Talk:Lenna - Wikiwand

Computing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Photography: History Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of photography.

On 5 May 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Lenna image. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Yet another requested move July 10 2024

Requesting that this article be moved to Lena, with Lenna left as a redirect. The standard test image in the USC SIPI library is refered to as lena, with only one n. See SIPI database: "Please note that we no longer distribute the following images that were previously available in our database: 4.2.04 (lena)..." Is this article about the playboy centerpiece or about the test image? If it's about the test image, the image was named Lena by its creators. The playboy centerpiece is named Lenna, yes, but the test image is just Lena (or iguess "lena"). Guninvalid (talk) 18:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. Many of the other refs seem to call it "Lenna". Seems like this distinction is a useful one for the person vs the image. As repeatedly noted in previous RM discussions it's a high-page-view at this name. We have a ton of other "Lena" meanings with Lena being a DAB page, so no need to throw this one into that pile only to require that it gets some longer name or DAB token. No evidence provided that this is overwhelming PRIMARYTOPIC for that spelling. No need to change away from NATDAB. DMacks (talk) 19:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

At least online, I do see a lot of references to "Losing Lena", and some of the original articles from journals such as IEEE refer to it as Lena. I see a lot of both though so it might still just be better to leave it as Lenna though. Many of the secondary sources around IEEE call it Lenna as well, even if IEEE itself calls it Lena. guninvalid (talk) 19:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I do agree that it is clunky from a article titling perspective. But I did wanna throw it out there as an idea, at least since that's what it's originally called. I'm not gonna check the original Playboy mag to confirm this, but my best guess is that "lenna" was the name Playboy gave her, but the test image was named Lena. So maybe calling her Lenna is a direct reference to her life as a Playboy model. Idk guninvalid (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

So as to not stir up an edit war

@DMacks I did wanna comment on just the quotes around "inappropriate", since I really don't like that it's there. If it is a direct quote, it should be treated as one in context. Pull the full phrasing or a whole sentence and put quotes around that. But putting quotes around just the word "inappropriate" comes off as dismissive.

As an alternate to just deleting the quotes, we could remove the "inappropriate" together: "...because of its subject matter." Alternate alternate, we could also do something like: "...because of its subject matter, which some view as inappropriate." guninvalid (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Zacwill: you were the one taking an editing interest in this detail. DMacks (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

It is not for Wikipedia to say whether or not the image is appropriate, since this is a matter of opinion. The quotes are there to show that the descriptor isn't coming from us. It's very normal to use quotes in this way in secondary and tertiary sources, and I don't agree that it's dismissive. It's neutral, as Wikipedia is supposed to be. Zacwill (talk) 21:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Using quotes around a single word like this does come off as dismissive. To me at least, it comes off as sarcastic, just like someone using airquotes around the word. Moreover, if it is supposed to emphasize that the descriptor isn't coming from wikipedia, then I feel it should do so in a different way. As I suggested: "...because of its subject matter, which some view as inappropriate." Or, as I also suggested, put the full quote in context from a source.

I suppose this is mostly a WP:IDONTLIKEIT argument, but it falls under WP:NPOV too. guninvalid (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Technical history

The article should mention who was the original photographer taking the photo for Playboy and what stock they used, in what format. I guess most likely, it was a Kodak negative stock (but which one?), used in some kind of medium format. --2003:DA:CF2E:4566:58A9:257D:A595:4F86 (talk) 00:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Those would definitely be worthwhile pieces of information to include. The article already does note the photographer is Dwight Hooker, who is notable enough for his own WP article. We'd need references to cite to support any other details. Do you have some information at hand? DMacks (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Related Articles