Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Gettysburg Address

Hay Copy of the Gettysburg Address[edit]

Reason: Historically significant, this is one of the great speeches of the American Civil War, and this copy is said to be "the most inexplicable of the five copies Lincoln made." I therefore feel this should be a Featured Picture.
Proposed caption: Image of the "Hay Draft" of the Gettysburg Address, in Abraham Lincoln's handwriting, from the Library of Congress website
Articles this image appears in: Gettysburg Address
Creator: Technically Abraham Lincoln, licence is {{PD-US}}

Support as nominator TomStar81 (Talk) 07:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice historical document scan. Cat-five - talk 10:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Weird splotches, especially obvious in the top left corner. Is this really what the document looks like or is this just poor depth of color in the scan? Spikebrennan 13:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably say it's a moire pattern. Either way, there's gotta be a higher resolution and better scan out there somewhere. MER-C 13:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Not detailed enough, no "wow". Enc is high, but that's not enough, IMO. I'd say the splotches are Newton rings. --Janke | Talk 14:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. Way too small. Can be rescanned, so the "small sizes are acceptable for historical pictures" rule doesn't apply, and a larger version probably exists on someone's computer anyway. However, what really destroys the picture is the moire or what it is - this is not how the document actually looks like! --Aqwis 14:59, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This is a common misconception; our FP criteria states explicitly that "Still images are a minimum of 1000 pixels in width or height; larger sizes are generally preferred." This image is 640 × 1031 pixel, and therefore meets minum FP criteria. If you wish to object on some other grounds, feel free, but objecting on the size of this particular image is for our purposes technically incorrect. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment, i am aware of the minimum image sizes, however, as far as i know they are not set in stone and in this image i feel that the small size makes it far less useful than it would be otherwise. However, even if the size is not a good reason to oppose, the coloured patterns in the top of the image are reason enough to oppose the image becoming FP. --Aqwis 21:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment Minimum acceptable sizes also depend on the subject; certain images such as Image:Vinland Map HiRes.jpg have to be a lot bigger than 1000px in order to see the detail. Since the writing in the Lincoln document is very delicate, a bigger image is probably needed. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 00:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless a better scan can be found. The size makes the text barely legible, which is a shame because it's a curious relic of the past. Futhermore, those splodges/discoloration are worryingly bothersome. -- Chris B • talk 10:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I just don't get this at all. It means nothing to me. The newton rings are enough on their own to kill any chance it ever had. --mikaul^talk 15:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Freakadelic color thing, man. ^8thstar 02:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 05:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]