- Reason
- Great portrait of a famous/infamous United States Army officer and cavalry commander of the American Civil War and the Indian Wars. It is a smaller photo but the FPC says exceptions to this rule may be made for historical or otherwise unique images.
- Articles this image appears in
- George Armstrong Custer, Indian Wars, Battle of Gettysburg, Third Day cavalry battles, List of German Americans
- Creator
- George L. Andrews
- Support as nominator CPacker (talk) 19:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: I would immediately support this picture, as it is certainly encyclopedic and historic, and the resolution quality is good. However, its size is 755 X 930; I think others will use this as grounds to oppose it, as the required minimum is 1000 for width or length. However, with a superb historical image where detail can still be discerned, this picture might have a chance.--Pericles of AthensTalk 19:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Ya I knew that its size was smaller, but it was very close to being 1,000 that I had to nominate it becasue of its historical importance.--CPacker (talk) 20:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- The LoC should have a higher res version available. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 05:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- The original is a little bigger but is not as pretty, this is a link to the original Custer--CPacker (talk) 08:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- The LoC should have a higher res version available. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 05:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Ya I knew that its size was smaller, but it was very close to being 1,000 that I had to nominate it becasue of its historical importance.--CPacker (talk) 20:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Support even though the size is a little less than usual. It's not like we need to count his pores or something. Historical portraits like this are probably the best asset for articles on historical figures. Dr. Extreme (talk) 20:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Support historic value and picture quality make the fact that this picture is 70 pixels away from requirement irrelevant for me.D-rew (talk) 04:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Support Historical significance trumps minor technical shortcoming. faithless (speak) 08:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- weak support It's even smaller, but I think I actually prefer this shot from the article. Matt Deres (talk) 14:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Support Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Weak Support I see no real reason to oppose, although it could be slightly larger. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 00:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose due to size. It's a marvelous photo, but I want a bigger scan. Spikebrennan (talk) 03:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Promoted Image:G a custer.jpg MER-C 02:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)