Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg

File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2015 at 15:51:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
•  Info created by a female Celebes crested macaque, uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Qian.neewan -- Qian.neewan (talk) 15:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Qian.neewan (talk) 15:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Could you please add a category above? Yann (talk) 15:59, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support copyright issue of this picture makes it a featured picture to me, but it is great anyway. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 18:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Neutral Nice, but IMO not FP. It's special because it was made by a monkey, but it is only a snapshot. --XRay ^talk 19:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
• It's a stolen image IMO. No matter what the stupid law says. --Donninigeorgia (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment This image was discussed extensively by a large number of reviewers at the earlier nomination: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Macaca nigra self-portrait (rotated and cropped).jpg. However, the actual JPG offered here is much larger (11.74MP vs 1.63MP) so I guess a revisit is justified. -- Colin (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Quality is not so bad seeing the condition how it was taken (good camera or artist monkey? ;oD) And now it is famous. Yann (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:39, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support - Great selfportrait... Kleuske (talk) 10:05, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 11:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose There is enough doubt about the copyright status of this image to make featuring it unwise. Voting to promote it to FP status just as the (human) photographer has said in yesterday's edition of Amateur Photographer that he is ‘working to pursue infringers in the UK’ feels too much like an unethical exercise in photographer-baiting. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Michael, this is the wrong place to discuss the copyright status of this picture, which already have been discussed ad nauseam and settled. David Slater is not the photographer (that's the point), and he sent a DMCA notice to the WMF and it was rejected. BTW his arguments are complete bullshit. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
    • See m:Wikimedia_Foundation_Transparency_Report/Requests_for_Content_Alteration_&_Takedown#Monkey_Selfie. -- KTC (talk) 22:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Yann, while I agree the copyright issue has been discussed ad nauseam and settled in the US, the image still strongly divides opinion on the ethics (enshrined in law or otherwise) of treating this image as free. A featured picture is supposed to be one "of the finest on Commons" and if some feel it is not ethical to host/promote such works then their opinion is a valid aspect that judgement of "our finest", even if some disagree. While threats of legal action continue in the UK, it would probably be unwise for any UK-based person to re-use this image [other than "fair use" for commentary, which seems to be 99% of its usage anyway], which surely affects its status as being among our best free works. -- Colin (talk) 07:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
      • Colin, the copyright status has been reviewed by several legal experts, including from WMF and the US government. I don't think there is any doubt that it is in the public domain in the USA and most countries. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
        • I know and I agree it seems pretty settled wrt copyright law. Doesn't mean that the ethics are settled (they clearly aren't, especially outside of Commons) or that the continued threat of legal action in the UK can be completely ignored. These two issues exist, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not. -- Colin (talk) 09:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
        • Yann, I understand that you don't see any ethical problem here. I do. The copyright situation in the UK is by no means as clear as it is in the US, and if it were to be adjudicated by a UK court the decision could go either way. That, and the perception that Commons is featuring the image out of spite is very relevant, in my view. The comment by Daniel Case, below, exemplifies the type of hostile and unpleasant view that I find most regrettable. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
          • Sorry to say, but talking about ethics here is a big hypocrisy. I am pretty sure than the camera owner, now being known as "the man who helped creating the monkey selfie", is a much better commercial position than being a photographer of an ordinary picture of an ordinary monkey. Beside, we promoted pictures of much worse ethics than this without anyone raising an eyebrow about it. And we will certainly do it again in the future. That's not an issue in itself, Commons being not a project for promoting ethics. I would be happy to discuss this in a RFC about "ethics and Commons", this nomination is not the right place to do it. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Just another selfie. Saffron Blaze 22:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't want to be too formal but per XRay plus it was taken accidentally. --Laitche (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Strong support because it's now a picture with historic value in and of itself, it was pretty good to begin with, and David Slater can go stick his long lens where the sun don't shine. Daniel Case (talk) 23:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

• ... and another case in point as to why I don't contribute images to Wikimedia Commons anymore. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

•  Oppose bastial, animal, but not FP. A "snapsot" taken from an animal can't be featured. It is simply a random image, a snapshot. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Who or what created the image is not a criterion for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: sorry, but what will be featured on this absolute and real/true random snapshot??? Can you please explain it me? That was neither wanted nor intended. It is comparable to a game of roulette or lotterie ... a simply chance from an interesting animal! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

•  Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nonsense. Jee 11:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose as others -- Christian Ferrer 11:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others --LivioAndronico talk 15:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:16, 30 April 2015 (UTC)