Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Buddha of Ibiraçu

Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 00:00:00 (UTC)

This article was vandalized by the same photographer and nominator last August with a similar photo of Buddha taken 40 minutes later.
There is of course a high risk of recurrence, because the photographer, who promised "not to disrupt anymore" has never stopped vandalizing. Now indefinitely blocked on Commons, the same person is continuing with sockpuppets like Aliphotography blocked a few days ago, Green Cabo and The American Person blocked today.
See also "Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Archive" mentioned today by a sockpuppet of this vandal on a recent Featured Picture Candidate. -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care you (guys from Commons) think about me at all. You, Basile, are the most confrontational point in the Wiki Universe ever. Lack of mutual appreciation. ArionStar (talk) 15:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arion, you literally created two new sockpuppets yesterday so you could nominate four pictures at once and break Commons rules. And this was only days after a previous sockpuppet was banned. You have vandalised Commons FPC with illegitimate accounts and lied about the identity of the sockpuppets when called out on them. You're not succeeding in trying to make Basile, who has broken no rules, into the villain, and it's entirely reasonable for us to point out this behaviour so that a very similar project on another wiki is aware of what they are letting themselves in for in allowing you to participate. Please, find a new hobby to occupy your time. Cmao20 (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, ignoring Commons users: it's time to analyze the image! ArionStar (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "guy from Commons", as you call me, made far more contributions than you in this section of Wikipedia. -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever, Basile from Commons… Whatever. ArionStar (talk) 00:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm confused, ArionStar. Sockpuppets aren't allowed on Wikipedia are they? Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SOCK. Moonreach (talk) 20:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: Just checked, but none of the sockpuppets mentioned above were ever active on the English Wikipedia. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regards ;-* ArionStar (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Armbrust: all pictures hosted on Commons are displayed here on Wikipedia in English (and other languages). Vandalized images make no exception. See for example the history of File:Buda de Ibiraçu (B&W).jpg, where you can verify it was vandalized during 6 days, before another user called Koavf reverts. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless @Armbrust:, I consider that all Wikis should abide by the same code of ethics; so a ban on Commons concerning featured images should surely be respected here; quite apart from the attacks on Basile which should not go unoticed by any Admin active here. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Answered a similar question at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kaaba 2. The same applies here too. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 05:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Took on an iPhone 15 Pro, who is DEFINITELY not at the standard of featured picture. Looking closely, this image is definitely not fit for being a featured picture due to all the quality issues, against what is described as “high quality”. Sorry, but another one of the lies from you Arion. Wcamp9 (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Article too small. Poor sources. Bad quality image of low resolution. -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are all right actually. RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Poor sources" doesn't mean "false". And the article in state is very small for a link on the home page. -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The main issue appears to be the photographer itself, and we need to Wikipedia:FOC. E_F⁵ 14:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I won't go into the merits, and I hope ArionStar calms down, but what Basile Morin said about vandalism is in bad faith and simply false. What vandalism?! The "lang-pt" template was replaced some time ago, so it's obvious that the previous version would be broken. In the diff in question, by the way, Arion only removed information that I, the article's creator, later confirmed to be indeed incorrect. RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Almost all of the few Featured Pictures ArionStar collected have been vandalized (1, 2, 3, 4, 5...) This is verifiable and some of these pictures were used in articles (concrete example, used in article "Papaye", the link is written below). This file here was used in the same article (a few weeks earlier in fact, before being replaced by this 2nd version, above), and given the considerable number of various abuses committed by the nominator, I warn that there is a strong chance that the same thing will happen again in the future if this image is promoted. See for example a "picture of the day" on frp-Wikipedia. There you go, now everyone must take their responsibilities. Kind regards. -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Basile. Yann (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]