Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/United States Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Secretary of Health and Human Services
I used the featured list United States Secretary of Energy as the precedent in editing this article to help build it to featured list status. The list is informative, interesting, well-sourced and visually appealing.-- Southern Texas  22:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, as the nominator.-- Southern Texas  22:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support following my edits. --Golbez (talk) 00:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Neutral: It feels very redundant to have images in the table, and ten other images next to it of the same people, and downright silly to have a "no free image" icon for Harris, and next to it, and image with her...Circeus (talk) 05:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose: The list is undeniably attractive and comprehensive in its scope, but I have concerns about the article content:
 * Like Circeus, I think it's odd to have images in the table and also have images of the same people next to the table. Keep the images in the table, but lose the others. That black-and-white photo of Harris could go in the article about her. In the table, you probably could use the postage stamp image of Patricia Roberts Harris (on this USPS web page); the webpage says "The stamp art features a photograph of Harris, taken in the late 1970s by a staff photographer for the Department of Housing and Urban Development," indicating to me that it's a work of the US government.
 * Nope; stamps are copyrighted by the USPS: "All U.S. postage stamps and other postage items that were released before 1978 are in the public domain. The postal service holds copyright to such materials released after 1978 under Title 17 of the United States Code. Written permission is required for use of copyrighted postage stamp images." from USPS. I'm sorry, but I have to delete the image and remove it from the article, as I don't see this falling under fair use. --Golbez (talk) 04:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The campaign button of Schweiker is a creative element, but I am offended by the caption that says "the first male Secretary of Health and Human Services". He was only the second person in the position, for crying out loud; there is no valid point in saying he was the first male.
 * Additionally, the lead section does not fulfill its purpose of "summarizing the scope of the list". The first sentence in the lead section says the DHHS is "concerned with health matters," which is an incomplete description of the scope of this department. The statement in United States Department of Health and Human Services is more comprehensive. Also, I cannot see how the last 4 sentences (beginning with "After the attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks...") help to introduce or explain the list; those sentences are totally gratuitous. DHHS is a large department with a diverse range of roles; I think it should be possible to say something more meaningful about its history and the history of its leadership.
 * --Orlady (talk) 03:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for showing me the link to that image, I uploaded it. Also the images on the right are there both for aestetic purposes, and for going deeper in depth about significant "firsts" for the Secretaries. They are all different images than the ones in the list. I explained thoroughly in depth about the importance of the position since the initiation of the war on terrorism in order to show the amount of responsibility that was been placed on the position.-- S    TX   04:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * IMHO, the position of Secretary of DHHS was plenty important before 2001. This is an historical list of everyone who ever held the position over 28 years. The introduction should not place heavy emphasis on one topic that has received attention in the last six years. As for the captions about "firsts," it seems excessive to highlight "firsts" within a list that includes only eight people. --Orlady (talk) 05:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I have to delete the image and remove it from the article, as I don't see this falling under fair use; the stamp is from 1999 and copyrighted. --Golbez (talk) 04:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I should be sorry, I should have been more careful, but at least this has been taken care of fast.-- S    TX   04:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's no problem, you were only trying to help. :) --Golbez (talk) 04:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for being the source of misleading information. There is an official-portrait-style photo of Harris at http://hhsu.learning.hhs.gov/womenshistory07/hhs.html (a US government site). I have not found any info about the copyright status of the photos there. --Orlady (talk) 05:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I cropped the current photo of Harris and inserted it in the table. --Orlady (talk) 04:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose: I have to agree with the above that having two columns of photos is distracting. Second, "first male" is downright silly.  Second (a), "male" is wikilinked, but "woman" is not ?? Third, WP:UNDUE regarding the war on terror - this list has very little to do with the war on terror. Fourth, could the columns be sortable? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  01:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I withdraw the nomination, apparantly editors don't see the importance of the War on Terrorism on this cabinet position nor did they see Secretary of Energy. I'd rather it stay in this state than be featured since this state is much much better than what the opposes want this list to be.-- S    TX   02:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)