Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Yellow hard hat

Yellow hard hat


This is a fine, if unassuming, image uploaded by Chris 73 for use in the hard hat article; it is also currently used to illustrate job stubs.


 * Nominate and support. - Anetode 23:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's a great picture of a yellow hard hat, and will - I'm sure - illustrate and add wonderfully to one or two articles on head-gear and so on. However, the humble hard-hat will always struggle to achieve the "wow!" factor on its own. --bodnotbod 06:52, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * comment: This is precisely why I nominated it. As you stated, this is a great picture and illustrates its article wonderfully.  The "wow" factor seems like a bit of a jaded judgement though, since it deprecates the subject (...of hard hats).  For instance, would you vote against the (already featured) picture of a Nikon lens because lenses generally lack that certain je ne sais quoi? --Anetode
 * Although I understand that the FP criteria does not demand that pictures contain a "wow" factor, there must be something that sets this image apart from an ordinary picture. For a photograph of an object, I would suppose that there must be something in the photograph itself that is beautiful or extraordinary or "wow"-ing; otherwise, every clear picture of an apple, a tree or a table will get promoted as an FP. I think this is slightly distinguished from the Nikon camera lens picture you linked to; the camera lens picture contains interesting details in the numbers, whereas this picture of a hard hat unfortunately does not enlighten me further than that a hard hat is a) a hat b) hard and c) can come in yellow. Enochlau 11:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I concur with Botnotbod. Enochlau 07:04, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * :) Lightning hat eh? Enochlau 13:44, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I think that an image needs to engage the reader and somehow interest the reader and compel them to read on about the subject matter which is depicted. This can be achieved many ways, the "wow" factor, artistic composition, shocking or titillating subject, historical rarity, etc. With skill, you can even make what would ordinarily be a boring thing (camera lens, as noted above) into something substantially more intriguing and even evocative of the function with which it is involved, in that particular case it is the use of interesting lighting techniques. This, is...well....just a hardhat. It illustrates the subject at hand satisfactorily but goes no further than that and that is why I can't support it for FP. --Deglr6328 08:11, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's just a hard hat. Alr 19:42, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. From the user that created it's page on the stockxchng site "The sale of the images is prohibited. It is prohibited the use of the images in works promoting intolerance, hate or racism.". The sites license is ambigious, and uploaders are not forced to view it. Thus the image is unfree. I have a nice white hardhat and could easily make a compariable picture, but it wouldn't be as striking as the yellow one. --Gmaxwell 05:32, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Also from the users page: "Nearly all my images are without restrictions.
 * You can include them in your personal or commercial works.
 * The sale of the images (for example: the inclusion in a commercial stock photos collection) is prohibited."
 * I have sent an e-mail to the artist asking for clarification concerning the licensing of this image, the image is possibly unfree. --Anetode 06:47, 22 October 2005 (UTC)


 * excerpted: At http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=profile&l=brokenarts you state that: Nearly all my images are without restrictions.You can include them in your personal or commercial works. The sale of the images (for example: the inclusion in a commercial stock photos collection) is prohibited. It is prohibited the use of the images in works promoting intolerance, hate or racism.
 * This policy is a little confusing, would you consider Wikipedia's use of this image to be consistent with your policy concerning commercial works?
 * Received reply:
 * From: broken-arts.com 
 * To:
 * Date: Oct 22, 2005 4:38 AM
 * Subject: Re: Use of "Protection helmet" image
 * Wikipedia id ALWAYS consistent with my policy. :)
 * Davide Guglielmo (brokenarts)  --Anetode 12:40, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination, as per Gmaxwell. &mdash; BRIAN 0918 &bull; 2005-10-22 06:35
 * Removed - inappropriate nomination ed g2s  &bull;  talk  13:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

