Talk:Kelly Rohrbach

New head shot available

Hi! I uploaded a new image for editors to consider for this article's infobox: File:Kelly_Rohrbach,_2015.jpg. The new image is more of a portrait photo, giving a clearer picture of Kelly Rohrbach's face.

Also, I ask if editors will consider removing image File:Kelly Rohrbach 2014.jpg from Kelly_Rohrbach#Filmography. Mrs. Rohrbach would prefer not to have that image so prominently represent her in her encyclopedic profile. While its best practice on Wikipedia to include an image in a biographical profile, I've not seen many where more than one image is included; it doesn't seem necessary here and could be seen as objectifying. Of course, this is up to the discretion of Wikipedia editors, but I hope editors might consider its removal.

I will not direct edit this page because I have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest; I work with the Walton family office, as I disclosed on my user page and declared above. Thanks, Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 16:31, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the image, Kevin. I did a quick image search, and think I can add a more specific date and place and event for it - is that edit correct? If not, please say. I also added it to the article infobox, per request, as it is likely a better image, due to looking at the camera (though the smile seems a bit crooked, to be honest).

However, I'm not going to replace the other image. You are quite right that due to being a swimwear image, out of context it could be seen as objectifying, but (from reading the article only, I know nothing about her otherwise) the article subject seems to be at least as notable for being a swimwear model (Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, no?), as for anything else, so seems to be an accurate depiction of the reason for her notability, so an appropriate illustration for this article.

The limited images you will see on other biography articles are:

• partly a function of limited availability (for some subjects we simply can't find more free images)
• partly a function of article size (if an article is too short, too many images overload it), and
• partly a function of the article subject (if the subject is a writer or a soldier or a scientist, then what they look like isn't quite as important).

In this case, we have the images, the article is long enough to support more than one, and as an actress and model, what the subject looks like is quite important to her career, so I think we should keep the second image. Out of the ... maybe 70? ... articles I have mostly written myself, 3 relatively recent ones are about models, and I have tried to include multiple images in them for this reason. Thank you again. --GRuban (talk) 18:28, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I know! I can mark it "upright", which will make it a bit smaller; since it's vertical, making it the same width as the horizontal infobox image unduly dominates. Maybe that will help your concerns a little? --GRuban (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, User:GRuban! I appreciate you switching out the infobox photo, and the resized modeling photo is a nice improvement. Your guidance has been so helpful. Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 19:35, 21 February 2020 (UTC)