Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Female Toque macaque with her child at Katagamuwa Sanctuary - (Don't let them fade away).jpg

File:Female Toque macaque with her child at Katagamuwa Sanctuary - (Don't let them fade away).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2019 at 10:31:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Female Toque macaque with her child at Katagamuwa Sanctuary - (Don't let them fade away).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Female Toque macaque with her child at Katagamuwa Sanctuary - (Don't let them fade away).jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)
•  Info created by Senthiaathavan - uploaded by Senthiaathavan - nominated by A-wiki-guest-user -- A-wiki-guest-user (talk) 10:31, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- A-wiki-guest-user (talk) 10:31, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose. Strong CA, quality problem -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:41, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Weak support Issues noted per George Chernilevsky, but overall the quality is up to scratch, and I like the image overall; it's certainly something we don't often see at FP. Having said that, I take issue with the explicitly political 'author's comments' on the image page. Whether or not you agree with the sentiments expressed, I don't think it's appropriate for an FP to take a political standpoint like this; a more neutral image description would be greatly preferable, I feel. Cmao20 (talk) 13:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

• If a photo is imported from another site or has another original name (given by the author) which it is know under on other sites, it is courteous to the author, and practical for online identification, keep it in some form when renaming the file to comply with Commons naming policy. This can of course be disregarded if the original name is highly offensive. In this case I figured we could keep the original like this when I renamed it, but it can be altered if you think it's better. --Cart (talk) 14:04, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

• I see what you mean about the file name, but that doesn't concern me so much as the comments on the image page. 'Nature always belongs to those who nurture, care and protect it. But the humans have forcefully claimed it theirs and are on a path of destruction: destroying jungles, waterways and evicting the rightful owners, the wild animals.' Of course it's a perfectly respectable position to hold, but I think the place for these comments is on one's personal website or blog or on a social media site, not on Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 16:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

• As long as it is quite clear (which it is) that the comment is strictly the author's and not the Wiki-project's, I think it's ok to keep it if it's not offensive. Photographers always have things to say about their photos, and when they become noted, we even quote them in articles. --Cart (talk) 17:53, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Because of the eyes. --Axel ^(talk) 15:31, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 16:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Cool! ;-) Yes there is noise in the sky, but still at acceptable level. --A.Savin 20:29, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose because of the CA.--Peulle (talk) 21:37, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment: would support if CA are fixed. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:29, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Great picture, unfortunately very distracting CAs, even at thumbnail size -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:16, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Tomer T (talk) 06:39, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Even considering the technical issues mentioned above, to me it’s simply a really great shot with tons of wow. --Kreuzschnabel 18:05, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:09, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- KennyOMG (talk) 21:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per the CA and the author using not only the image page but the filename itself for advocacy. Daniel Case (talk) 05:00, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment Just commenting to object to "advocacy" coming up at all in this FPC. "Don't let them fade away" isn't political. Saying that a species going extinct is a bad thing, even in more impassioned words than that, is not advocacy in the pejorative sense we typically mean when Wikimedians use that term. If the comment on the file page violates Commons policy, that can be addressed, but I don't see why it should have any bearing on FPC. If it violates policy, deal with it through the proper channels. Failing it at FPC won't address it and it has nothing to do with the image itself. To be clear, I don't intend this to change anyone's mind; the CAs haven't been fixed, and I'm clearly here commenting rather than supporting. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  05:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose I have to oppose this per others sorry--Boothsift 07:21, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
•  Support.--Vulphere 09:32, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others. --Hockei (talk) 06:40, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 11:13, 8 September 2019 (UTC)