Support as nominator --
Tomer T (
talk) 15:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support -- Excellent picture. The relative poor image quality is largely mitigated by a good composition and high encyclopaedic value. --
Alvesgaspar (
talk) 15:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose This photo has a pretty poor composition. The main feature is the rack of shoes on the left of the image, and the shoemaker is in the background.
Nick-D (
talk) 22:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support-- It is an excellent composition. The rack of shoes on the left are not the "main feature". They are a pertinent frame to the left side of the image. The main subject, the cordwainer himself, is set clearly against the background of his trade, compositionally distinguished by his blue shirt and grey hair. His angled elbows form and round head are a compositional contrast to the general clutter. This is a "painterly" composition of a person in his environment, not simply close-up image of a single person in which his tools of trade are merely a background. Moreover, everything in the picture takes your eyes to his busy hands.
Amandajm (
talk) 05:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support more or less per Amanda. Focus is more on the cordwainer than the rack of shoes, and this composition presents more than just the individual (who, as an individual, is not notable in the Wikipedia sense) but an occupation. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 17:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support as in Commons.
Jee 06:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)reply
You can't simply support an image "as in Commons" since FP on the English Wikipedia have
different criteria. --
ELEKHHT 07:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)reply
I'm not a newbie here; know the differences very well. :) (Check the file history of the image and both articles. No offence, indeed. I'm too lazy to type more.)
Jee 04:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator --
Tomer T (
talk) 15:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support -- Excellent picture. The relative poor image quality is largely mitigated by a good composition and high encyclopaedic value. --
Alvesgaspar (
talk) 15:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose This photo has a pretty poor composition. The main feature is the rack of shoes on the left of the image, and the shoemaker is in the background.
Nick-D (
talk) 22:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support-- It is an excellent composition. The rack of shoes on the left are not the "main feature". They are a pertinent frame to the left side of the image. The main subject, the cordwainer himself, is set clearly against the background of his trade, compositionally distinguished by his blue shirt and grey hair. His angled elbows form and round head are a compositional contrast to the general clutter. This is a "painterly" composition of a person in his environment, not simply close-up image of a single person in which his tools of trade are merely a background. Moreover, everything in the picture takes your eyes to his busy hands.
Amandajm (
talk) 05:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support more or less per Amanda. Focus is more on the cordwainer than the rack of shoes, and this composition presents more than just the individual (who, as an individual, is not notable in the Wikipedia sense) but an occupation. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 17:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Support as in Commons.
Jee 06:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)reply
You can't simply support an image "as in Commons" since FP on the English Wikipedia have
different criteria. --
ELEKHHT 07:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)reply
I'm not a newbie here; know the differences very well. :) (Check the file history of the image and both articles. No offence, indeed. I'm too lazy to type more.)
Jee 04:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)reply