Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Mikado 1895

c. 1895 The Mikado vocal score cover
Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2013 at 14:30:14 (UTC)
 * Reason:An illustration for the Mikado, from the authors' lifetimes, which, while simple, is also highly appealing. Probably one of the best examples of an embossed book cover on Wikipedia, and if I could find an article that actually talked about embossed book covers...
 * Articles in which this image appears:The Mikado
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Theatre
 * Creator:Anonymous.


 * Support as nominator -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment If this is a book cover, wouldn't it be nicer to see the whole book (i.e. not have the edges so tightly cropped)? 86.160.83.253 (talk) 17:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That is literally impossible. The book just fits my scanner, and, unfortunately, photography has a maximum resolution way, way under scanning. Particularly with the only cameras I have. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You couldn't do it in two halves and stitch it together? 86.160.83.253 (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's a very hard cover - probably wood boards - and, in stupid-but-almost-ubiquitous design elements, scanners tend to have ridges around the outside. If something doesn't lay reasonably flat, the scan tends to suffer blurriness rather badly, and at 600dpi, it wouldn't take much to look blurry. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Support although it looks a little dark to me. Cripes Adam, good thing they're increasing maximum file size on Commons. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:28, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Adam, I don't think PD-UK-anon is going to work here. A book cover is legally considered corporate authorship, ascribed to the publisher. The underlying drawing or etching would be work-for-hire. Chick Bowen 23:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From work for hire: "In the European Union, even if a Member State provides for the possibility of a legal person to be the original rightholder (such as is possible in the UK), then the duration of protection is in general the same as the copyright term for a personal copyright: i.e., for a literary or artistic work, 70 years from the death of the human author, or in the case of works of joint authorship, 70 years from the death of the last surviving author. If the natural author or authors are not identified, nor become known subsequently, then the copyright term is the same as that for an anonymous or pseudonymous work, i.e. 70 years from publication for a literary or artistic work; or, if the work has not been published in that time, 70 years from creation." - so it works out exactly the same either way. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In the UK, "Prior to 1 August 1989 though, the copyright in photographs, portraits and engravings (and only those types of work) which were created as a result of a commission were owned by the commissioner and NOT the creator." From UK IPO. Chick Bowen 01:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Just to add: this in indisputably free in the US. Worst-case scenario is it needs to be reuploaded locally, and we have previously allowed such images to be featured. However, I don't think this is merely a technicality: we should be precise about authorship whenever possible. Chick Bowen 01:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The interior material cites the International Copyright Act; here's the text of that as of 1886: http://copy.law.cam.ac.uk/cam/tools/request/showRepresentation.php?id=representation_uk_1886&pagenumber=1_1&imagesize=small Since it doesn't mention work for hire in any way, so far as I see, I'm not sure the concept existed at the time. Are there even commons copyright tags for Anonymous work for hire? Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, well. Uploaded locally,. which should resolve the issues, since only US copyright matters here on en-wiki. For status on commons, see commons:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 *  Conditional Support, assuming the copyright is cleared up. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  20:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Should be 100% unambiguous now. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see no copyright issue with the local version. Chick Bowen 23:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Vote updated. Thanks fellas. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  00:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Support. Chick Bowen 23:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Was waiting for © to be resolved. Nice work, gorgeous cover. I can't decide if I agree with Crisco 1492; I thought it was a wee bit dark yesterday but now it's fine. Ambient lighting in the room. Anyway, I'm good. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 03:24, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose While this is an excellent reproduction of the cover of this early copy of a vocal score, I don't think the cover of this early vocal score has strong EV for the article. Is the illustration notable? Is it discussed in the article? Is it artistically wonderful? Does it tell us a lot (or much at all) about the opera? Colin°Talk 08:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 14:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)