Exactly! I’d even say that nominating already does that - or better: asks for it. Maybe it’d be better to ask the author if they are OK with being nominated.
As for the ‘featured’ criteria: I’ve always understood it in a way that those artworks should really offer something that’s a fair bit above average - besides being a show-off of Krita’s capabilities. Entering the '“Hall of Fame” on the grounds of personal preferences and taste feels just wrong to me.
That’s the reason why I voted negative (was I the only one?) on that recent suggestion. I just could not see the quality that’s imho required in there - nothing to do with ‘not liking’ etc. Also I have to say that most of the nominated works lacked some quality in my book, but were OK-ish. Hence I stayed out of it so far.
So this begs the question how one would find objective criteria for feature-worthiness - and I think that it’s almost impossible. There are though some criteria that should be fulfilled as a minimum requirement:
- good (and hopefully interesting) composition
- proper use of values and lighting
- good colour harmony
- proper perspective
- if characters are involved: correct anatomy
- readability of the elements
- (probably more…)
Now, we all know that there are some outstanding artworks, which break one or more of the above “rules”. But then those pieces should offer something worthwhile in return - which of course doesn’t make evaluation any easier…