Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Madame de Pompadour

Madame de Pompadour

 * Reason:Not long ago a few FPC regulars commented about the shortage of women in Wikipedia's featured pictures. So here is one of the leading figures of eighteenth century politics and intellectual life: Madame de Pompadour.  She ran a salon where Voltaire was a frequent guest and she encouraged Denis Diderot to pursue his Encyclopédie project, which became the first modern multi-volume encyclopedia.  During the 1750s she determined a good part of France's military and diplomatic policy.  A commoner by birth who rose through talent and determination, her physical relations with the king ended in 1750 and she selected later partners for him, while as official mistress she functioned as the equivalent to an important minister of state.  A good portrait for its era on technical merits and a quality file large enough for nomination.
 * Articles this image appears in:Madame de Pompadour, Bonnet (headgear), Embroidery hoop
 * Creator:François-Hubert Drouais


 * Support as nominator Durova Charge! 07:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It's a bit small, though otherwise very good. Can we find a bigger one? Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 08:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll replace it if I can. Durova Charge! 08:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Bigger would be nicer, but it is big enough. faithless   (speak)  11:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 18:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose Small-ish, alone not enough to oppose, but combined with some serious jpeg artifacts... Thegreenj 01:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Unusual dress fabric (likely a painted silk rather than an embroidered one), lovely illustration of period use of lace and striped ribbons, and a stunning floor-standing tambour frame, all of which are of encyclopedic interest. - PKM (talk) 07:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose per Thegreenj. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  13:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Artifacted and too small. Of course size is a perfectly valid reason to oppose in a case like this. Just like we excuse sub par sizes for irreproducible images we should enforce above par sizes for simple reproductions. Quite frankly I do not see the point in featuring every single ok quality scan of some old painting we have (same with NASA pics by the way). And I find the lack of quality original shots on FPC a bit disappointing/frustrating lately. Sorry, but I had to get that off my chest... --Dschwen 03:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- too artifacted.  howcheng  {chat} 20:14, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 09:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)