Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Golden Face

Golden Face[edit]

The typical smart look of a golden retriever, inquisitive and always learning. This image clearly supports the well know fact that golden retrievers are very curious and hence learn quickly. You can also see kindness which another feature of this gentle animal. The image has spontaneity and is true to life. I have created this picture, his name is Riley and this image appears in.. you guessed it “Golden Retriever”

Nominate and support. --Calyponte 17:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Too close up. It would be more informative to show the entire dog. Redquark 18:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The article already has a full view of a golden retriever, the close up was taken purposely to show its facial expression in detail.
Oppose. clearly supports the well know fact that golden retrievers are very curious and hence learn quickly. You can also see kindness. This is about as unencyclopedic as it gets. With this caption it might illustrate the pathetic fallacy article (check the link, it's not an insult!). --Dschwen 20:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- While I agree that the photo is not encyclopedic, the caption does not render this a good illustration for pathetic fallacy, which relates to inanimate objects. The golden retriever in the picture appears to be alive. -- Moondigger 22:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - True, although the article states Animal Farm as an example. Anthropomorphism would probably be a better fit. Anyway I'm not suggesting putting the picture in any article, its rather the whole nomination that serves as an example :-) --Dschwen 00:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It is very much alive indeed.
Oppose. Not terribly encyclopedic, though it is a nice photo of the dog. -- Moondigger 22:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. In terms of the photograph itself, the biggest problem for me is the fringing around the edges of the dog's face. But I also can't support an image like this without it being in an appropriate article. Right now it is not. I think this picture would best demonstrate the tendancy for humans to personify animals into having emotions and human expressions and such, but I don't know if there's an article for that. --Tewy 02:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Anthropomorphism --Bridgecross 03:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I guess what I meant is the tendancy for humans to see the general shape of a face, and recognize it as such (like this :) ;-) :-( :-D ) Someone looking at this picture would see the dog's "expression" and think the dog felt a particular emotion. Is there an article on that recognition, or does Anthropomorphism cover that range too? I've read the article and can't find anything specific about it. Anyone more familiar with this subject? --Tewy 03:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The only thing this photo shows is a Golden Retriever's head, nothing more. I don't see any inquisitiveness whatsoever. To me the dog has a blank, almost stupid look. Goldens aren't known for being particularly smart either --Dobelover12725 22:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:CIVIL. ♠ SG →Talk 00:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm reasonably sure the dog will not be offended. --tjstrf talk 09:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why? Because he is too stupid to understand? Man, you're just making it worse ;-) --Dschwen 15:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - That dog could make a reasonable case at WP:RFAr. ♠ SG →Talk 17:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 21:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]