Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Eidsvoll riksraad 1814

Eidsvoll riksraad 1814 edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2010 at 10:56:33 (UTC)

Original - The painting Riksforsamlingen på Eidsvoll 1814 was probably begun in 1882. The picture includes 55 portraits of the constitutional fathers. (Not all of the 112 persons are viewable.) It is today located in the Norwegian Parliament, behind the speaker's platform and the presidential podium.

Edit 1: This is what I'd expect the colours to look like - though that doesn't mean I'm right. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit 2: Or maybe it's between the two?

Reason: High resolution and high quality image of one of Norway's most famous paintings. Illustrating a major turning point in Norwegian history.
Articles in which this image appears: Constitution of Norway

Union between Sweden and Norway Treaty of Kiel Norway in 1814 Monarchy of Norway Norwegian Constituent Assembly Oscar Wergeland Norway Template:Norwegian-people

FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings

Creator: Oscar Wergeland

Support as nominator --P. S. Burton (talk) 10:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is the original that light? It looks a little washed-out, but that doesn't mean it actually is, given the bright light from the window. Edit uploaded for comparison. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:57, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Info This is were I found the picture; Flickr stream of the Archives of the Storting --P. S. Burton (talk) 12:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support whichever is determined to be most accurate. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question Can we identify some of the people in it? Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment According to the Norwegian article about the event, the man standing in the front is supposed to be Christian Magnus Falsen and the man sitting next to him is Wilhelm Frimann Koren Christie. Katalysator (talk) 23:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The painter is very talented, the faces look photographic, but this intimidates me because I know so little about its subject matter->EV. The color quality, going off the one guy in red, is best in Edit1, but everything looks kind of blurred in this, like it was scanned out of a glossy magazine. --I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 04:56, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Again, I do not feel the paintings category is appropriate. This is not being used as a painting. J Milburn (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Would you mind elaborating on that? I think I know what you mean but I'm not totally sure. Amphy (talk) 07:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I do not support it being added to Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings, as the fact it is a painting is incidental. On Wikipedia, it is being used to illustrate the subject of the painting. In the same way, Lizzy takes rank among other royal figures, because we're looking at her, not the painting. J Milburn (talk) 10:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is anyone going to actually vote on this? Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support to get the ball rolling. It clearly has plenty of EV. Prefer edit 2. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 15:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I'm not convinced this is a great reproduction. If this was a photo, we would be saying it wasn't sharp enough. Now, correct me if this is the painting style... Additionally, we don't have the dimensions of the actual work, so it's hard to judge what this is like size-wise in comparison. J Milburn (talk) 11:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC) Sorry, voting period was over. I stand by what I said, but I leave it to the closer to judge whether to take it into account.[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]