This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This sentence seems completely out of place in the paragraph it leads. It's immediately followed by explaining what he is praised for, and it doesn't have any kind of reference. I'll leave it to the Wikipedia experts to figure out what might be better. 113.166.212.229 (talk) 13:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the official photo for this page be Coolidge when he was president and not when he was governor in 1919? This portrait from 1924 would fit well as the official photo in my opinion.
I agree that, other things being equal, a 1924 portrait would be preferable to a 1919 portrait.
This 1924 portrait looks fine to me too.
I typed "Calvin Coolidge" at the Amazon website, and got a bunch of books about him, generally with portraits (presumably the portraits used on the book jackets). It looks like this portrait was used for the book jacket of a book by Robert Sobel. There are some other interesting portraits among those books. Most of them are not already in the WikiMedia commons, so if you liked one of them better than you like this one, you'd have to upload it to the commons; but they should all be in the public domain by now, anyway. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As of now, I'll stick with the 1924 portrait, because most of the portraits you mentioned don't seem to have dates with them.
I vastly prefer the 1919 portrait as a piece of photography and as a representation of the man, but your logic is not only sound but welcomed. His tenure as Presidency is easily the most notable aspect of Coolidge and, as such, his photograph should reflect that. Thank you for the update! SlippinJimmy79 (talk) 17:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]