Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Menggigit Ekor Sapi.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Menggigit Ekor Sapi.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 09:07:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created & uploaded by Aqil F - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)- Support There are already some good pictures of this very photogenic event, but the view from above is less frequent.--Ermell (talk) 09:23, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Ermell. --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Abstain --Aristeas (talk) 06:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC) 
Comment I will not vote for this photo but will continue to speak out against this unnecessary animal suffering.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Unacceptable cruelty to animals. WikipediaWikimedia should have respect for animal welfare and not endorse this cruelty. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Why are you saying Wikipedia? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Two things: First, I think the existing two FPs we have of this event are significantly better. All of the images of this spectacle have energy/action to them. Second, on the animal abuse: if this were something that would happen anyway and someone just happened to stop by and take a photo, that's one thing. But as I understand it, pacu jawi has become a tourist attraction for the photography, and its popularity has led to more races. When we're moving from documenting abuse of animals to encouraging abuse of animals, I think there's good reason to take pause, at least. — Rhododendrites talk | 12:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your thoughts on the ethics of this. I have paused and reconsidered, but that leaves me with more questions than answers. This is a tourist attraction that's all over Instagram already - wouldn't it be presumptuous to think that having or not having a FP on Commons would really make any difference to the fad? How is this any different from, say, a rodeo? How do we decide what is cruelty and what is sports? Bullfighting is bad, but show jumping is natural horse behavior and totally fine as long as we don't see what's going on during training? Should we oppose pictures of pugs and other BAOS-prone dog breeds now because that could encourage people to get one for themselves? Should be stop promoting awesome photographs of military equipment because it might encourage people to join an army? These are all questions worth asking, but their answers are highly subjective and too often based on emotions rather than reason. I my opinion, these considerations are not a good basis for evaluating a photograph. But I find this one not to be an outstanding example of its "genre", which is a much more straight-forward reason to Oppose. El Grafo (talk) 10:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think on animal cruelty, we should be free to vote on our conscience. So if you endorse bullfighting, support an image. If you think bullfighting should be banned, oppose. Of course, El Grafo, many votes at FP are "highly subjective" and "based on emotions rather than reason". That's inevitable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your thoughts on the ethics of this. I have paused and reconsidered, but that leaves me with more questions than answers. This is a tourist attraction that's all over Instagram already - wouldn't it be presumptuous to think that having or not having a FP on Commons would really make any difference to the fad? How is this any different from, say, a rodeo? How do we decide what is cruelty and what is sports? Bullfighting is bad, but show jumping is natural horse behavior and totally fine as long as we don't see what's going on during training? Should we oppose pictures of pugs and other BAOS-prone dog breeds now because that could encourage people to get one for themselves? Should be stop promoting awesome photographs of military equipment because it might encourage people to join an army? These are all questions worth asking, but their answers are highly subjective and too often based on emotions rather than reason. I my opinion, these considerations are not a good basis for evaluating a photograph. But I find this one not to be an outstanding example of its "genre", which is a much more straight-forward reason to
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I can't see any WoW and the picture is not very sharp. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Rodhodendrites and others. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per other opposers --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
