Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Usain Bolt Olympics Celebration.jpg

File:Usain Bolt Olympics Celebration.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2009 at 18:43:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Usain Bolt Olympics Celebration.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Usain Bolt Olympics Celebration.jpg

895

353

41

41

1534

1944

Dust spot

•  Info created by Richard Giles, uploaded by Manjithkaini, nominated by Yann (talk) 18:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support as nominator Yann (talk) 18:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support this is the kind of quality free images we strive for. Bastique ^demandez 18:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Even though I think the dust spot above his left should should be cloned out. --Korall (talk) 19:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Nice Rastrojo _(D•ES) 21:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Nice. Kwj2772 (msg) 03:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support This picture is truly worth a thousand words Ter890 (talk) 06:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Great. -- JovanCormac 06:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Question Aren't commercial use of photos taken at the Olympic Games forbidden? Diti the penguin — 09:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Not by the photographer. How can the IOC have a copyright on this picture? That's the point of this article. Yann (talk) 10:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Actually, the article seems to show that commercial use of Olympia photos for some reason requires permission from the IOC. I have retracted my vote of support until this matter is settled. -- JovanCormac 13:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
      • The claims of the IOC cannot be related to copyright, so they do not concern us. But I think that these claims are complete bullshit, just to be clear. Yann (talk) 15:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
        • I agree, yet I'm surprised that nobody has filed a deletion request yet, given the usual copyright paranoia on this site that often honors even very dubious claims... anyway, enabled my vote again. -- JovanCormac 17:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

• It is not a copyright issue - the author of the photo owns the copyright. It is a matter of whether he has violated the terms of his contract with them (the entry ticket) by publishing the photo with a license that allows commercial use - purely a civil matter, they may wish to sue him for breach of contract. But the free license can not be revoked (of course TINLA etc ;-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

•  Support —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:58, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Avala (talk) 15:47, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Javier ME (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Mbz1 (talk) 01:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Durova (talk) 00:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Confirmation today that the IOC say (even though it may not) it has to do with copyright: their terms of use forbid the use of Creative Commons licenses, according to this article. Diti the penguin — 15:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not a bad photograph, but not FP material: composition is so-so, background is messy and distracting, point of view is not very good, perspective is all flat due to the telelens, and the subject is taken at an unflattering moment. Rama (talk) 15:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose - soft, funny composition, really doesn't look like a good sport portrait Multimotyl (talk) 18:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Not a perfect photo, as two commentors above said, but still a very good one, and the fact that it was taken immediately upon the breaking of a world record gives it a great wow factor. Jonathunder (talk) 20:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Per Rama and motion blur. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 09:14, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People