Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sample 09-F9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte

Sample 09-F9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2015 at 18:19:33 (UTC)

Original – A sample of 09-F9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte. Known as the "Free Speech Flag" in Internet culture, it was created by John Marcotte as a symbol for Freedom of speech during the AACS encryption key controversy. The colors correspond to the cryptographic key at the heart of the controversy.

Reason: High Encyclopedic Value. Valued image on Commons. Prior deletion discussion on Commons ended with a resounding and unanimous Keep. Since confirmed as free-use-licensed "public domain" by flag's creator via OTRS confirmation. This file has itself received coverage from Slashdot.
Articles in which this image appears: Free Speech Flag, AACS encryption key controversy, Freedom of information, Illegal number, Freedom of speech
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle
Creator: John Marcotte

Support as nominator – — Cirt (talk) 18:19, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Change to Support if file is labeled as "Sample 09-f9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte" and in the caption and file description, it has a description like that. The point is to call it artwork with the title Free Speech Flag. It is a fair example of the artwork produced at the time. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've changed the file and caption to Sample 09-F9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte, as suggested by Bluerasberry, above. Thank you for the suggestion, it is indeed more accurate and descriptive. — Cirt (talk) 19:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am happy to support now. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much!!! — Cirt (talk) 19:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note - we talked a bit more on my talk page. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 22:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:41, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did John Marcotte originate this idea or is he just one among many? (Or can't we say in case he gets arrested? scratch your nose twice if he did; I'll be watching). Belle (talk) 13:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, Belle, thanks for your interest. Yes, John Marcotte did originate the idea, more info at his original post about it. — Cirt (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That gives it more value, but I'm not sure something so generic rates FP status. It's kind of like featuring the block of red squares at Red. Of course I can't point to anything in the criteria that disqualifies it; that would be too easy; I'll just have to have a think about it; I'll just have to have a think about it ... over cocktails. Belle (talk) 14:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, enjoy your cocktails! — Cirt (talk) 14:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Thanks to your inspiration, Belle, I've gone ahead and created an article on the Free Speech Flag. Thanks for your helpful advice, — Cirt (talk) 18:09, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the EV is in any doubt, but I think this is so simple that it falls below my threshold for what makes a FP; I'm not going oppose it though as there's nothing the FP criteria to oppose on. Belle (talk) 00:11, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for acknowledging we agree on the High Encyclopedic Value, much appreciated! :) — Cirt (talk) 00:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Meets all criteria. Jujutacular (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - good EV (particularly with the creation of the article). --Godot13 (talk) 16:34, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain - I just don't get it. I read the article, but this still seems like half-baked conceptual art. It's just not very pretty, the "+CO" is blurry/pixelated on the edges. Maybe if John Marcotte turned it into a painting (I recommend alkyd on aluminum) and auctioned it for a ton of money, I'd write the lot notes for a cut of the auction price, but otherwise I'm at a loss. Is this really among the best images Wikipedia has to offer? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your participation here, I've tried my best to address helpful specific suggestions raised by others, above. I changed the title of the image per good recommendation from Bluerasberry. I researched and wrote the article Free Speech Flag after a great suggestion by Belle. I wish there was more I could act upon from your comments. — Cirt (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it may come down to taste, I dunno... I didn't vote against, but even so... This image seems inscribed in an online political battle, and I'm not sure I completely understand its usage and importance. it just sort of looks like "test pattern" to me, not aesthetic, not a pretty image. I referenced the Christopher Wool painting b/c its definitely a touchstone in today's "Emperor's New Clothes" conceptual art market (and the Christie's lot notes are notorious for hyperbolic oversell). But I'm just trying to understand the "Support" here. What am I missing, what makes it pretty? Is it even supposed to be pretty? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 20:29, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's more the historic and high encyclopedic value for its place in history related to Freedom of speech, similar to the Support at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Streisand effect. That might be why people understand the high encyclopedic value enough to Support. — Cirt (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I get that. And I appreciate your efforts to explain it. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 20:55, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you! :) — Cirt (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Jobas (talk) 11:11, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain - I don't get it either, but I won't be one of those people who opposes something because they don't get it. HighInBC ^{(was Chillum)} 19:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, no worries, thanks for participating! — Cirt (talk) 19:19, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question are there any FP flags? Should flags like LGBTQ's be featured? Nergaal (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Nergaal, for your interest in this topic! Couple relevant examples at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aldrin saluting American Flag and Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/1 million colors. Yes, I think that flags like LGBTQ's could be featured, if there's a High Encyclopedic Value with a particular image and high quality. — Cirt (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First one is not a relevant example. IF we FP this, then we HAVE to FP all the flags in the world and several other flags. Is that something we want? Nergaal (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably best to evaluate individual files one-at-a-time on their encyclopedic value and quality. — Cirt (talk) 20:37, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we have to nominate EVERY other flag for FP? Each flag is different and has a different meaning. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this gets to be FP, why shouldn't the Flag of Poland also deserve to be FP? Just because this might have a somewhat intriguing story, does it make it more worthwhile to be FP that the easily-recognizable File:Flag_of_Poland.svg? Nergaal (talk) 22:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see File:Alabama state coat of arms (illustrated, 1876).jpg, File:England Expects Signal.svg, and Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/State Arms of the Union (set) -- all Featured on English Wikipedia. Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 22:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why you understand my point. I have absolutely nothing against coats of arms. The File:England Expects Signal.svg is the only comparable nomination, but even that one is way more complex than a simple flag (it has like 30 of them). Nergaal (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify my point: the actual "content" of this picture is 507 bytes. Should we feature something this simplistic? Nergaal (talk) 00:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Godot13's rationale. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm having a hard time really seeing the EV. Outside of Free Speech Flag, it's not really contributing much in my opinion. Dusty777 18:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating. I'll have to say I agree with Godot13, Jujutacular, and Rsrikanth05 on the EV. I'm sure glad I went ahead and researched and wrote and created the article on Free Speech Flag. — Cirt (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Sample 09-F9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte.svg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]