Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Peder Severin Krøyer

Peder Severin Krøyer
Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2012 at 08:47:56 (UTC)
 * Reason:A self portrait of the notable Norwegian-Danish painter Peder Severin Krøyer. High quality, great resolution and details.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Peder Severin Krøyer
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
 * Creator:Peder Severin Krøyer


 * Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 08:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment It appears there are some doubts as to the authenticity of this painting (in Danish). Its provenance is a little muddy and it is very close to the 1888 Uffizi self-portrait which has long been thought to be the only self-portrait by Krøyer from that year. The director of the Skagens museum was apparently unable to confirm its veracity between its listing in the Dorotheum catalogue and its sale in October 2011. If it is a forgery, it is a good one, but while there is doubt there are alternative self portraits to use.  Yomangani talk 12:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Normally whether a painting is a fake officially comes down to its inclusion (or not) in a catalogue raisonné, and given the emphasis on verifiability and not truth if it's in its in and if its out its out and it would therefore be very important to know. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:16, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not. It was unknown until it materialised from a private collection in 2011. (Thankfully we've dispensed with the terrible "verifiability not truth" now anyway) Yomangani talk 11:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC) 7
 * So we have a choice whether to accept a lower standard of proof than the experts. However, we must still be sufficient sure about its licencing - if we doubt the authorship more than negligibly, that means that it may still be in copyright. Speaking of which the file doesn't have a valid US copyright tag, e.g. PD-100. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Copyright and authenticity are very closely related questions. If it is a forgery, the forger obviously owns the copyright, but will probably be unable to make any claims on it without risking legal trouble himself, making it a de facto free image. If it is an authentic Krøyer, it only has a valid US copyright tag (don't let the template text fool you, the US term is life + 70 years since it was first published in 2011), but is not free enough for commons since it is protected by the 25 years publication rights in the European Union. The only completely safe thing to do licensing-wise is to revert to the grayscale version, which is taken from a 1912 book and completely in the clear, and then revision-delete the colour version. They are different paintings anyway, even though they look almost identical, so maybe they should be uploaded as different files even if this version is kept around. 90.184.205.91 (talk) 17:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 23:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)