Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Juvenile Nubian ibex

Juvenile Nubian ibex
Voting period ends on 4 May 2020  at 02:10:01 (UTC)
 * Reason:High quality image of a juvenile. (I revised the reason because article was changed) Quality lead image, represents the subject well.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Nubian ibex
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
 * Creator:Rhododendrites


 * Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Thanks. This one was a good sport, pausing for a quick moment for me to position myself and get a decent shot. :) &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 03:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. MER-C 18:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose As a juvenile, it should not be the image to illustrate the article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * That's a topic for the article talk page, no? Oppose if it doesn't significantly contribute to the article, but that shouldn't be based on whether it's an infobox image, especially if the content/quality of the image is just going to be superseded by the age of the particular animal for infobox purposes. IMO it's silly to get into talk of positioning in these threads because no decision at FPC overrides editorial judgment at the articles themselves, so what we promote today could be moved out of the infobox tomorrow. Meh. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 01:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Well said, I agree with Rhododendrites. Besides, Charles has previously argued for promoting (and has nominated) various images of the same animal, such as an adult, a juvenile, a flying pose, etc. So why is he opposing this for being a juvenile!? Bammesk (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * FPs are fine for juveniles etc., but I don't think juveniles are right for the infobox picture. Particulalry not of this species. If we had an FP of the adult with its horns, then that is different. We shouldn't mislead readers of an encyclpaedia. I have changed the Wikipedia article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * now that you have changed it, why are you still opposing? and not supporting? Your oppose rationale no longer applies. Bammesk (talk) 01:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant to unoppose. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - very good picture - --Andrei (talk) 12:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 07:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Nomination didn't reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)