Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sue Gardner

Sue Gardner
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2018  at 23:29:07 (UTC)
 * Reason:I think the only objection I could see to this excellent photograph is whether it's too Wikipedia-focused. This is easily dismissed: A. She's had othe major positions outwith Wikipedia. B. She was ranked the 70th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes. C. We have a fucking featured picture of Jimbo, so, that's an objection now?
 * Articles in which this image appears:Sue Gardner, Criticism of Wikipedia, Gender bias on Wikipedia
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Business
 * Creator:Victoria Will


 * Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about % of all FPs 23:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I think the acute angle to her face is unencyclopedic. Something like the image in this article is much better.  JJ Harrison (talk) 05:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * How about the alt? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about % of all FPs 10:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Support the alt. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment – Both poses (or are they candid 'action' shots?) by a commercial photographer seem rather odd. Also, WP:NAVEL. – Sca (talk) 14:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that if we have a picture of Jimbo in FP (we do), it would be odd deny Gardner on WP:NAVEL grounds. I think that might be a case for considering not putting her on the Main Page, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about % of all FPs 16:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Alt 1 – for lead image in her article. Bammesk (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose both I don't think that either image is FP-worthy. The original is a striking portrait (and the best choice for the infobox, IMO), but doesn't have FP-level EV as it doesn't clearly show her face and is too posed. Alt 1 is clearer, but also isn't a great portrait due to the facial expression. Nick-D (talk) 04:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 23:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)