Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cheetahs on the Edge (Director's Cut).ogv

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2013 at 01:34:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Unfortunately I see it as an advertisement and not a message. There's one line about their plight in the end and a link to commercial websites/organizations! Do we need the vulgar show of power over captive animals to put across the message when there's tons of films shot in the wild (which are better by being natural IMO)? I guess we do for more audience, but abusing (or exhibiting) captive animals is something I deeply detest. :( -- ~y (talk) 08:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I knew that would come up in this discussion eventually. Thanks for going through my contributions to pick up the one captive non-domesticated animal! I've hated myself for going to that orca show because I didn't know better in 2009 (and it is only on commons as encyclopedic content for a wikipedia article). In fact, I hate myself each time I look at it and feel sad for the plight of the beautiful orcas (which I've seen in the wild). So, your point of bringing that up was because I have posted ONE picture of a captive animal means I have no right to air my views on showcasing captive animals? Also, I do have many photographs of captive animals from a long time ago (at a time when I thought it was OK because big names did it) and that in no way means I like doing it now or in the future, or encourage photography of captive animals or support it. I believe that's a change for the good and I think it is up to the big organizations to encourage that change. The least we (or at least I) can do is to oppose featuring captive animals and encourage wild content. Sorry for the long comment. -- ~y (talk) 08:48, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment No personal attacks please -- Nossob (talk) 08:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No sarcasm here, please. Your negative vote was accompanied by the statement that the picture should have been submitted to "Featured Video Candidates", because "here at FPC we have no established rules to assess moving images." It that was intended to be your reason for opposing the picture, then it seemed possible that your negative vote was in error, since "Featured Video Candidates" does not exist. It appears, however, that you had merely made a comment in addition to your negative vote. I just needed to know which was which. Peace? Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 08:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wish I was solar-powered, but what's your point? My eating habits should decide what I like or don't like? So, you're telling me all meat eaters should support animal cruelty and ill treatment? I've worked in wildlife reserves and I've seen the kind of silly things people do to get photographs and videos that were inspirational. Chasing animals with cars, shouting at them to get an expression, driving off-road and capturing them for the sake of a video or a photograph is more common than you think. Remember, there are inexperienced amateurs trying to copy photographs and videos using far more cruder and dangerous methods. And that's just a small part of the larger issue I have with captivity and treatment of wild animals for the purposes of entertainment, which by the way is very different from sustenance and conservation. I'm not debating the quality of the video, just the larger implications it has. It's fine to think this video awesome (I know it is awesome), but I have personally seen a lot of negative consequences resulting from videos and photographs made in "controlled environments" and it is worrying. -- ~y (talk) 13:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Yathin and his opposers: The ethics in nature photography is beyond the scope of this page, I afraid. We've similar discussion earlier; where Richard Bartz says "DONT KILL ANIMALS!". But we all know killing, dissection, and study are part of education. But the limit how much we can go is always a question though. I think the best compromise is to vote on individual ethical stand and respect others on their stands. I've not a firm stand in this case, honestly. JKadavoor Jee 16:37, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree. I'm generally opposed to anything captive and it will always get an oppose from me. I was just mentioning my reasons for the oppose in my vote (instead of a simple "captive" or anything else equally useless). I know I'm going to be a minority, but at least it serves as food for thought. Also, the behind-and-scenes, credits and branding at the end is perhaps like putting up pictures with watermarks which is why I thought this was like an advertisement as well! There is no harm in having healthy discussions as long as there are no personal attacks -- which are unfortunate. In the end, everyone who works with animals thinks about their welfare, which is good. -- ~y (talk) 17:05, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry for derailing the conversation, I souldn't have done it. Just for the clarity of what I said : I'm French, and in French, we have two different words for "plant-based diet" (végétalien) and "life without exploitation of animals, in food, clothes, entertainement..." (végane). Both can be translated by "vegan" in English but I was talking about the latter. I'm always bothered by people claming one kind of animal exploitation is bad while doing other kinds when they could easily avoid them (and for the record, I know that for a lot of people, plant-based diet is not easy). Concerning your point about "setting a bad example", I understand it (I know a flickr group about birds that doesn't allow pictures of nests because of unfortunate consequences for the youngs in the said nest) but feels like it is something we can't endorse in Commons. I will not talk about veganism / animal advocacy until I'm in front of a nice beer and actually talking and not writting, I promise :) Léna (talk) 12:24, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries! Written discussions can obviously sound heated when they are not, especially in matters like this which tend to have people (like me) who strongly believe in an ideology. I have previously opposed nest/captive photographs on FPC for similar reasons. As per JKadavoor and others, this is definitely not in the scope of commons, but it is always good to put forward a thought and a reason for the oppose, hoping that it may change in the future. Every small change helps in making it a better place for the animals (like the popular nest photography bans). You're welcome to drop by to Oslo for a discussion because I could go on for hours about this! ;) -- ~y (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:47, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animated
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Cheetahs_on_the_Edge_(Director%27s_Cut).ogv&oldid=296806786"