Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Girl and cat.jpg

Image:Girl and cat.jpg - not featured

•  Info created by Joaquim Gaspar— uploaded by Alvesgaspar — nominated by Alvesgaspar 18:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Support Alvesgaspar 18:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Comment Did the girl's parents give permission ? Lycaon 21:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Support Lycaon 22:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice and cute, but... it's a bit noisy on dark parts, has jpeg artifacts too evidents and that white thing on the left (a switch?) is disturbing. Francisco M. Marzoa 23:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Strong oppose Neither nice nor cute. Very boring home snapshot. - MPF 00:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Strong oppose Indon 10:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Strong oppose Ss181292 10:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC) - another this is my pet photo. No value, low quality, bad composition, boring. Please read and understand Guidelines for nominators above before your next nomination.
  •  Comment No need to be arrogant. The history of Art (and of Photography, in particular) is full of themes as banal as this one. Also, and as you should know, "beauty" is essentially a question of taste, in its various components: theme, composition, colours, excitment... To call attention to the "guidelines" because you think the photo is boring is ungraceful Alvesgaspar 14:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
    • But Commons is not a collection of art. This is not a collection of personal photos also. I call to guidelines because you apparently dont understand what is the purpose of FPC (this page). Ss181292 15:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Once again you are extrapolating wildly (and seem confused) about what Commons is. Surely, it is also a collection of art as well as of personal photos (whatever a personal photo might be), including the “this is my pet” type. Please understand that I’m not defending the merits of my picture (you are right, it is not a very good one), only the right to have bad taste, to participate in FPC and (even so) to be treated with courtesy. Of course, you also have the right to be blatant, although I suspect that is not the normal way with Wikipedia.Alvesgaspar 18:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
    •  Comment This site (FPC) was created for finding such pictures from all pictures on Commons that are somewhat special. I think everybody should understand that after reading the title (newcomers to). If not, we have delivered some guidelines. Now we vote; everybody reveals what they are thinking about the picture; in form of short informations like: bad composition, low resolution or high value. It has nothing about offending or being arrogant - it is common and convenient way (no need to write a lot and read a lot, cause everybody understands). The fact are that Commons is not the place for every picture or every piece of art, but for that that has some value (in many ways); and Featured picture is such picture from Commons (so it is already valuable) that is special. I wouldn't be writing this if you hadn't said that you have been offended or mistreated. Mistake was on your site. If you are guest somewhere, you shouldn't complain on rules Vulpecula 23:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
      •  Comment Expresions like bad composition or low resolution has no emotional load, but "another "this is my pet photo" sounds rude and arrogant, and since it doesn't contribute with nothing possitive there's no need to use it. There are million ways to say the things without being offensive. Francisco M. Marzoa 01:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
        • It might be rude, but not in this context. We are here, not anywhere. Beside every week some new wikipedian, who didn't wish to read the rules, wants his sunset featured. Half of the votes are: "yet another sunset" and nobody complains. Vulpecula 19:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
          • In fact we are here, not in a brothel, so rude expresions are out of context. "Yet another sunset" as an impersonal expression like -let's say- "yet another bad composition" or "yet another low resolution" is not rude as "another this is my pet photo" indeed. And, BTW, sunsets are in NO way forbbiden by the rules guidelines, even some of them has been featured before Image:Päijänne and päijätsalo.jpg Image:Koh Samui Lipa Noi2.jpg Image:Pennsylvania Winter Sunset.jpg Image:Sun behind the Heel Stone.jpg. Final dot (this is NOT a forum neither). Francisco M. Marzoa 00:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose also considerably leaning to the left Roger McLassus 10:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Neutral got carried away... Lycaon 13:20, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

You mean you got carried away by oppose votes and didnt want to stick with your guns? --Fir0002 www 22:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

nope. by the cute face, still don't want to oppose (stick, guns etc..) ;-) Lycaon 23:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

•  Strong oppose No educational value, no encyclopedic value, no historical value, etc... Ordinary subject. And definitely not a piece of art. Vulpecula 23:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Info I withdraw the photo, agree with the comments of Francisco M. Marzoa, Roger McLassus and Lycaon. The truth is it does not justify all this noise... Alvesgaspar 13:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

1 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral, nomination withdrawn → not featured Roger McLassus 18:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)