Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Burking Poor Old Mrs Constitution. Wellcome L0019663.jpg
In this article we are going to explore Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Burking Poor Old Mrs Constitution. Wellcome L0019663.jpg in depth, a topic that has generated great interest and debate in recent times. From its origins to its relevance today, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Burking Poor Old Mrs Constitution. Wellcome L0019663.jpg has been the subject of study and analysis in different areas. Through this article, we seek to shed light on this topic, addressing different perspectives and approaches that allow us to better understand its importance and impact in different contexts. To do this, we will rely on the vision of experts, studies and relevant data that will help us delve into the ins and outs of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Burking Poor Old Mrs Constitution. Wellcome L0019663.jpg and reflect on its relevance in contemporary society.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2015 at 12:38:52 (UTC)
Original – Burking Poor Old Mrs Constitution, Aged 141 (1829). This satirical cartoon by William Heath depicts the Duke of Wellington and Robert Peel in the roles of the body-snatchers Burke and Hare, suffocating Mrs Docherty for sale to Dr. Knox; representing the extinguishing by Wellington and Peel of the Constitution of 1688 by Catholic Emancipation.
Reason
Great and interesting satirical cartoon, good quality
Not that I can find at Wellcome, or elsewhere - 1,668 × 1,198 is the largest version I can find (although still looking), just in case. - SchroCat (talk) 13:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Comment Scro, that was really funny. Geat pic. But do you know about the requirements? minimum 1500px X 1500px on both sides... This one is only 1,668 × 1,198 pixels ... I mean, it will probably not work, because it is rather under minimum required size. Hafspajen (talk) 13:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Oppose on the small side, and a little oversaturated-looking - surely the colours would have faded a little bit even if they were that vivid to start? More importantly:
EV in Burke and Hare murders: Very low: the way it's used it made it look like Miss Constitution was one of the victims, placed right up next to the list of victims, and naming Miss Constitution prominently without explanation. It's a bit more relevant elsewhere, but... Adam Cuerden(talk)02:45, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I've put the image back in, lower down in the "In media portrayals and popular culture" section, together with an explanation in the text. That may not answer the question of oversaturation, but should cover the Burke and Hare question. - SchroCat (talk) 09:05, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
It's at least not actively misleading now, but I'm not really convinced there's enough EV to overcome the small size, and probable over-saturation. There's no one article where it adds particularly much. Adam Cuerden(talk)10:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
My presumption would be that the British Museum copy is uncalibrated. That is not at all a natural look. This is why I prefer restoring from things in my hand whenever possible. Anyway, I don't mean to say it adds nothing; just that I don't think it adds enough to overcome my concerns. I live in Edinburgh, so of course know Burke and Hare, but for readers in America or Australia or the like I could see needing a lot of explanation. And that's after explaining about the constitution. I'd be more enthusiastic if it was A. outside a gallery in William Heath and B. higher-res William Heath artworks weren't readily available. Adam Cuerden(talk)11:04, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
