Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sacrifice of Isaac

Sacrifice of Isaac edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2015 at 04:18:22 (UTC)

Original – Abraham sacrificing his only son, Isaac, on Mount Sinai, at the behest of God. God asked Moses to sacrifice Isaac in order to test his loyalty. An angel stopped Moses halfway through the act because his loyalty had been sufficiently proven in the eyes of God. The expression on Isaac's face says it all, really.

Reason: It should be self-evident that oil-on-canvas paintings of Biblical events are always gorgeous and high-quality. (No really, I checked it against the featured picture criteria. All checks out, in my opinion)
Articles in which this image appears: Binding of Isaac, Sacrifice of Isaac (Caravaggio), Abraham
FP category for this image: Artwork
Creator: Caravaggio

Support as nominator – ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Where's this digitization from? This looks like there's a bit of halftoning. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, wonderful painting, very expressive and very good. Not exactly a blessing, this friend of ours, who uploaded lots of Caravaggios only filling in for source = scan. Wish he wouldn't do that. My own nomination of a Caravaggio went down in the drain too, because of it (Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy-Caravaggio (c.1595).jpg). All picture has to have a correct source given to be accepted as FP. This guy doesn't exactly making us any favor with his scan-source-uploads.--Hafspajen (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I think somebody should start looking into this matter on commons. Or start uploading new Caravaggios with a source. They are too many that are unsourced. It is rather irritating. --Hafspajen (talk) 09:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Abraham, not Moses. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 07:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Jobas (talk) 01:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support - if the source problem can be fixed. Hafspajen (talk) 14:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Source=scan, not acceptable. Scanned from where?? KDS4444^Talk 02:03, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Source problems don't look like they'll be fixed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified the original uploader of the image of the problem with the image's source. It appears he/ she is Polish— I hope my English will be translatable. How or if the problem will be addressed, though, we shall have to wait and see. I also came across Hafspajen's previous request for clarification of an image's source information from this user, and saw that it was ignored. Very disappointing. What is worse, he/ she appears to be an administrator at Commons! Double-weird. KDS4444^Talk 13:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:KDS4444. I agree, it is very disappointing, there was no solution. But he did responded, not that it was much of a help... Hafspajen (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This was the response, I copy it over here: Sorry. The situation is, that as I'm more into tehcnicalities, I mass uploaded all these scans on behalf of my friend (user:Staszek99), who took care for descriptions and so on. Therefore, I really don't know their source and clearly see now the problem, that they aren't fully described. I contacted him yesterday about the issue you've raised, and he promised to come back to me soon. Masur (A) (talk) 13:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for not replying. Staszek99 confirmed, that unfortunately he doesn't remember now. So pity - but it's how it's :/ Masur (A) (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:25, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]