Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2 الحداد.jpg

File:2 الحداد.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2021 at 16:51:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work
Info created by Sofiane mohammed amri - uploaded by Sofiane mohammed amri - nominated by Andrew Krizhanovsky -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Raybans are not suitable eye-protectors. And he's standing on the power cable. Workpiece is not secured to the work table. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Charlesjsharp: what's that got to do with the quality of the photo? This might be the norm where he lives. Seven Pandas (talk) 00:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment The guidelines state 'our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures'. This image is demonstrating an unsafe workplace putting the young man at risk of serious injury. Algeria had safety at work laws to cover this type of workplace in the 1970s. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Charlesjsharp: Honestly, your arguments are poor reasons to oppose a nomination. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:42, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      - Comment @Charlesjsharp: taking "'our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures'" and stretching it to cover unsafe work practices is really lame even by your standards. Show me where the rules actually cover unsafe work practices. Your argument here is just another case of you inventing your own rules and applying them in a hypocritical uneven manner. Seven Pandas (talk) 21:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Seven Pandas, Please stop your personal attacks. I am entitled to oppose any nomination which I believe might encourage people to endanger the lives of others. You don't have to agree with me. I also oppose images showing animal cruelty and that's not in the guidelines. There is nothing in the guidlines that prohibits images showing people breaking the law of the land. I have seen workers lose their eyesight due to carelessness or being denied suitable safety equipment, so I take this very seriously. When you have been in charge of a factory where this type of metalworking is undertaken, you don't break the law. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:08, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        I am merely stating facts. And thanks for admitting you invent your own rules. Seven Pandas (talk) 22:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don’t see anything outstanding here, a straightforward workplace shot of mediocre quality at barely 7 megapixels. I’d have chosen landscape orientation but a square crop could make it a bit more interesting (suggestion added). --Kreuz schnabel 05:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the whole composition: the way he is leaning to the left, with his body parallel to the hardware on the wall behind him. At the same time, the table foots and the blue lever are inclined to the opposite direction, providing equilibrium. The several shades of blue in the picture contrast with the golden details (his hair, glasses frame, gloves, grinding wheel, and the wall behind). And finally, the sparks add some dynamism and tension to it. —capmo (talk) 02:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 19:59, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The spark shower and the man's angle work, but for me the composition is too busy (And I just want to say that if Charles wants to oppose because he finds it morally objectionable to feature an image of a man working in unsafe conditions, he can, just as I oppose any images of someone walking along (or taken standing on) active railroad tracks no matter how good). Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Daniel Case: Since people can invent any rule they want let's just throw out all the rules and make it a free for all, well shoot it's practically a free for all already, which is why I don't upload my own photos. Nominations should be judged by the quality of the photo, that's all. Seven Pandas (talk) 00:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Seven Pandas: People can make any rules themselves for their own !votes ... they just can't attempt to impose it on others. Charles isn't asking the rest of us to !vote his way. I don't ask other people to. And that's OK. Daniel Case (talk) 01:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: I emphatically disagree, which we'll just have to agree on disagreeing. Plus, Charles is a hypocrite, he imposes higher standards on other people's photos than his does his own. Seven Pandas (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Seven Pandas: But don't we all? Daniel Case (talk) 17:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some people are more critical of their own work than others, but for those who do apply stricter standards to other people's, I suspect they're conscious of that and work to make sure it doesn't come through in a forum like this. There's a small number of people who nominate things at FPC that seem to consistently apply different standards to themselves. I'm not saying Charles is one of them, but it certainly happens, and it's ok to be frustrated by that.

As for inventing rules, yes, it's extremely frustrating.. but mainly just when people don't put forth the effort to frame their rule in the context of things that are typically understood as valid reasons to oppose. So, not "oppose because it's unsafe" (I'm uneasy with the idea of Commons nannying its users) but "oppose because while it has some 'wow' it's not actually a valuable illustration of this activity due to x, y, z". I think that sort of framing is much easier to swallow. The value of an image, apart from its technical quality and "wow", is typically understood to be a valid reason for supporting/opposing. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:03, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exciting composition. If we ever run it as Picture of the Day, the ways in which the man is in violation of fundamental safety codes should be mentioned, and I would certainly support their being added to the description on the file page, but I don't see that as a reason to oppose a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:47, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Capmo and Ikan -- Radomianin (talk) 08:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp. The grinder sparks are very neat but I would be much more impressed and interested by a picture that shows how to do it right. --Trougnouf (talk) 08:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - and in particular, reject Charlesjsharp's claim that poor eye protection makes a bad photo. This is how people in many countries (and plenty in the US) do work. We also have Category:Lack of personal protective equipment as a consequence. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Quality is okay, Shows something different. I too reject Charles' comments - Undeveloped countries do things their way and that's fine. You'd be surprised what can and does happen in the UK too. Other than perhaps quality issues I see no reason to oppose. –Davey2010^Talk 17:45, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Algeria is not an undeveloped country. Safety at work legislation was in place many years ago when I worked there in engineering. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:35, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay my apologies, Well still we're not here to teach people how to use tools correctly nor do we condone whatever happens in those images. We simply showcase the various images we have here good or bad so without sounding disrespectful to you imho your comments on safety are irrelevant. If people choose to disregard safety then that's up to them. –Davey2010^Talk 22:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:01, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#People_at_work