Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/President Trump Visits St. John's Episcopal Church (49963649028).jpg

Donald Trump photo op at St. John's Church

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2021 at 10:48:09 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality (official source, so no better is available). EV is represented by the number of articles where it appears. The photo is, basically, the main subject of the article. It happened a year ago, so no hype.
Articles in which this image appears: Donald Trump photo op at St. John's Church, George Floyd protests in Washington, D.C., Religion and authoritarianism, St. John's Episcopal Church, Lafayette Square, Timeline of the 2020 United States presidential election (January–October 2020), Timeline of the Donald Trump presidency (2020 Q2)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
Creator: Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead

Support as nominator – Andrei (talk) 10:48, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Overexposed, whites clipped. --Janke | Talk 12:06, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Sign out of focus (DOF). EV minimal. – Sca (talk) 13:33, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Beautiful picture with significant historic value. --Gnosis (talk) 06:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ support It says a lot about the utter incompetence of this incident that the photographer messed up the exposure and/or DOF on what was obviously a pre-planned photo op. Technically this isn't great, but as noted in the nomination statement the EV is very strong. If this passes it shouldn't go on the front page, for fairly obvious reasons. Nick-D (talk) 11:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, no main page --Andrei (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On further consideration, I'm moving to full support on the grounds of a) EV being strong (as noted in the nomination statement, this incident which was a significant element of Trump's presidency was undertaken to obtain this photo) and b) the technical problems with the photo telling an interesting story in their own right - it seems that the photographer emphasised Trump at the expense of everything else in the frame, and the article on her notes that this was in line with the instructions Trump provided her with for her work. In short, it's a historically significant photo that forms a good illustration of how Trump wanted to be presented, even when it was obviously not a good idea. Nick-D (talk) 10:23, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not want to do much research here, but there are numerous articles online that highlight how and why, after remarkable work done by Pete Souza, Trump's administration was making characteristically bad photos. Almost all of them are low quality, badly composed, not personal, taken from a distance, they also often used mobile phones to document even the most significant events. --Andrei (talk) 12:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Petar Milošević (talk) 11:40, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The image has EV for this one time event, but we feature one or two photos of any given person and this photo doesn't rise to the top IMO. Also his legacy is very much in flux (unsettled), he might become president again, I think it's too soon to have a FP of him. Bammesk (talk) 01:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --Commonists (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I struck this vote. Editor has less than 100 edits. See instructions on top of This page. Bammesk (talk) 00:26, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:38, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Gnosis (talk) 17:37, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I struck this vote because it was cast after the voting period expired and it's also a duplicate (see above). Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:20, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:22, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus to promote this image. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:22, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]