 :::Keep your assertions about my pet ownership to yourself. That is a total breach of Wikiquette. Claiming that my personal status does this or that to my judgement is rude, besides being just as subjective as you accuse me of being.  ::::As I stated before (perhaps not clearly enough), just because an image is used in another FA doesn't mean it is appropriate for this particular usage. It only verifys that the image is useful and encyclopedic. But in an article that already has more than sufficient images, it is gratuitous. One single image demonstrates nothing about the different attributes of beddings. The zoo image is of dubious relation to the Diet section, and once more there are already several images showing guinea pigs feeding. Simple appreciation of the images (hmm, sounds like aesthetic enjoyment, instead of firm encyclopedic necessity. i.e. cuteness/eccentricity) is not an argument for inclusion.  