Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Field Marshall Keitel signs German surrender terms in Berlin 8 May 1945 - Restoration.jpg

Field Marshall Keitel signing the German Surrender after WWII
Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2019  at 23:55:35 (UTC)
 * Reason:I think it's an iconic image of WWII. I had some doubts over the inky shadows last time. It turns out there was an undocumented restoration with an accidental bad levels adjustment, so I repeated the whole restoration from scratch. Sorry I didn't spot that sooner, LLcentury!
 * Articles in which this image appears:End of World War II in Europe, Wilhelm Keitel +5
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/History/World War II
 * Creator:Lt. Moore (US Army), restored by Adam Cuerden


 * Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.7% of all FPs 23:55, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support The thing done right. Geoffroi (talk) 01:06, 17 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose – Per opposition to previous nom three weeks ago. It's still a poorly framed old snapshot that's been published extensively for three quarters of a century. – Sca (talk) 12:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


 * An "old snapshot"?! This is the signing of one of the most important documents of the 20th century. This is the surrender of the Nazis. Surely the enormous EV should go a long way? Geoffroi (talk) 17:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Your previous oppose focused on Wikipedia having had it a long time, so it wasn't bringing anything new to the table. I'd have thought the new restoration would have at least partially dealt with your previous oppose. I mean, I don't want to tell you what to vote, but I don't quite understand your objection. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.7% of all FPs 18:42, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Sometimes great minds run in different channels. Anyhow, it's gonna be promoted this time. – Sca (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * PS:, if I'd been there with my trusty Graflex, I wudda framed it differently – even if I'd had to push Zhukov outta the way. – Sca (talk) 22:03, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Support – with thanks!!! The moment this photo captures is huge. It is like traveling in time. The viewer is given a glimpse into the past. A past that should be remember and rebuked. Look at the arrogance: the glove(s), the riding crop. Per WP:FP?, A picture's encyclopedic value (referred to as "EV") is given priority over its artistic value. --- Coffee  and crumbs  02:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support though again, pity the head of the other man is missing. :( --LLcentury (talk) 16:57, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose It might be a significant moment in history - it isn't, really - but it's still a shitty photo. Look at all the phone shots and selfies of the Mona Lisa; they aren't great photographs. It is poorly composed and cluttered. It's someone holding up their camera and pressing the button. There's nothing artistic about it. --Pete (talk) 22:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * A better shot of the Mona Lisa is always and is still possible. Without a time machine, a better shot of this moment will never be possible again. --- Coffee  and crumbs  02:44, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support for the EV. This is not Commons... ;-) --Janke | Talk 10:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support for the high-level EV. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:14, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support – image has EV (in the article as FP criteria says), historic images don't have to look good. And in this case: signing a paper takes seconds, this wasn't a photo op, this is a wartime photo, yes composition can be better, but composition isn't everything. Bammesk (talk) 15:26, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 01:57, 27 June 2019 (UTC)