Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Einat Kalisch-Rotem

Einat Kalisch-Rotem
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2019  at 17:50:44 (UTC)
 * Reason:Good quality and high EV
 * Articles in which this image appears:Einat Kalisch-Rotem
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Political
 * Creator:Edward Kaprov


 * Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 17:50, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Geoffroi  20:48, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Subject image, though technically OK, is unremarkable and of scant visual interest. Pic. (with artificial studio BG) and the brief article seem largely promotional, lacking significance or EV. Not appropriate for Main Page. – Sca (talk) 15:00, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * She's the mayor of the third biggest city in Israel, and the first female in this role, certainly notable. Tomer T (talk) 20:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * ... in Israel perhaps. Looks like an official photo. – Sca (talk) 23:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * So we shouldn't feature for example a picture of Bill Peduto, Ras Baraka, Lou Leon Guerrero or Mia Mottley? Tomer T (talk) 13:43, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Please explain to users involved here why a static photo of Einat Kalisch-Rotem would be of interest to a sizeable portion of Main Page readers of the English-language Wikipedia. – 'Bye. – Sca (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I already did. Tomer T (talk) 20:46, 28 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. Much more interesting that Sca's references to the real and definitely not made up featured picture criterion #17: "must be of interest to a sizeable portion of Main Page readers of the English language Wikipedia". Josh Milburn (talk) 18:14, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Regarding picture quality, I have to agree with Sca. While this is a very useful photo of a notable person, it's a fairly stock-standard promo photo which gives no hint at all as to why we have an article on her. A high quality photo of Dr Kalisch-Rotem doing something or in a setting associated with the reason for her notability would be vastly superior. Nick-D (talk) 21:40, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Tomer T has convinced me. I can not see how it is technically different from, for example, File:Théophile Thoré by Nadar.jpg (which seems to be the main argument against). This is a studio portrait indeed, but it is made far more dramatic than all those official portraits (many of them have QI status) --Andrei (talk) 00:04, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Support It has the modern standard blue-grey background, but that's far less distracting than the cheesy American flag background a lot of the American politicians get, and, frankly, I think we're often way too harsh. If it's an action shot, like Fannie Lou Hamer, we object to the pose not being perfect; if it's staged, we object it's staged. What do we expect? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 09:14, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comparing modern photos to early portraits like that is a bit odd. It was very difficult to take photos outside a studio setting in the 1850s due to the limits of the technology at the time, and even then subjects had to sit or stand very still. We happily don't have that problem any more! Nick-D (talk) 10:18, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I Support. Good quality. Notable personality. DreamSparrow  Chat   19:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 19:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)