Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The White Elephant

The White Elephant edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2013 at 11:26:39 (UTC)

Original – The White Elephant by John Tenniel, published in the 22 October 1892 issue of Punch

Reason: This illustration has encyclopedic value as an accurate representation of the deteriorating situation in Uganda in 1892 which eventually led to the demise of the British East Africa Company.
Articles in which this image appears: Imperial British East Africa Company, White elephant
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
Creator: John Tenniel

Support as nominator --—Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 11:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Stong Oppose, sorry. Without the caption, the artwork is largely meaningless; The caption is part of the work with early cartoons, and it makes no more sense to remove it than to remove the text from cartoon speech bubbles; in cartoons of this period, the caption serves the same purpose as speech bubbles do in modern cartoons. There's also some description issues - Governor is Cockney slang, the character is talking to what appears to be John Bull, certainly not Gerald Portal, which is what you linked; there's no evidence that the character is a circus proprietor, indeed, a reliable ource identifies him as a "parody of an African explorer". Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:51, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the corrections. It didn't occur to me to search for references by using the caption. I have applied the changes. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 03:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there is a crease down the middle (horizontally) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Technically, that's a gap between the wood blocks that made up the print. The magazines often weren't particularly careful about getting things perfectly aligned. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:51, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Alright, thanks for the info. Arsonal has added the caption to the description page, is that enough for you? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, it's part of the image, and shouldn't be removed. It's a basic necessity for understanding the cartoon; I'd probably not support it even if it appeared in the articles (which it doesn't), frankly. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:31, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]