Proposal: Do not use caricatures as profile of the week images of esteemed people

Question

Hi there! Yesterday I went on WikiTree and I really couldn't believe my eyes - really, a caricature of a federal judge — of a nation's highest court — on the main page? Normally, those are just photos of people! Why would it be different this time?

Because of copyright issues maybe? No, there even is a normal photo on the profile. Hm. Strange.

While probably not intended, this does make WikiTree kind of look bad, having a kind of contempt for him, even if he is "featured". By displaying a caricature of someone in a high office, one of dignity and honour, the website ends up expressing a contrary judgement to that opinion. I can't imagine that was the original intent; there's a lot of different profiles that become profile of the week. But if I was a first time visitor, especially someone who had respect for such an office, I would think twice before using this site any further. After all, you wouldn't put up a caricature of Lincoln, Reagan, Chirac, MacDonald, or Darwin on the front page either. It voices a certain opinion.

I would therefore ask whether we could set a policy to not use caricatures of esteemed people on the main page. I can see there could be certain exceptions for that - a comedian for example, in which the caricature would not voice a politic view, but rather the fact that that comedian him- or herself is quite funny.

Comments

I imagine that the Team was looking for a color image to enliven the main page, rather than using a black and white photo.

---

I 100% agree with everything you write, Willem. Except one thing - I would have no problem posting a caricature of Jacques Chirac (a profile I co-manage) but certainly not as the main profile picture that shows on all thumbnails.

---

The original version of this image at Wikimedia Commons is much more tasteful. The change from a gray background to an orange background makes the image look like a joke.

Also, the photo at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thurgoodmarshall1967.jpg is in color and could be cropped for use here. (I think it's the photo upon which the caricature was based.)

Answer 1

As a cartoonist myself, I don't agree that a caricature is necessarily mocking or contradicting the views of the person it depicts, but I do agree that it shouldn't be used as a main image if a suitable photograph exists.

Comments

This is the dictionary definition of a caricature:

"A caricature is a satirical, exaggerated portrayal of person"

---

Think of all the possibilities when you create a presedent like this. I can certainly think of numerous ways to depict even politicians on their own profiles.

---

Did you mean 'precedent' - or 'president'? LOL

---

Yeah I know, my English sucks. Translations always come out weird. precedent should work. Just imagine that the internet was mostly German or a language you don't speak LOL

---

Having looked at the website of the artist (Donkey Hotey), I think this particular caricature was made with reverential intent -- not to ridicule the subject. The original artwork has a gray background, so it is more dignified in appearance than WikiTree's version, which has a bright yellow background that imparts a cartoonish appearance.

---

Edit - these sentiments have already been expressed, and better.