Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Standing white tiger.jpg

File:Standing white tiger.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2019 at 19:12:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Standing white tiger.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Standing white tiger.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
•  Info The only minor flaw with this shot to me is that the crop on the left is a bit tight, which may be why Basile didn't nominate it. Other than that it seems pretty excellent - very sharp, good quality, and lucky to capture the tiger in a dramatic pose. created by Basile Morin - uploaded by Basile Morin - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment Lucky? In a zoo? Charles (talk) 23:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

• Well, still lucky to get such a good expression, although certainly massively easier than getting it in the wild! I don't mind zoo shots but you're quite entitled to oppose for that reason. Cmao20 (talk) 00:07, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks, Cmao20 -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:17, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Adorable image 😺 --PantheraLeo1359531 (talk) 12:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support - Pretty big pussycat. But seriously, per others. Was he roaring at you? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:49, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

• I think my neighbor was more appetizing -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:50, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

•  Support I'm normally not a big fan of zoo shots, but in this case it works pretty well for me, almost in a passport portrait kind of way … --El Grafo (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Gnosis (talk) 19:30, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Torn on this, but landing on oppose. It's a technically good shot, of course, but to feature a white tiger I'd want it to be really spectacular rather than just standing there. Grown white tigers are nonexistent in the wild, but they make for money-making spectacles in captivity so they're inbred just for the purpose of display in zoos/entertainment. Breeding them is banned by e.g. the American Zoological Association because it has "has been clearly linked with various abnormal, debilitating, and, at times, lethal, external and internal conditions and characteristics". So yeah, sometimes we should feature things that are morally objectionable, but I wouldn't apply the same standards to them that I would another kind of animal (in the wild or in a zoo). Further reading. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  05:45, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

• Same than dog breeding. But according to Wikipedia, the White tiger is reported from time to time in the wild. Some animal lovers say life is harder for a White tiger in the wild than in captivity -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:35, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

• The enwiki article is presently not so great. There hasnt been a real wild white tiger seen in the wild in some decades iirc. But yeah life is harder for them in the wild, to the point that they, well, don't exist in the wild. So yes like an extreme version of dog breeding (most white tigers around now are believed to be from a single lineage, in fact, with immediate relatives bred together...). — Rhododendrites ^talk |  07:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

1. My picture is for free, not for sell. Not made for dollars. I bought my camera with my own money, and now release this image on Wikimedia Commons without retribution. Anyone can use the free licence for any purpose. You can even send a Christmas card with my tiger if you want . Or you can illustrate an article about animal coat, breeding, roar (vocalization), etc. Your creations won't bring me money.
2. - I think the Wikipedia article is better than the ABC News article you link, because it is free (based on volunteering), with a neutral point of view, and existing in more than 31 languages (English, French, Hungarian, Hindi, etc.) On the contrary, there are many adds to Facebook on the page you publish here, and it is certainly written and illustrated in a sensational way, so that everybody share it on the social networks, to make millions of dollars to ABC News and billions of dollars to Facebook. By the way, this is totally schizophrenic, because when you click on one of these Facebook links, you discover the same ABC News site previously published this article displaying a picture of two adorable young white tigers in front, and encouraging to "boost the gene pool in its breeding population" For the article White tiger of Wikipedia, it can be improved, and illustrated accurately with various sources and all the available images. But as long as the white tigers exist in the world (and in the wild at the beginning), I think we should feel free to illustrate the animal accurately. This specimen here shown on the image is a descendant of Mohan.
3. - The Zoo of Singapore, where the tiger comes from, honestly mentions the origin of its specimens: "When Mohan went on to mate with a female from this litter, they produced four white cubs. This started the breeding of white tigers under human care." Now the question about "human care" and ethics in such cases, like dog breeding, is another debate, in my opinion. We are photographers, not the WWF committee.
4. - Your article says it is "a barbaric practice for beauty". We could consider the same for this girl, and all the Kayan females in Myanmar. Although this is a Featured Picture -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:05, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

• I don't think I understand the context for all of these. My oppose isn't about you or your ability (as I said, the technical quality is good, and I suspect you know by now that I have a lot of respect for your work). I'm also not suggesting the ABC article is better (or worse) than Wikipedia. It was just the first relevant source I spotted. The girl with neck rings suggests a conversation about ethics/morality in the context of FPC more broadly, and I don't really want to get into that here. I just found myself uncomfortable featuring a white tiger without there being something truly exceptional about the image. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  04:24, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

• Agree it should be considered as a Bengal tiger before being a White one. Thus I've added a direct link to the species in the description. Hopefully this beautiful specimen will mate / be crossed with a yellow one in the future and in the wild, to produce 200% healthy cubs 😺😺😺.

Your link gave me the impression that this image should not be promoted because the existence of the animal is objectionable on an ethics aspect (but like the neck rings of the Karen girl in Myanmar, or like the ABC News articles, in my view). Now I understand you find the image rather ordinary, and I respect your opinion. Thanks for your contribution -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:10, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Rhododendrites --Andrei ([[User talk:Andrew J.Kurbiko|this Karen girltalk]]) 13:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Rhododendrites, I didn't know. Charles (talk) 16:56, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:14, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:31, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)