Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Little boy of Laos laughing.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Little boy of Laos laughing.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2018 at 22:09:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Little boy with deciduous teeth and stains of mud and marker on his forehead, laughing in the countryside of Don Det, Laos
  • This picture was shot in a public space. As far as I know, not consent is required for an action related to a picture of a person in a public space in Laos, like in China, see Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements. Only consent is necessary for a commercially use, and there is a Personality Rights template associated to this file, which may be helpful and clear enough as it is. Moreover, I always have the implicit consent of all the people taken in picture that I publish. I'm not a paparazzi. I respect all the people I shoot (even those who laugh and make me laugh because they laugh). This joyful smile was not extracted through money, threat, nor pressure. No, no, it really just comes from the heart. And IMHO parents should be more grateful than rancorous with such a valuable image of their child, all the more so as I nearly always make prints (professionaly made) offered to the family. But anyone here could process differently, I don't mind, that's not the matter. There are hundreds of FPs of people on Commons, see for example this File:Young_Ashaninka_girl_in_an_Apiwtxa_village,_Acre_state,_Brazil.jpg very close to my style, and I assume everybody here is acting like I act. Then, honestly, I don't really understand these insistent questions related to copyrighting aspects. Here this is the FP area, not the OTRS department. So the pictures should be judged for their technical and aesthetical characteristics only. Dealing with other concerns is just out of the subject, I think, and may negatively influence the present votes -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Basile We have internationally a wide range of attitudes towards photographing strangers, and particularly children. Street photography has a long tradition but this ranges from those who take candids by force, walking down the street snapping away, or those who ask for permission with a smile and a nod, or those who think it rude not to first develop a rapor with the subject before even considering taking a photo, to those who would not take any image without permission and consent in writing. In the UK, as a middle-aged man, if I tried to take a photo of a stranger's child, even in a public space where it is legal, I would be in quite serious risk of being physically attacked as some kind of paedophile and having the police called to arrest me. Common policy (COM:IDENT) is pretty much to be permissive about what is acceptable here, within the constraints of law. It is therefore not a guide to "finest" opinions about best practice wrt photographing people. There is a big difference between getting consent to take a photograph for personal use and having consent to publish it widely such as on Commons or Wikipedia. While your offer of a photo in exchange is a nice gesture, I suspect those involved did not know their image might end up in a Wikipedia article with thousands of hits per day. In practice, the "personality rights" that the Commons template mentions only really exist in the US, and there is no such protection in the UK for example, other than basic human right law. It can only be enforced by the subject, and I don't realistically think a boy from a village in Laos is in a position to sue any big corporation using this photo without permission. There is a gaping chasm between what is so awful that Commons agrees to delete it and what allows everyone to feel as warm as the sun in this photo. I think it is therefore fair for reviewers to raise questions about the provenance and ethics of an image, and to oppose if they wish even if no law has been broken or policy infringed. -- Colin (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes I think so. He was the youngest among 2 other boys (1), (2) and a girl (3), who seem to have had fun together with a blue marker and the fresh mud of the paddy fields. Though I was not there when this happened, and just found the result "creative". It inspires me the decorative marks some tribes enjoy to make on their face and parts of their body with natural products like colorful pigments -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination, per Daniel Case -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]