually in good condition. Durova³⁵² 01:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay, so you are right about size, but I say get rid of the white border, and that would then drop the size anyways. As for the drawing, it seems like his head, specifically the top and the hair, are heavily faded. Nezzadar [SPEAK] 05:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Perhaps the confusion stems from the medium. This isn't a drawing but a relief etching--a printing method Blake invented. The border crop is dictated by Blake's brush strokes. Actually that raises a good second use for this image; added to the etching article. Durova³⁵² 05:38, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose due to size and border and, while it might be a good example of a technique, I don't feel it is Feature worthy. --Silversmith Hewwo 07:43, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support this is important encyclopaedic material, it is painstakingly restored, it is not a photo and this whole file size thing is a drama that makes perhaps sense for digital photography but I think it is even there vastly overrated. GerardM (talk) 11:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support As said before, this is pain-stakingly restored (by a wikipedian no less, Wikipedia's best work!). A greater resolution than this is wholly redundant. We often forget in the digital age the nature of scale; this was produced on a small scale, meant to be displayed on a small scale and really would gain very little if more resolution was expected. Cowtowner (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral--note on EV: this is not generally considered the most significant of Blake's self-portraits, from what I've read. There's much more discussion of this one, which we don't seem to have a version of on commons (at least I can't find one). A high-res scan of that would be very welcome. Chick Bowen 22:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted - no consensus. --jjron (talk) 11:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]