Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Keep Calm and Carry On

Keep Calm and Carry On

 * Reason:Very emotive and powerful poster, which says a lot. I have it on the cover of a book next to me, on my wall at home, and I have seen the it (and bastardisations) on clothing and the like- in Britain, it is comparable to the likes of the famous Che Guevara photo in terms of its iconic status. This svg is a perfect reproduction, and, as an svg, can appear at any size necessary. There can be no better illustration for the article on the poster itself, and is a decent addition to the other articles on which it is used. I think it could probably be used in other articles as well. Has that "wow" factor that we're not allowed to talk about, and meets all the criteria, as far as I can see. Yes, it's simple, but it's certainly a highly valuable addition to the encyclopedia.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Keep Calm and Carry On, motivational poster, Ministry of Information (United Kingdom)
 * Creator:UK Government (design), Evilandi (svg)


 * Support as nominator --J Milburn (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. An an adopted Brit, I appreciate the symbolism of this, and the enc is high in the articles. There's something strange about using an SVG version of historical illustration, but of course it's the design rather than the poster reproduction that creates the impact. &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  21:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Especially as the design now has significance within popular culture. J Milburn (talk) 22:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support, although I think it fits much better within the category of propaganda than in motivational posters. Mostlyharmless (talk) 00:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak support The SVG of something historical coupled with the relative simplicity of the image puts me off a bit, but it's a crystal clear illustration. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Needs counterclockwise rotation. Durova  405 05:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak conditional oppose pending rotation. Too bad it isn't in raster graphics or I'd do the correction.  If rotated, count this as support.  Durova  408 17:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You've obviously got better eyes than me- I can't see it. Is there somewhere I can request this? J Milburn (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a graphics lab that usually has vector editors available. Needs about a tenth of a degree rotation.  Take a close look at the text from left to right; once you see it it jumps out and becomes distracting.  Happens all the time with historic material.  Durova  409 18:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've made a request at the lab and got a reply- can we perhaps have this request on hold while this is worked on? Apparently, there are a few other issues that need to be fixed. J Milburn (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, I was doing it when you added this. Replaced the figures of the letter by text and centered it (they come horizontal by default). Still I see them rotated. Maybe some optical illusion?  franklin   21:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Please revert and upload under a different name. The two are different and now there are two conflicting requests. -- Zoo Fari  21:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I've got a mug with this on! It's Blue on my mug though, but I assume that is no issue just choice of the mug maker... Gazhiley (talk) 12:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm concerned that the vectorization is not perfectly made, particularly the text which is all crooked and misaligned. There's no rotation necessary, it's just that the shapes are slanted, most likely due to straight forward trace from a raster. Needs to be reworked. -- Zoo Fari  20:43, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * See my comment above- your assessment is probably right, and it is being worked on. Perhaps it would be best to put this nomination on hold. J Milburn (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, missed it. -- Zoo Fari  21:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Wouldn't this be more authentic if it was a high resolution scan of an original? Noodle snacks (talk) 21:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: These were never actually used, as such- it's the design that's famous, not the poster. J Milburn (talk) 00:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Might I point out that the font of the text on the original posters used is different to the one in the nomination: . (Check the K, C, A and R for clarification.) I don't think it looks nice as a consequence. If I remember correctly, the original nomination (before the text was rotated) had it right, though. Also, the crown needs rotating; it wasn't just the text. 79.67.154.166 (talk) 21:59, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Already reverted my edition to the poster. this website claims that the second picture is one of the originals. Can someone recognize what is the font being used? If it is really one the originals it would be good to have it. If there were no original prints at all then it doesn't matter.  franklin   00:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The posters "have a unique and recognisable typography" according to our article. The font on the current image certainly matches the one used on my book cover. I also have a poster of it from The Times- I'm afraid I can't compare that myself, as I will not be home again for several weeks. J Milburn (talk) 00:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I was asking for the font so that, when fixing the alignment of the letters, I can use the right one.  franklin   01:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Grr. A search in Google give many places saying that it is not a specific font but something hand drawn. We will have to just move the letters already there.  franklin   01:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Definitely seen this and heard the phrase before. Noodle snacks (talk) 03:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose this picture is very fit for VP but I see no reason why this is worthwhile featuring. Nergaal (talk) 22:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It meets every criteria? High resolution, high quality, accurate, a strong addition to the articles in which it is used, freely licensed- to boot, it is a historically and socially important image in the UK, and evokes a wide variety of emotional responses? Seems like the perect FPC to me. J Milburn (talk) 23:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've commented on the closure of this nomination at the FPC talk page: Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates.  Mae din \talk 18:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Nergaal -- mcshadypl T C  21:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Can we please keep this open or relist it? We have a new alternative from the graphic lab, made from scratch. I will ask the author to come and explain it. J Milburn (talk) 12:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Considering the number of votes that would need to be updated, perhaps it would be more suitable to close this and create a new nom for the latest version.  Mae din \talk 14:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That was my thoughts too. &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  14:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi there, author here. I've retraced it by hand and it should be a nice improvement. I'd be more than happy to address my views on this Featured Picture candidate, but the new nomination does seem like a good idea rather than have the mess of vote changing. Of course, I'm open to whatever we all agree upon; just let me know anything else you need from me (and where you want me to write about it!) Mononomic (talk) 15:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Featured picture candidates/Keep Calm and Carry On 2. J Milburn (talk) 17:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

— Mae din \talk 17:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not promoted in favour of new version nominated here: Featured picture candidates/Keep Calm and Carry On 2