Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/King of Bhutan
Appearance
Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/King_Jigme_Khesar_Namgyel_Wangchuck.jpg/250px-King_Jigme_Khesar_Namgyel_Wangchuck.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/da/King_Jigme_Khesar_Namgyel_Wangchuck_%28edit%29.jpg/250px-King_Jigme_Khesar_Namgyel_Wangchuck_%28edit%29.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/da/King_Jigme_Khesar_Namgyel_Wangchuck_%28edit%29.jpg/250px-King_Jigme_Khesar_Namgyel_Wangchuck_%28edit%29.jpg)
- Reason
- The picture is of an exceptionally high, professional quality. The technical standard is superior and is of comparable quality to our featured pictures of Mohammed Alim Khan.
- Articles this image appears in
- Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck
- Creator
- Image sent to Wikipedia by the Bhutanese royal family.
- Support as nominator --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Weak oppose not very sharp and just above the minimum size Muhammad(talk) 19:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support Technically weak (per Muhammad), but not terrible either. More important, this image, apparently donated here by the royal family, seems like it could be an extremely rare image -- if you go to Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck and look at the infobox showing his royal family, we have very scant coverage and no other pictures. We must have a gazillion photos of Obama, GWB, etc. This represents systemic bias. Fletcher (talk) 21:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support - I absolutely agree with Fletcher here. Intothewoods29 (talk) 22:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support Per Fletcher.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 00:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support Edit 1 The portrait seems pretty good and asthetically pleasing. Quite a lot of blown highlights though unfortunately (mostly the red channel). The relatively low shutter speed seems to have caused some camera shake blur which I have compensated for as much as possible in the edit, the change is most visible around the eyes. talk)
- Support Edit 1 In the full size, I do notice the blur (around the eyes) on the original and correction made by Noodle snacks. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 03:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support Although the photo is a bit smaller than I would like to see, I will support until there is a larger copy available. smooth0707 (talk) 05:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support edit 1. Any minor flaws (such as the fact that it's cropped a little too close, resulting in the loss of a bit of his right arm and left cuff) are more than made up for by the difficulty in getting a free image of this subject (no pun intended) at all. —gr 07:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)]
- Support
edit 1edit 2 Diego_pmc Talk 08:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC) - Support edit 1 - Good portrait. --Caspian blue 16:00, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 slightly smaller then it could be but, very asthetically pleasing, very difficult to get image. Anonymous101 (talk) 21:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 User:Angr really sums up my opinion on this pic. It's not technically perfect, but its still nice enough and its rarity makes up for it. SpencerT♦C 21:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Request I just noticed some damage done by the sharpening process. On the back of this head, at the limit between his hair and the wall there is a bright line (artifact). Would someone please fix that, I find it pretty annoying. See this pic. Diego_pmc Talk 13:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support either --Avala (talk) 19:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Promoted Image:King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck (edit).jpg MER-C 23:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)