Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/March-2008

< Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates
Featured picture tools

Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.

Older Archive
Miscellaneous Archive
2004: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2005: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2006: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2007: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2008: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2009: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2011: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2012: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2013: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2014: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2015: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2016: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2017: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2018: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2019: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2020: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2021: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2022: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2023: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2024: January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.



USS Lexington, Philippine Sea

edit
 
Original - Grumman F6F-3 fighter landing aboard the Essex Class carrier USS Lexington (CV-16) - flagship of Task Force 58 - during the Battle of the Philippine Sea, June 1944.
Reason
Great World War II Photo.
Articles this image appears in
*Battle of the Philippine Sea
Creator
US Navy



Not promoted . --John254 02:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lyndon B. Johnson and Martin Luther King Jr.

edit
 
Original - President Lyndon B. Johnson meets with King in the White House Cabinet Room in 1966.
Reason
Historic significance
Articles this image appears in
Lyndon B. Johnson
Creator
Yoichi R. Okamoto
  • Support as nominator CPacker (talk) 06:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Unquestioned encyclopedic value, but poor composition. MLK is in profile and LBJ looks like he's shrinking away. History and names aside, it looks like the caption would be When will this man stop talking so I can get some aspirin? Very much worth a place in an article, but not the best choice for Wikipedia's main page. And I'm sorry to say that, because it'd be great to feature an image of these two men. This one isn't it. DurovaCharge! 18:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Durova. It would be great to see MLK and LBJ featured pic but this one isn't it. I wonder of LBJ's thoughts at the time this photograph was taken. Looking at his face in the full-size I bet it was something like Come on, Negro, give me a break. Fine, I'll give ya more rights but ya'll be votin' for me, ok?. - Darwinek (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I actually like the composition; their relative postures and expressions speak volumes about the racial situation as it was then, but the picture is much too grainy, bordering on B&W posterization. LBJ's face is worst hit. Matt Deres (talk) 23:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Matt Deres. I, too, love the composition and expressions, but the quality isn't high enough. See this book [1] (which, unfortunately, isn't cited on the LBJ article) for a detailed exploration of their relationship. Also, Durova, our featured pictures exist for more than just Picture of the Day; i.e. we can promote images which will never go on the main page. If a higher quality image shows up, I'll change this vote to support. - Enuja (talk) 18:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 02:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prinsengracht by night

edit
 
Original - The Prinsengracht in Amsterdam by night
Reason
This high resolution photograph shows the Prinsengracht, a 17th century canal in Amsterdam. It presents a characteristic view of the Amsterdam canals by night.
Articles this image appears in
Amsterdam, Canals of Amsterdam
Creator
commons:User:Aforaseem

Not promoted MER-C 09:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Studies of Embryos

edit
 
Original - Anatomical study of a fetus in a uterus (pen over red chalk 1510-1513).
 
Edit 1 artifacts removed, minor levels adjustment on upper portion.
Reason
A fetus at 4 months. Clear high resolution file.
Articles this image appears in
Leonardo da Vinci, Study (drawing)
Creator
Leonardo da Vinci

Promoted Image:Da Vinci Studies of Embryos Luc Viatour.jpg MER-C 09:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Pale Grass Blue (male and female)

edit
 
Original Pale Grass Blue male and female. (mating).
Reason
High resolution photograph of Pale Grass Blue male and female. (mating).
Articles this image appears in
Pseudozizeeria maha, mating
Creator
Laitche

Not promoted MER-C 09:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Goalkeeper

edit
 
Original - In Association Football, a goalkeeper is a designated player that is charged with directly preventing the opposite team from scoring by defending the goal.
Reason
Composition, facial expression, good motion blur.
Articles this image appears in
Association football, Goalkeeper, Association football positions
Creator
Master Sgt. Lance Cheung

Not promoted MER-C 09:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Elizabeth I embroidery

edit
 
Original - Cover of a manuscript book known to have been translated and copied, and believed to have been also embroidered, by Elizabeth I of England as an 11-year-old child for her stepmother Queen Catherine Parr, 1544.
Reason
The image description and related article provide a good background on the historical significance. Comes from the same source as current FP Image:Felbrigge.jpg and likely to be the only other FPC nomination for an embroidered book (unless non-English sources of comparable quality and importance come to light). A fine image of surviving Tudor needlework with exceptional provenance.
Articles this image appears in
The Miroir or Glasse of the Synneful Soul
Creator
Elizabeth I of England

Not promoted MER-C 09:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Snowy Plover

edit
 
Original - Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus)
 
Edit 1 by Fir0002 - downsample, sharpen, convert from Adobe RGB to sRGB
 
Edit 2 sRGB conversion only
Reason
Another great bird photo from Mike Baird. I've been sifting through his flickr archives, and I think this is one of the best and most useful.
Articles this image appears in
Kentish Plover (this is what the Snowy Plover is called outside the US, where this photo was taken)
Creator
Mike Baird
I think I'll go the compromise edit (2) here. Plus I've suffered a recent lack of energy/enthusiasm recently. If there are no objections by the weekend, Edit 2 sticks. MER-C 08:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Snowy Plover srgb.jpg MER-C 09:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Discovery of the Mississippi

edit
 
Original - 'Discovery of the Mississippi was the last painting to be commissioned by Congress for the United States Capitol rotunda. William H. Powell was given the commission in 1847 and the painting was purchased in 1855. At the center of the canvas, is Spanish navigator and conquistador Hernando de Soto riding a white horse.The painting depicts de Soto and his troops approaching Native Americans in front of tepees, with a chief holding a peace pipe. The foreground is filled by weapons and soldiers to represent the devastating battle at Mauvila (or Mabila), in which de Soto suffered a Pyrrhic victory over Choctaws under Tuscaloosa. To the right, a monk prays as a crucifix is set in the ground.
Reason
A very good painting of a historical event.
Articles this image appears in
United States Capitol rotunda
Creator
William Henry Powell, 1847

Not promoted MER-C 11:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Bedouin woman

edit
 
Original - Bedouin woman in Jerusalem, between 1898 and 1914.
Reason
A vintage photograph of a Bedouin woman in traditional attire. Unusual for one from this period to show her face. This image was popular with a recent GA drive so several editors searched for a high resolution file that would be suitable for cleanup and FPC. Restored from original LoC archives. A slightly different crop, unrestored, is at Image:Bedouin woman (1898 - 1914).jpg.
Articles this image appears in
Palestinian costumes
Bedouin
Creator
American Colony Photographers

Promoted Image:Bedouinwomanb.jpg MER-C 11:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rigger

edit
 
Original - "Big Pete" Ramagos, rigger at work on dam (TVA) Douglas Dam, Tennessee, June 1942.
Reason
Another example of early color photography (picking those PD archives clean). Quite a face. Most of the articles about construction professions don't have any image, so it's good to locate a quality example. Restored version of Image:AlfredPalmerRamos.jpg
Articles this image appears in
Rigger (modern usage)
Creator
Alfred Palmer

Promoted Image:AlfredPalmerRamagosa.jpg MER-C 11:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Worlds tallest buildings in 1884

edit
 
Original - Diagram of the Principal High Buildings of the Old World
Reason
Absolute top encyclopedicness, large resolution, historical value
Articles this image appears in
List of tallest buildings and structures in the world
Creator
George F. Cram

Not promoted MER-C 11:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Tablet press animation

edit
 
Original - A tablet press compresses powdered pharmaceutical formulations into hard tablets of uniform shape and weight. The lower punch retracts to form a cavity which is filled with powder by the feeder. The excess is scraped off and the punch is drawn down and covered. The upper and lower punches compress the tablet in two steps as they travel across heavy compression rolls. The tablet is then ejected from the cavity and the process repeats. At full speed, a typical press can make over 250,000 tablets per hour.
Reason
Animation shows the complex, multi-step process of tablet pressing in a convenient view.
Articles this image appears in
Tablet
Creator
Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs)
The compression rolls do the heavy pressing (yes, they actually rotate) and the punches actually travel directly on the rolls during this compression step. A typical force might be 10 kNewtons on the first set and 30kN (equivalent to about 3000kg force) on the second set. The photo on tablet is a good comparison. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 04:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to say it but it looks like you should fix the image.. it looks like the punches are hanging from the track and when the tracks get closer, the punches get closer.. the picture of the old press has no track at all- the punches are all mounted to the assembly (no track) and pushed downward by the rollers. :D\=< (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The edges of the punches rest on cams. If you look carefully in the photo you can see them. It is really only the lip of the punch that touches the cam. The animation is based on a blueprint of a more modern press which is constructed in a slightly different way, the photo is of a much older machine. Either way, the basic process is the same. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 05:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on, I still don't get why they spin. They're smooth- how does spinning do anything? :D\=< (talk) 09:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All of the punches are inserted into a large rotating turret (not shown in the animation for clarity), similar to the photo. When the turret turns, the punches do too, just like a merry-go-round. The punches are analogous to a horse, they ride up and down as the ride spins and moves over the cam. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 15:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Abstain until there is animation in the rollers. Is this 6 frames or so? Then a simple set of dots or other marks on the rollers moving in a cycle of 6 frames would indicate roller movement. --Janke | Talk 09:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 18:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but - the small rollers are slipping badly, and there's some slip on the large ones, too... --Janke | Talk 08:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
New version uploaded over old one. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 18:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Tablet press animation.gif MER-C 11:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Vector Maths

edit
 
Original - A student working on a vector proof problem as part of a VCE Specialist Mathematics Course
Reason
A high quality shot with excellent enc value - I really don't see how it could be improved (but obviously that's for you guys to find!). And I also thought it would be quite a fitting subject for what will be my last nomination for quite some time as I start my first semester of an Aero/Law double degree which promises to keep me very busy!
Articles this image appears in
Homework
Creator
Fir0002
  • Support as nominator Fir0002 11:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for your reasons given...I can't really oppose you. Great handwriting btw =D Dengero (talk) 11:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's a little too neat for most homework, but can't oppose for that ;). Very well composed image. Good luck with your studies. --liquidGhoul (talk) 12:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support difficult to illustrate well, but this does it. — BRIAN0918 • 2008-02-21 17:58Z
  • Support Ugh, I hate doing proofs. -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 23:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I went through the vector proof and, so far, everything seems to be correct... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment and no vote. The composition is kind of unappealing to me (since the white notebook takes up so much of the frame and the text is nearly upside-down from the viewer's perspective), but I don't know what I would do to change or improve it. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I always feel like a jerk when I oppose something Fir has offered, rare though that is. There's not much to say about the technical aspect (we know he can take a picture!), yet I don't see anything of feature quality here. To me, there are two things that led to my oppose: first, I don't know how useful the picture is - period. This is just some dude doing math proofs; you could give the viewer almost exactly as much encyclopedic content using plain text. I just can't picture someone reading the homework article and still having some question left over that this picture might answer, so (to me) it fails criterion 5. Second, I just don't find this impressive at all; there's no "wow" factor here, nothing to draw a viewer in to learn more about a topic. I usually think it's inappropriate to compare two FPCs that are currently on the block, but I find it incongruous that pictures like those of the Himba ladies should be dismissed as being snapshots, while this utterly mundane (with all due respect) picture is almost universally lauded. Gah! I feel like I need absolution now! Matt Deres (talk) 01:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's not about the subject matter so much as it is about carefully planning the composition and getting a professional looking photo. But I also oppose purely because it's not very enc. Try commons :D\=< (talk) 04:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Matt's comment above got me thinking about what a high-quality, encyclopedic image of homework should look like, and... this is better than anything I can think of. SingCal 01:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Recognising the photo's technical quality, this just doesn't have any wow factor for me. Pstuart84 Talk 13:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also Fir, good luck with the degree - uni years really are the best! Pstuart84 Talk 13:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • No they're not. No money, obcenely huge mounting debt, no time for anything but work and studying, slop for food (OK not slop, but no successful adult would touch it), sharing a tiny room with other people and a communal housing arrangement that defies any reasonable expectation of a quiet place to sleep at night, nonstop stress from grades and work. I'd say more than 85% of the people in my dorm have serious sleeping disorders that probably deserve immediate medical/psychological intervention, but of course they don't because that's the least of a college student's worries- most students just drown themselves in coffee. I don't know how things work in Australia, but I can't imagine they're very different. I get that the later stages of life are boring or whatever but adults tend to have a ridiculously distorted view of what adolescence and early adulthood is actually like- the uncertainty far outweighs any excitement. :D\=< (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is no wow factor in homework. MER-C 07:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Meets all criteria, and, from a slightly biased perspective, probably as likely a nom to gaining FP status that's related to my profession as we're going to get. Would strong support if they were doing homework for a real subject like Physics or IT ;-). --jjron (talk) 01:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sorry Fir, the light is pretty flat and does nothing to highlight the main subject. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 17:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • You've mentioned lighting on more than a few of your recent opposes. I'm just curious, what would you do to improve the lighting? I think that anything more direct direct than this won't help much—shadows help bring out textures in some photos, but here it would just distract from the real subject, IMO. Thegreenj (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I may oppose due to lighting fairly frequently, mainly because it is the most important technical aspect of photography. Composition is the other thing you will see me oppose for more than some people. In this photo, it seems like the light on the paper (the central subject of the photo) is indirect window light or other fairly flat reflected light. There seems to me some artificial light from the lower right (probably tungsten based on color). That would be all fine except that the artificial light is aimed to high. It falls mainly on the hand doing the homework and less on the paper. The hand, then, is the focal point of the light in this picture, it appears that the meter exposed for it leaving the rest of the picture somewhat contrast-less with luminosity near that of highlights. The light on the hand is pulling the balance of the image way to the top RHS and the OOF paper at the bottom LHS serves to exacerbate that problem. I feel like the artificial tungsten would have been better placed in the lower LHS of the image and aimed significantly lower. If you are curious about any of the other opposes in more detail. Drop a link and I'll be happy to elaborate. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 00:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I understand what you're saying, but I'm really uncertain it would make much of a difference if what you said were done. Getting the balance right with light is fine and dandy with if you want to perfect the aesthetic nature of the picture, but doesn't it look perfectly natural as it is? Of course the paper has a luminosity near the highlights—it's white! How much contrast would you gain if you moved the lights, and, more importantly, how would that help the picture? Not that I'm questioning the validity of any of your opposes; I just think that you are reading a bit too much into a mundane picture that is really not trying to be more than that. I mean, really, when was the last time homework was exciting? : ) Thegreenj 01:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Just to weigh in on the lighting issue the only lighting was natural light from a nearby window - there was no artificial lighting on the hand or anywhere else. --Fir0002 10:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - well taken and illustrative. As to User:Fcb981's lighting issues I think that this is an artistic assessment which is always likely to lead to differing opinions. From my point of view the point of an illustration of homework is the doing of the work (rather than the work itself). Light leading you to the hand first then onto the work illustrates better than the reverse, just as an image of horse-riding is better if you are lead to the rider first rather than the horse. I like the way the composition and lighting leads you across the work to the worker, then back to the work - Peripitus (Talk) 03:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I've been down that road before --ZeWrestler Talk 23:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Thanks to everyone for your well wishes they're appreciated! And sorry about the subject choice jjron! ;-) --Fir0002 10:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportAt first, I thought it was a picture for the article on vector maths, which that wouldn't be good for; but as it's for homework, it seems like an excellent treatment of the subject. Dr. Extreme (talk) 19:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Peter ;-) --Petar Marjanovic 21:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment (I've already voted, so don't count me twice!) I can't believe the amount of support for this utterly uninteresting photo. I hate being the guy who seems to want to stir up trouble where none is needed, but there is no way that this qualifies as being a feature quality photo. My opinion is that the support for this picture comes from two sources - people who remember having to do similar exercises and people who want to support something Fir was more personally involved in than usual because they know he's a key contributor. People voting with their hearts. Read the support comments carefully before calling me on an ad hominem. Look, if this was a technically similar photo uploaded by a less recognizable user and his subject was a hand doing elementary arithmetic homework, would the supporters of the current nom also have supported my hypothetical one? I don't think so - it would be "uninteresting" and "have no wow factor" and "be unencyclopedic because homework requires a home setting and none is shown here". A whole lot more people have had to do 2+2 style problems than tackling an equilateral. Matt Deres (talk) 22:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's boring and drab. I'm sure it "illustrates the article" very well but its still boring. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus MER-C 11:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Edison and his phonograph

edit
 
Original - The invention which first gained Edison fame was the phonograph in 1877. This accomplishment was so unexpected by the public at large as to appear almost magical. His first phonograph recorded on tinfoil around a grooved cylinder which allowed the recordings to only be replayed a few times.
Reason
Because of its great historical and encyclopedia value.
Articles this image appears in
Phonograph, Thomas Edison
Creator
Brady-Handy Photograph Collection
  • comment Sorry I didnt know about the other photo, I added the featured photo to the two articles this photo is on. Can anyone close this nomination up? Thanks --CPacker (talk) 08:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 08:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Edited version already featured.



Plunketts Creek in winter

edit
 
Original - Plunketts Creek cutting through Camp Mountain in the village of Proctor: the creek's ecosystem has recovered since it was a tannery's waste disposal system, from 1868 to 1898.
Reason
I am nominating this winter panorama of Plunketts Creek (in the village of Proctor in Plunketts Creek Township, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, United States) because I believe it meets the WP:FP criteria. Specifically, it has no technical issues that I am aware of (or that were mentioned at WP:PPR), is of more than sufficent resolution, illustrates the subject (Plunketts Creek) in a compelling way, and "is among the best examples of a given subject [creeks] that the encyclopedia has to offer". I know of only one Featured Picture that is of a creek (Image:USA Lassen NP Kings Creek CA edit3.jpg), but even that is not used in an article specifically on a creek.
I also believe this picture illustrates and adds value to the Plunketts Creek article in several specific ways. The Geology section of that article describes how the creek is in a dissected plateau and at right the creek can be seen cutting into Camp Mountain (it forms a water gap through the mountain just downstream of the site pictured). The creek also cuts through glacial deposits, as can be seen. The picture also illustrates the history and ecology of the creek and its watershed. In the late 19th century the village of Proctor was founded as a company town with 120 houses for a large tannery, which used the creek for its waste disposal. The watershed was also clear cut of all its trees then. Today the tannery and most of the houses are gone, the trees have grown back, and the creek and its ecosystem have recovered to the point that the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources rated Plunketts Creek a "High Quality-Cold Water Fishery".
There is a wider, lower resolution of this image at Image:Plunketts Creek Winter Panorama.JPG. It was originally five photos stitched together with Autostitch and cropped with Paint.net. I cropped out part of a bridge at left per a helpful suggestion at WP:PPR and can upload the original five images if desired. I want to thank Dincher for requesting the article on the creek initially and Ben MacDui for requesting a winter photo of the creek. (A summer version of this scene is at Image:Plunketts Creek in Proctor.JPG.)
Articles this image appears in
Plunketts Creek (Loyalsock Creek) (a Featured Article), Plunketts Creek Township, Pennsylvania
Creator
Ruhrfisch

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 08:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn.



DontGiveUpTheShip

edit
 
Original - Missile launching from the USS Lake Erie (CG-70), on February 20, 2008
Reason
clear, large PD image, illustrates both the event, the ship the missle, looks good, good quality, very few images that show all the pyrotechnics of missile launches.
Articles this image appears in
USS Lake Erie (CG-70), USA 193, Missile, Vertical launching system, Oliver Hazard Perry and James Lawrence
Creator
US Navy

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 08:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Arcimboldovertemnus

edit
 
Original - Vertumnus by Giuseppe Arcimboldo (1527 - 1593), a portrait of Rudolf II. Now at Skokloster Castle, Sweden.
 
Alternative 1 - Summer, 1563 by Giuseppe Arcimboldo (1527 - 1593), Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria.
Reason
One of Giuseppe Arcimboldo's incredible paintings surely is worthy of FP status. If someone finds an even better example, I won't object.
Articles this image appears in
Giuseppe Arcimboldo, Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor, Vertumnus, Hidden faces
Creator
Giuseppe Arcimboldo
AFAIK this is the full picture. "Summer" exists in several versions, and this earlier one does not have the leaf border seen on the 1573 version... --Janke | Talk 09:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
nono, I know this is the full picture, but because its only the side of him, and completes his body with (clothes?) material, it doesn't really have the fruity taste to this picture, which is what this is meant to be about. The top one is perfect, except for the quality criteria. Dengero (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 08:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


US Propaganda

edit
 
Original - Poster for Thirteenth Naval District, United States Navy, showing a rat representing Japan, approaching a mousetrap labeled "Army Navy Civilian," on a background map of the state of Alaska.
Reason
Good quality image showing anti-Japanese propaganda by US.
Articles this image appears in
Propaganda
Creator
WPA Art Project (U.S. government)
  • Comment. The nommed image was just added to the Propaganda article today, where it joins many other propaganda images. Time will tell whether the image "adds value" to that article; but I don't think that it's possible to fairly assess that yet. The image is also kind of blurry-- is this the best scan that we've got? Spikebrennan (talk) 19:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually I noticed the size problems with the previous anti-Japan propaganda two noms. down and located this larger alternate from the Library of Congress site. Gave it a quick 15 minute restoration (it didn't need much). Tried a few ways to sharpen it and this was the best balance. It was the only image of this type I found in an hour of searching. Suggestion to nominator: please withdraw other two candidacies. Could find a place at Anti-Japanese sentiment and similar articles. DurovaCharge! 19:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support excellent example of period propaganda Shifthours (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Poor quality and fairly uninteresting as propaganda posters go. I also agree with Dschwen point, this guy is being a complete douche bag. -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 00:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Eek, Have people been filing their teeth to bite the newcomers extra hard? This is someone who's brand new to this and seems to mean well. His first two noms were a little off target so I helped him out. Not sure whether this one will fly, but it seemed like the right thing to be friendly and offer a helping hand. Chew on my ear if you disagree, please. DurovaCharge! 03:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hear hear. WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, and all those other things that we should all know by now. SingCal 17:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the guy that made about 20 failed noms last week, including some highly questionable subject matter? (See here for starters.) I think there were a number of polite prods made last week for him to spend some time here learning the ropes before jumping in again, which may help explain the less polite reaction seen on these. --jjron (talk) 11:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • A particular user being annoying doesn't give someone else the right to break the no personal attacks rule.D-rew (talk) 18:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Sorry, I don't know why I put that here, you obviously weren't attacking him. You were just trying to help, sorry if I sounded accusatory.D-rew (talk) 15:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • That's true - I was just trying to point out that Durova's comment about him being 'brand new' and this being his third nom weren't actually right, and that some people are possibly questioning whether or not he really does 'mean well'. --jjron (talk) 06:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Well, I apologize if that was inaccurate. The basic idea of this type of propoganda poster is a good one. Perhaps the FPC criteria should be updated to give people a realistic idea of how much leeway voters actually give for historic material. I've seen other people read that page, trust what they saw, and make noms that were out of step. Made the same mistakes myself, at first. DurovaCharge! 06:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Low quality, adds no value to the article, and not a famous propaganda piece. — BRIAN0918 • 2008-02-28 14:28Z
  • Weak oppose High enc, but quality is too far under the FP bar for my taste. SingCal 17:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The guy may be a douce bag, nevertheless I think its an interesting photo. It's eye-catching, and it adds value to the article. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 19:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're right, I apologize to the nominator. I just think there should be a rule against nominating more than two photos on the same subject in the same day or even week. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 21:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 11:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



AntiJapanese Propaganda

edit
 
Original - US Office for War Information, propaganda message: working less helps our enemies.
Reason
Historical image showing anti-Japanese propaganda in the US.
Articles this image appears in
Propaganda, Anti-Japanese propaganda
Creator
In public domain in the United States
Comment: According to Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria, "Exceptions to this rule may be made for historical or otherwise unique images". Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 11:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Love or Duty

edit
 
Original - "Love or Duty", an 1871 chromolithograph by Gabriele Castagnola. Chromolithography was the principal method of producing color prints from the late eighteenth century until the development of offset printing in the 1930s.
Reason
Originally promoted in a unanimous but hurried vote with a little bit of WP:IAR as a holiday idea for Valentine's Day (Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/"Love or Duty"). After it ran on the main page some editors objected on procedural grounds, so it's been delisted for a regular vote. No disrespect was intended. Putting this forward in the usual manner (as the second edit, without the Library of Congress imprint).
Articles this image appears in
Gabriele Castagnola, Chromolithography
Creator
Gabriele Castagnola
  • After thinking bout it I would like to see some mention in the caption of what we can learn from this painting about the artist's technique/timeperiod/etc. for encyclopedic purposes.D-rew (talk) 19:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Love or dutyb.jpg MER-C 11:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Kaaba

edit
 
Original - Pilgrims performing Tawaf (circumambulating) the Kaaba during the Hajj. This picture taken from the gate of Abdul Aziz seems to divide the Kaaba and the minarets into mirror images of one another.
Reason
Something different to the usual western images that go through FPC. An earlier version of this image was nominated at FPC last year and just missed out on promotion. It went back up on PPR and I'm nominating this touched up version from there.
Most of the opposes at FPC last year were to do with the quality being average and it being 'easily reproducible'. Well, the edit has upped the quality, and as the PPR nom says, no better pictures have been forthcoming. Given that photography is, let's say, 'highly discouraged' in here, neither are they likely to be anytime soon, thus rather counteracting the 'easily reproducible' argument.
Highly encyclopaedic and attractively composed, this is one of the best photos available of the Kaaba on the internet, and has since been picked up by several news services.
Articles this image appears in
Kaaba
Hajj
Muhammad
Most sacred sites
Masjid al-Haram
Creator
Muhammad Mahdi Karim

Not promoted MER-C 11:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


United States Marines Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima (Video)

edit
Original - Video of the Flag Raising on Iwo Jima, shot by Marine photographer Bill Genaust.
Alternative Color version of the same
Reason
This is public domain footage from a film real operated by Bill Genaust as he shot the second flag rasing on Iwo Jima. The film size is small, but it shows the moment the marines and navy corpsman rasied the second flag atop suribachi, and in my opinion has high historical value, hence the nod at FPC. This image originated from the Commons, and was the selected as a media of the day for August 23. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima
Creator
Bill Genaust (USMC photographer)

Promoted Image:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima.ogv MER-C 11:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Mont Blanc

edit
 
Original - The top of Mont Blanc seen from the Gare des Glaciers.
 
Alternative - Mont Blanc as seen from Aiguille du Midi.
 
Alternative 2 - Mont Blanc seen in the afternoon taken from the Rébuffat platform.
Reason
Very clear and encyclopedic image.
Articles this image appears in
Mont Blanc European Union
Creator
User:Nattfodd

Promoted Image:PanoMontBlancHDR_edit_1.jpg MER-C 11:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Scoti===Hurricane Katrina===

 
Original - Hurricane Katrina as a category 5 in the Gulf of Mexico
Reason
Shows a famous storm, NO THERE IS ONLY 2 HURRICANE FEATURED PICTURES!!!
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Katrina, Disaster
Creator
NASA

Not promoted MER-C 11:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



1863 Meeting of Settlers and Maoris at Hawke's Bay, New Zealand

edit
 
Original - An 1863 meeting between Maoris and settlers in Hawke's Bay Province, New Zealand. This was during the Invasion of the Waikato, and, although the Maoris and setters in this region had always gotten along fairly well, the situation grew somewhat tense, and so this meeting was held to allow them to talk things over, and resulted in a reaffirmation of friendship and peace between the groups.
Reason
I think this is a wonderful image, showing a snapshot of life in New Zealand in 1863, particularly the all-too-rare view of Maori life at that time. A note on restoration: I've attempted to compromise in the restoration between the two possibilities of dealing with the lines between the glued-together woodblocks: I made them less visible, and edited them out as much as possible from important parts of the image such as faces, but allowed some traces of them to remain.
Articles this image appears in
Hawke's Bay Province, Māori, Pā
Creator
M. Jackson
  • Support as nominator Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 14:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Historic, ridiculously high resolution, and as you say, an interesting snapshot of life. Dr. Extreme (talk) 14:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I noticed a couple of lines, but they don't detract from the overall image. Would it be completely blasphemous to suggest a reduction in overall resolution? The nature of the woodblock print means that it has to be viewed from some distance--as it is now, you can't really tell what it's supposed to be at full resolution. --jonny-mt 15:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those will be the gaps between the woodblocks I mentioned - removing or not removing them has proven controversial in the past, so I tried to compromise by leaving some traces of them, but removing them from all the important areas. As for a reduction in resolution - well, it's an A3 engraving, and probably needs to be about this size to reproduce well at its original size when printing it. However, you do have a good point, so I've set up some sub-pages to assist viewing. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Defer to others the degree to which woodblocks gaps should be preserved, although I err more on the side of more preservation. I do have a question though; what's with the grey smudges visible in white spaces in the foreground (especially the man's hat on the right)? I would expect the original is just white and full-black from the ink. - Enuja (talk) 05:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think that's mostly the remains of text-bleedthrough from the other side of the paper, mixed with dirt, smudging from the page pressed against it, etc, etc, etc. - in the end, this was from a very old newspaper, with all the problems that causes. It was much worse before the cleanup, but I probably missed a few spots, as going for perfection is all too often a case of "that way madness lies". And, of course, the final shrinking down from 8250px wide to 6000 px may turn some small black marks into grey itself. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. - Enuja (talk) 20:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:1863 Meeting of Settlers and Maoris at Hawke's Bay, New Zealand.jpg MER-C 11:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Flagellum base diagram

edit
 
Original - A flagellum (plural: flagella) is a long, slender projection from the cell body, whose function is to propel an organism. The depicted type of flagellum is found in bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella, and rotates like a propeller when the bacterium swims.
Reason
i have recently noticed that when my images are featured they become more viewers and this increases the chances for them to be translated and to move into other wikipedia proyects. i want to try to feature my main diagrams so that they can get improved and or better distributed... plus i think it is of a great enciclopedic value...
Articles this image appears in
Flagellum
Creator
LadyofHats
  • Support as nominator LadyofHats (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Top notch diagram. Only thing missing is the disclaimer not to use it under mousetrap --Mike Spenard (talk) 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minor point Does not say what type of flagellum it is, and this editor is far too sleep deprievd to be trying to deal with this =) Sheesh, I thought "Well, clearly there's the Type III secretory system in there, the one used by plant pathogens and Yersina pestis so it's Eukaryotic."... god, I'm stupid before my coffee. It's Bacterial, of course. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support - I will support strongly if the text background is made transparent - at the moment, the two columns of text are on white boxes which seem randomly distributed and don't even touch the edges of the image. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 12:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can not take the white squares away since they are there so that text can be readed ( when removing them there are still colors bellow that would make reading the text confusing). would it help you if i extend them so that they go out up to the borders?. i can not make them both have the same width becouse it would be useless empty space on the right.so what do you sugest?.-LadyofHats (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I might suggest having a white background under the whole thing. I can't see any reason to have a transparent bg on this image. I might also suggest changing the stroke color on the L-Ring to be black or blue other than red, which looks weird. You may want to add a label that says Cytosol. I'm also confused about the label Cell Wall, my understanding is that the inner and outer membranes, together with the periplasmic space in-between, all together make up the cell wall. Is there a reference to check? Otherwise very nice image, Support. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, make the entire background white, just so that the sections of BG don't stand out. Remove the current white boxes, then fill the entire BG with white again. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support--Mbz1 (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support,Oppose I'd like to see a mention that this is from a Gram-negative bacteria in the caption because Gram-positive flagella and eukaryotic flagella are quite different. I also believe this type of flagella also moves in a rotational fashion, not so much a whip like action.D-rew (talk) 21:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • i do have a diagram of an eukariotyc cillia. but tell me what is the diference between a gramm positive flagella and one gramm negative? if it is so big maybe i should do 2 diagrams -LadyofHats (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's big enough that its not trivial. The main differences are in the attatchment points, because think about it, for a Gram-positive its gotta go through one plasma membrane, but in Gram-negative its gotta go through two which involves a whole other smattering of proteins. Here are some outside links to other diagrams to give you something to work with. Scroll down to section figure 2.47 about 2/3 the way down the page. There are also some good diagramshere. This page fig 1.4 should show you some of the differences in how they move(note it is a Eu flagella that acts like a whip (a la sperm), but a Pro flagella that spins like a propeller).Also note that eukaryotic cilia aren't the same thing as eukaryotic flagella. Here are the differences between cilia and flagella put simply.D-rew (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't even get me started on spirochete flagella. My point is that there are a lot of different types of flagella, and a lot of them don't look like this, so I think some specification is in order.D-rew (talk) 00:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • ok i got what you mean :P geesh, i think the more diagrams i do the more complicated they get. I have changed the description page to astop it


to do :P -LadyofHats (talk) 11:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support de Bivort 22:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • OpposeSupport The flagellum looks straghely squeezed against the outer membrane, and shouldn't it the junction be a ~45 degree angle compared to the rotor? And the caption should mention what type of bacteria it is (a proteobacterium?). And it doesn't have any references. Narayanese (talk) 00:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • squeezed against? i didnt got that part, can you explain?. my source makes the hook 90 degrees. but i changed it a bit since some other sources do show it less inclinated. I added some information on the description of movement. and none of my sources metioned a specific kind of bacteria. so i have no idea if it is or not a proteobacterum or not. Plus if you read a bit up in this discussion you can see the links to some of my sources. The reason why i dont place them on the description page is that they are external links and with the time they tend to become invalid. -LadyofHats (talk) 03:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've only seen unipolar flagella myself and they point out from the cell and only start bending a lot further out, but at second thought I suppose the amphitrichous/peritrichous; ones do lie close to the membrane like in the picture. Now I see your sources, good. I looked up the hook angle, it's 65 degrees in Salmonella (Foruta 2007, PMID 17142059), so your current bend is ok.Narayanese (talk) 08:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Is there issues regarding the caption lines at different sizes or is it my browser? -62.172.143.205 (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I changed the caption, likening it to a propeller. (source: [7]) and specifying organism. Narayanese (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Flagellum base diagram.svg MER-C 11:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Acapulco Bay

edit
 
Original - A 1628 Spanish relief map of Acapulco Bay.Acapulco is a city and major sea port in the state of Guerrero on the Pacific coast of Mexico, 300 km (190 miles) southwest from Mexico City.
Reason
Excellent image
Articles this image appears in
Acapulco
Creator
A. Boot ?

Promoted Image:Puerto de Acapulco Boot 1628.png MER-C 11:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



abank Place.jpg}}

Map of the world by Piri Reis

edit
 
Original - Surviving fragment of the first World Map of Ottoman admiral Piri Reis (1513)
Reason
The map shows part of the western coasts of Europe and North Africa with reasonable accuracy, and the coast of Brazil is also easily recognizable. I think this is a feature picture.
Articles this image appears in
Piri Reis
Ottoman Navy
History of the Turkish Navy
Islamic geography
Creator
Piri Reis
Sorry, the true version (2.000 × 2.753) is from commons [8]--Dsmurat (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the local mainpage image, so that problem with the incorrect size should be solved. Royalbroil 04:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The commons version is a dreadful, artifacted scan. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 03:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Casa Milà

edit
 
Original - The Casa Milà, a 1912 work by Catalán architect Antoni Gaudi, in the Eixample, Barcelona. Gaudí's fascination with trencadís-influenced decoration and curves (predating biomorphism by almost 20 years) can be seen here.
Reason
A beautiful shot with a high technical standard, of a subject by an important architect. The essential features of the building are clearly captured, and elements indicative of Gaudi's style are all prominent (the biomorphic curves and trencadís-like texture, for example), giving it wonderful EV.
Articles this image appears in
Antoni Gaudi, Barcelona, Casa Mila
Creator
Diliff, licensed under GDFL

Promoted Image:Casa Milà - Barcelona, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg MER-C 09:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Moon view from earth

edit
 
Original - Moon view from earth in Belgium
Reason
quality and natural vision to Moon, no view to NASA
Articles this image appears in
Moon
Creator
Luc Viatour
True, but only for the bit of moon that's lit and even the full moon will show crater details at the edges (as our FP does). Also, as per Kaldari, the subject is cut off. While you and I know that the deep shade on the left really wouldn't have any details anyway, the position of the subject seems to follow the cartoon idea that the crescent moon is really a crescent (and not an apparent crescent due to the angle of illumination). Matt Deres (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are absolutely right about cartoon, but IMO it might be impossible to show half Moon in such details together with the Eartshine.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant oppose Cropped on the left. It may be possible to clone in some blackness and fix this. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is that possible? We might need some serious panorama stiching-wizards in here. Diliff? :D\=< (talk) 02:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 09:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Submission of the Prince to the General

edit
 
Original - The scene on The Submission of Prince Dipo Negoro to General De Kock (1830) marks the end of the Java War in the Dutch East Indies; painted by Nicolaas Pieneman.
Reason
This painting shows the arrest of Prince Diponegoro by General de Kock in 1830, which marks the end of the Java War (1825–1830) in the Dutch East Indies. The scene symbolizes colonialism: the colonial power rules over the indigenous people in the colony. The painting was made by Nicolaas Pieneman, and is now in the collection of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam.
Articles this image appears in
Java War, Diponegoro, Hendrik Merkus de Kock, Dutch East Indies
Creator
Nicolaas Pieneman

Not promoted MER-C 09:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



GGB Reflection in Raindrops

edit
 
Original - The Golden Gate Bridge refracted in rain drops acting as lenses.
Reason
Aesthetically and artistically beautiful, good example of lenses, and fallen rain drops. it also displays a high level of technical skill, and high resolution.
Articles this image appears in
Rain, Refraction, Lens
Creator
Mbz1
Encyclopedia use can extend to an excellent example of reflection, as well use in the Golden Gate Bridge (perhaps as a gallery), lense (planoconvex?), raindrops, image flipping, etc. Zidel333 (talk) 23:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please feel free to support it then ;)--Mbz1 (talk) 21:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
May I please ask, if you read the caption? I'm afraid I have not noticed anywhere in the caption that it claims to illustrate the rain.On the other hand rain droplets belong to rain (there are no rain with no droplets). That's why the image might be good for rain article as well as it is good for refraction article.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ooops - space out on it being included in refraction already. It claims to illustrate rain above in the "articles this image appears in" section. As an illustration of refraction it is non-ideal. I would prefer a more diagramatic photo with simpler geometry. de Bivort 23:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
May I please thank you for not getting upset with my comment and changing your vote?I've added the image to lens too. I'm not sure it will be allowed to stay there, but I hope it will. IMO the image might find the use for the explaining of the phenomena to school kids, for whom diagramatic photo with simpler geometry might be a little bit boring.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It illustrates the point of refraction well, and its eye-catching. I'm all for it. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A well-made diagrammatic picture for refraction would be great, but I think a well-made photo like this, which shows the effects of refraction in an interesting way, is also valuable. Mila, are you working on a book of optical phenomena photographed on the Golden Gate? Matt Deres (talk) 14:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi,Matt. Thank you for your question. I am not working at any book and I never will. I just like to take pictures and atmospheric optics is one of my favorite subjects. I've always wanted to see the Spectre of the Broken. At one point I considered to go to Broken, Germany just to see it, but then I realised that San Francisco and Golden Gate Bridge in particular is the great place to see these rare phenomena. May I please also thank you for forgiving me my ignorance? (I believe you know what I'm talking about.)--Mbz1 (talk) 14:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:GGB reflection in raindrops.jpg MER-C 09:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



"Earthrise" on the moon

edit
 
Original - A image of the Earth rising as seen on the moon, taken by Apollo 8
Reason
This is an excellent image, with high resolution, and good technical quality, and is also high in enecyclopediac value. It is also a featured picture on Wikimedia commons
Articles this image appears in
Earth, Apollo 8
Creator
Bill Anders
I don't believe so, but I will check for you. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 18:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure if the original was in color, but our current FP of the subject is. This is it here. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That one is very nice. This one is different, though, and would be fine as an FP. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 20:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Er, not really; it's in B&W for no reason and shows substantially the same kind of image as an existing FP that's in colour. I guess the position of the earth is more evocative in your nom, but not to a staggering degree. Oppose. Matt Deres (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for telling me. However, I fell this one is different, and could easily stand alone as its own FP. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 14:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A black and white picture like this makes me understand when we went to space/the moon. It is also the first picture of the moon landscape's contour that I have seen. Xilliah (talk) 10:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just curious, but why does a B&W picture make you understand why we went to the moon? Does the colour picture obscure that understanding or fail somehow? I've got to admit I don't understand your reasoning on this. Matt Deres (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He actually says it makes him understand when we went to the moon, not why. The only thing I can think is that when we went there there was no such thing as colour?? :-) --jjron (talk) 08:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 09:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Honoré de Balzac's La Comédie humaine

edit
 
Original - Honoré de Balzac's epic collection La Comédie humaine contains over 100 novels and stories.
Reason
The sheer number of works is represented by the many volumes displayed here. It's hard to display them all, and I've uploaded some alternative images, if folks would like to see them.
Articles this image appears in
La Comédie humaine
Creator
Scartol



Not promoted . --John254 02:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Downtown Honoluu

edit
 
Original - An aerial view of downtown Honolulu, Hawaiʻi taken on April 7, 2007. In the foreground is Aloha Tower, a clock tower and lighthouse greeting visitors to Honolulu Harbor since 1926. In the center of the photo is First Hawaiʻian Center, the tallest building and oldest bank in Hawaiʻi. In the lower right is the Falls of Clyde, the only surviving iron-hulled, four-masted full rigged ship, and the only surviving sail-driven oil tanker in the world. The Falls of Clyde is now a museum ship in Honolulu Harbor.
Reason
A beautiful image showing several notable landmarks of downtown Honolulu, such as the First Hawaiian Center, Aloha Tower, Honolulu Harbor, and the museum ship Falls of Clyde.
Articles this image appears in
Honolulu, Hawaii and Aloha Tower
Creator
ErgoSum88
  • Support as nominator ErgoSum88 (talk) 06:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, Neutral I ask the original photographer to look at recent featured cityscape pictures. This photo would certainly have been promoted 3 years ago when standards were lower, so I will remain neutral on moral and precedence concerns. However, the sky is in poor focus and the background is not as sharp as it could have been. The lighting is also not very great. EgraS (talk) 08:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I did look at the other photos before I nominated this one, and there are very few urban photos which are not panoramas. As I said, I considered this more of an encyclopedic photo rather than just another pretty picture. And I quote from criteria #5: Adds value to an article and helps readers to understand an article. An image's encyclopedic value is given priority over its artistic value. In fact if you compare this photo to another featured photo that was nominated 3 years ago as you mention, Image:I-80 Eastshore Fwy.jpg, then this photo would be of some comparison. Perhaps we should delist the I-80 photo but that is a discussion for another forum. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 04:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I realize this photo is not of the highest quality, taken with a cheap camera from a windy helicopter. My argument is that the photo adds value to the article which it is featured in. There are plenty of mediocre photos which are promoted because: 1. "It is a photograph ... which is among the best examples of a given subject that the encyclopedia has to offer." 2. "It illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more." 3. "Adds value to an article and helps readers to understand an article." So in response to these criteria I submit: 1. This is the best photo of downtown Honolulu Wikipedia has to offer (I realize I'm biased, but hear me out). 2. It shows three landmarks and their relationship to each other, each with its own article. 3. It clearly shows the tallest building in the city and demonstrates just how much taller it is than the other buildings (which isn't much). And thats about all I can say about it. After reading the FP criteria it was my understanding that this wasn't a photography contest, merely a place to promote quality photos which add value to their respective articles. Obviously, a better photo could be obtained since Honolulu isn't going anywhere, so if anyone thinks this photo doesn't deserve FP status then by all means oppose it. This is my first nomination so I really didn't know what to expect, and I'm not trying to beat a dead horse, but I'm not giving up without a fight. ;) --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 02:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photographer in Calgary

edit
 
Original - Photographer using a Nikon D200 at the 2007 Calgary Folk Music Festival
Reason
It is well composed (in my opinion), illustrates the topic well, and is of adequate size and resolution.
Articles this image appears in
Photographer
Creator
Stromcarlson



Not promoted . --John254 02:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Ophelia

edit
 
Original - Hurricane Ophelia off the coast of North Carolina.
Reason
shows a well defined hurricane
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Ophelia (2005), List of North Carolina hurricanes (1980-present).
Creator
NASA



Not promoted . --John254 03:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Wilma

edit
 
Original - Wilma at record intensity in the Atlantic Hurricane Basin
Reason
shows really intense hurricane with pinhole eye.
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Wilma, 2005 Atlantic hurricane season.
Creator
NASA



Not promoted . --John254 03:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sea Foam

edit
 
Original - When w:Plankton crushes ashore, it dies and disintegrates creating w:foam like bubbles, which are left at w:tide pools floor after the w:ocean retreats. The bubbles display all the same properties as w:soap bubbles do, displaying typical w:interference w:colors , except they last much longer than soap bubbles do.The w:organic material of the w:Plankton , that lowers the surface tension of the water (as soap does) and preserves the film is responsible for these w:colors. It might be also interesting to note how the appearance of my reflection is chanhing from bubble to bubble. The image was taken at w:Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

.

 
Alt 1
Reason
Have you ever wondered, where sea foam comes from. I have not until I noticed this beautiful, colored sea foam at California tide pools. I believe the image has high encyclopedia and educational values.
Articles this image appears in
Plankton;Reflection;Interference;Foam
Creator
Mbz1
  • Your oppose is absolutely fair. I added alternative image, which shows less foam, but rocks, algae and shells to prove that the image was not taken in a sink. I also added alt 1 to other version at the original description page because I still like the original better. Maybe it will do it for you. May I please also mention that one could see some algae at the upper right corner of the original image? May I please also mention that the bubbles of sea foam differed a lot in their sizes? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Interesting art shot, but not enough encyclopedic value. (Yes, there is an encyclopedic explanation, but neither of the images are particularly useful to further that explanation.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enuja (talk • contribs) 05:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As you could see the caption of the image provides a very detailed explanation about the subject. The question is how to make Wikipedia readers to read the caption. IMO the more interesting the shot is the more Wikipedia readers would be interested in reading what is this interesting (artistry) shot is about. May I please ask you to take your time and to explain to me what kind of image of the same subject would have been useful to further the encyclopedic explanation of seafoam. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To me, the question is not how to get readers to read the caption. The question is what encyclopedic information that image itself contains. Because you stated the image will probably be removed from reflection and interference, because the way that the green is interference is completely not addressed in the interference article, and this isn't an exceptional shot of reflection, as it's just a silhouette of you, I was evaluating the encyclopedic nature of this image for plankton. There isn't even a wikipedia article on sea foam (it's a redirect to a particular confection). If someone started an article on sea foam, and an image of sea foam that included the sea (or at least the beach) in the background, was taken from down on the ground, didn't include any (or any distracting) reflections of the photographer), and was of high technical quality, then that image on that hypothetical article might be a featured picture. - Enuja (talk) 20:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC) Thinking about it, the different image I describe would be encyclopedic for a soild section about sea foam in the plankton article. - Enuja (talk) 20:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've never stated the image will probably be removed from reflection and interference. I've stated just the opposite. Like with all my nominations I feel this way: I saw the phenomena, I took an image of it, I know what it is and I did my best to share my knoledge with the others, but failed, which is just fine with me. Thanks.I withdraw my nomination. --22:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Are you serious?!?!?! I was just about to nominate this!!! Support! -76.252.61.105 (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Doesn't seem encyclopedically applicable to any of the articles listed as hosting it. de Bivort 03:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the vote, de Bivort. (I really mean it, I like when my images are voted for or against does mot matter), but may I please ask you, if you noticed that the nomination was withdrawn :)--Mbz1 (talk) 04:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment about encyclopedic value of the image. In reflection article it is the only images, which gives an introduction to Specular reflection at a curved surface. In Interference it is the only image which shows how Interference may occure in Nature,in Plankton article it is the only image, which shows how dead plankton looks, in Foam article it is the only image, which explains in details where seafoam comes from. Yes, IMO this image has lots of encyclopedic and educational values. I withdrawn my nomination not because I agreed with the opposers (I do not), but simply because I am very, very tiered from all this FP process. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted



Plasma Ball Vid1

edit
Original - Short video of a plasma ball/lamp in action
Reshot - Short video of a plasma ball/lamp in action
Reason
Self nom but I feal it is a good video that shows the movement aspect of a plasma ball better than an image could. It is nominated here because featured videos (unlike featured sounds) dosen't appear to have got off the ground.
Articles this image appears in
Plasma_lamp#History
Creator
Myself user:geni
currently haveing camera issues bot once sorted yes I can give it a go.Geni 02:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That being the case could this be withdrawn for the time being (not quite sure how that works here).Geni 18:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okey I've reshot. I can't get the resultion any higher without loseing FPS.Geni 22:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have fallen off the nomination pile. Relisting it. MER-C 05:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They make a quiet hum, but only if you put your ear right up against them. For the purposes of the video, cutting out the sound channel completely and having it totally silent is the best way to go (does it actually have no sound channel or is it just a silent one? Removing the channel would shrink the file a little). We should add on the description page though, "This video intentionally has no sound" so people don't think their soundcard's bust or something. And for the second one, maybe emphasise that the video is not sped up in any way - someone could assume it was from the fast motion. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 12:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Plasmaball vid2.ogv MER-C 07:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Ambrose Everett Burnside

edit
 
Original - General Ambrose Burnside, c. 1860-1865.
Reason
A fine portrait of an American Civil War general who made even greater contributions as a cultivator of male facial hair. Seriously, sideburns are named after him.
Articles this image appears in
Ambrose Burnside, Sideburns
Creator
Matthew Brady

Promoted Image:Ambrose Everett Burnside.jpg MER-C 05:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Sandwich making

edit
 
Original - Sandwich making
Reason
Didn't even mean to get involved with the Sandwich page, but you get carried away, and I could find no example, not even a bad one, of a standard English white-bread sandwich. The finished sandwich doesn't really tell you anything, it just looks like bread, hence the half-assembled state pictured. The photo is only slightly posed i.e. keeping the ingredients close together. I made several sandwiches and took about 25 shots to get one I was pleased with.
Articles this image appears in
Sandwich
Creator
ProfDEH (talk)

Not promoted MER-C 05:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



edit
 
Original - A Navajo man, full-length, in ceremonial dress including mask and body paint, c. 1904.
Reason
A well composed image of Navajo ceremonial attire from a century ago. Good textures, contrast, and depth of field. Encyclopedic historic and cultural value. Restored version of Image:Navajo-Curtis.jpg rotated and cropped, with artifacts removed and some depigmentation replaced.
Articles this image appears in
Navajo people
Creator
Edward S. Curtis

Promoted Image:Zahadolzhá--Navaho.jpg MER-C 05:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Yellowish Flycatcher

edit
 
Original - The Yellowish Flycatcher, Empidonax flavescens, is a small passerine bird in the tyrant flycatcher family. It breeds in highlands from southeastern Mexico south to western Panama.
Reason
Mdf created several beautiful pictures of birds. Many which deserve to be featured, this is one of them.
Articles this image appears in
Yellowish Flycatcher
Creator
Mdf

Promoted Image:Empidonax-flavescens-001.jpg MER-C 05:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



USS Saratoga CV-3

edit
 
Original - The Uss Saratoga during world war 2
Reason
a rare color view of the ship
Articles this image appears in
USS Saratoga (CV-3)
Creator
US Navy



Not promoted . --John254 00:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kayak Playboat

edit
 
Original - Unknown paddler at Paddle for the People, July 2007, Manchester New Hampshire, Crackpipe playwave on Merrimack River
Reason
The prominent RGB color balance in this action shot stimulating. And the object 'playboat' is in its proper context.
Articles this image appears in
Playboating
Creator
Michael Spenard --Mike Spenard (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Kayak_Playboat_ManchesterNH.jpg MER-C 02:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Hurricane Rita

edit
 
Original - Hurricane Rita as a Category 5 on September 5 2005.
Reason
shows a powerful storm in the Gulf of Mexico.
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Rita, List of storms in the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season
Creator
NASA

Not promoted MER-C 02:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



George Custer

edit
 
Original - George Armstrong Custer, U.S. Army general, killed in battle at the Battle of the Little Bighorn.
Reason
Great portrait of a famous/infamous United States Army officer and cavalry commander of the American Civil War and the Indian Wars. It is a smaller photo but the FPC says exceptions to this rule may be made for historical or otherwise unique images.
Articles this image appears in
George Armstrong Custer, Indian Wars, Battle of Gettysburg, Third Day cavalry battles, List of German Americans
Creator
George L. Andrews

Promoted Image:G a custer.jpg MER-C 02:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Mars panorama

edit
 
Original - Descent from the Summit of 'Husband Hill' by the Spirit Rover, November 23-28, 2005.
Reason
Short version: a panorama of Mars.

Long version:

In late November 2005 while descending "Husband Hill," NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Spirit took the most detailed panorama so far of the "Inner Basin," the rover's next target destination. Spirit acquired the 405 individual images that make up this 360-degree view of the surrounding terrain using five different filters on the panoramic camera. The rover took the images on Martian days, or sols, 672 to 677 (Nov. 23 to 28, 2005 -- the Thanksgiving holiday weekend).

This image is an approximately true-color rendering using camera's 750-, 530-, and 430-nanometer filters. Seams between individual frames have been eliminated from the sky portion of the mosaic to better simulate the vista a person standing on Mars would see.

"Home Plate," a bright, semi-circular feature scientists hope to investigate, is harder to discern in this image than in earlier views taken from higher up the hill. Spirit acquired this more oblique view, known as the "Seminole panorama," from about halfway down the south flank of Husband Hill, 50 meters (164 feet) or so below the summit. Near the center of the panorama, on the horizon, are "McCool Hill" and "Ramon Hill," named, like Husband Hill, in honor of the fallen astronauts of the space shuttle Columbia. Husband Hill is visible behind the rover, on the right and left sides of the panorama. An arc of rover tracks made while avoiding obstacles and getting into position to examine rock outcrops can be traced over a long distance by zooming in to explore the panorama in greater detail.

Spirit is now significantly farther downhill toward the center of this panorama, en route to Home Plate and other enigmatic soils and outcrop rocks in the quest to uncover the history of Gusev Crater and the "Columbia Hills."

This is an altered version of Image:MarsPanorama.jpg, stitching problems fixed and cropped.

Articles this image appears in
Mars rover, Spirit Rover
Creator
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Promoted Image:MarsPanoramaa.jpg MER-C 02:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Golden Eagle close up

edit
 
Original - The Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos is one of the best known birds of prey in the Northern Hemisphere. Like all eagles, it belongs to the family Accipitridae.
Reason
Great photo with really nice detial.
Articles this image appears in
Golden Eagle
Creator
Richard Bartz

Not promoted MER-C 02:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Royal Spoonbill

edit
 
Original - The Royal or Black-billed Spoonbill (Platalea regia), a wading wetland bird of the western Pacific. This individual is approx. 0.7m tall and is displaying breeding plumage
Reason
High quality image of the species in a natural and attractive setting.
Articles this image appears in
Royal Spoonbill
Creator
jjron
  • Support as nominator jjron (talk) 14:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too harsh contrast, messy BG. Looks oversharpened, too - note dark contour around head ("hair") feathers. --Janke | Talk 15:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Cool name! Natural background isn't appealing, light angle hides belly. Royalbroil 16:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nice!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It doesn't matter if the background is "messy" or "unappealing", it is the natural habitat of the bird. Personally, I would much rather this background than some ridiculous (and often artificial) amout of blur that we get with other photos. Great illustration of a beautiful subject. These guys are my favourite water bird, glad to have a good photo of them. --liquidGhoul (talk) 08:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per LiquidGhoul Muhammad(talk)
  • Oppose I think the bird is really cool but I agree with Royalbroil the the background is not appealing and really distracts from the bird its self Support, After my first vote I couldnt stop thinking about this photo, I still think that the background is not as good as it could be, but the bird is great--CPacker (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support DoF properly puts subject matter in context. Information (context) should take precedence over artistic aesthetics--this is wikiPEDIA not wikiARTGALLERY --Mike Spenard (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose The line of circular orbs that follow the bottom of the rock is kind of distracting. Could they be processed out a bit? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not quite sure I follow this. There's no rocks in the picture (the bird's standing on a log, if you think that's a rock), and I don't see what orbs you're talking about in relation to it. I can only guess you're talking about the ripples in the water radiating out from where the bird had put it's beak in the water to feed, and I have no idea why you would want to edit that out, and how that's a reason to oppose. --jjron (talk) 05:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Royal-(or-Black-Billed)-Spoonbill-2,-Vic,-3.1.2008.jpg MER-C 02:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



The following debate relating to this featured picture candidacy is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the featured picture candidates talk page or the closer's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

Not promoted

Morpho peleides

edit
 
Original - An image of a Morpho peleides on a leaf
Reason
It is a quality close up of a Morpho peleides
Articles this image appears in
Morpho peleides
Creator
Mario1987
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the the featured picture candidates talk page or the closer's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.



Hurricane Erin (2001)

edit
 
Original - Hurricane Erin near peak intensity
Reason
shows a well defined storm with a large eye.
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Erin (2001)
Creator
NASA



Not promoted . --John254 15:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Game-winning softball pitch

edit
 
Original - This is the third strike of a game winning strikeout by the Texas Longhorns vs. Penn State University in a softball game.
Reason
I think this is a fantastic shot capturing the climatic moment of the game-winning pitch. Note that the yellow ball is just passing in front of the batter's arms. I also like the Longhorn logo (the logo of the winning team) seemingly hovering just over the batter.
Articles this image appears in
strikeout, Texas Longhorns, softball
Creator
dave_hensley at Flickr
OK, thanks for the feedback everyone. Best, Johntex\talk 19:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 15:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Night Revels of Han Xizai

edit
 
Original - A 12th century remake of a 10th century original by Chinese artist Gu Hongzhong. Keep in mind, this is only one half of the painting; the other half can be found here.
Reason
I've placed this under peer review for a week now, but no replies; I'm no expert, but it did not seem to conflict with the listed requirements for a featured picture. The painting's rich textures and hues complement its historical significance, as it displays furniture, clothing, table wares, musical instruments, and elite social life in China during the 10th century while also serving as a showcase for the technical achievement of Chinese painters during the period.
Articles this image appears in
Society of the Song Dynasty, Gu Hongzhong, 10th century, Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms, Society, Pipa
Creator
12th century artist after Gu Hongzhong (937–975)
I wish I knew how to fix it. I was not the original person to scan the image, and unfortunately I have no means of scanning it from somewhere else. 'Tis a shame.--Pericles of AthensTalk 19:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 02:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Night Revels of Han Xizai edit

edit
 
Stitched/corrected version - A 12th century remake of a 10th century original by Chinese artist Gu Hongzhong. This is the full version of the painting.
Reason
I've taken the liberty of stitching together the two halves of the painting. I've also corrected the color band that exposed previous stitching.
Articles this image appears in
Society of the Song Dynasty, Gu Hongzhong, 10th century, Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms, Society, Pipa
Creator
12th century artist after Gu Hongzhong (937–975)

<rant>Do NOT include more than one nomination on a page. I find multiple noms on the same page extremely annoying - it messes with the archiving schedule as I cannot archive the above nom until this one is complete. </rant> MER-C 03:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Not promoted . --John254 21:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria and Merrie England

edit

 

Original - The sheet music to Sullivan's ballet, Victoria and Merrie England.

[Forgive the wonky formatting - I don't think anyone's nominated a PDF before, and it's not like there's any better place to nominate it...]

Reason
The best-reproduced (if I do say so myself) and rarest of my musical score PDFs, this is a very hard-to-find piano reduction that is the only surviving source for most of the music to Sullivan's ballet. There may be some minor tilting, but it's the best copy that people are ever likely to see.
Articles this image appears in
Victoria and Merrie England
Creator
Arthur Sullivan
The PDF works for me (in xpdf). MER-C 10:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The inability to view the document should be reported on the Acrobat bugzilla! -- carol (talk) 11:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, Metzler had downright weird bass clefs. =) I've also uploaded a few other scores Media:Arthur Sullivan - Festival Te Deum.pdf‎ Media:Arthur Sullivan - Incidental music to King Arthur.pdf Media:Yeomen of the Guard - A Laughing Boy.pdf - but I didn't think they came out as well. The first two were from photocopies supplied to me by a friend (with his permission to do what I wanted with them), and the third involved a small amount of judgement on my part, as the full scores I had available were imperfect, and I knew this. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose - Speedy Close Not FP material - this is a more than 100 page scan from a book - put this on Wikibooks, instead! Furthermore, this isn't even a picture in the article - just in the link section... --Janke | Talk 11:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wikibooks is not for this type of books.. and since its already on the commons, and works fine on my computer (Acrobat 8, Firefox 2.0.0.12). Also.. this is damn encyclopedic.. And for the no img in the article, PDFs cant be embedded atm ;) Yzmo talk 11:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- and that's exactly the reason I oppose. How can we get such a FP onto the front page? No way... Suggestion: take one single page, save as jpg, and nominate that - that's the only way to go, IMO. --Janke | Talk 12:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - But it's the best copy that people are ever likely to see. *cough* Modern reprint *cough* Seriously in the age of LilyPond and Sibelius, any original music score is pretty redundant except as a reference or historical interest. Centy – reply• contribs – 12:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It has never been reprinted, and copies of the original are exceedingly rare. If I recall correctly - I do a lot of things with scores, and may be getting them mixed up - it was this PDF that I donated to the Sir Arthur Sullivan society, because they didn't have one. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 14:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose To be honest a black and white photocopy of a 127 page score is best off suited to wikibooks, for a Picture to be nominated it needs to be:

"Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words," the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria." - Quote from [[10]]

Personally I don't find it "eye-catching", or feel that it is really a picture, or that it really illustrates the article it is in - as it is hidden at the very bottom of the article that it is in. My advice would be to nominate it in the Featured section of wikibooks, it would be more suited, and appreciated there. --Dave (talk) 20:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 01:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

White water rafting.

edit
 
Rafting through a section of rapids on the Arkansas River.
Reason
Great action shot of rafting on the Arkansas River.
Articles this image appears in
White water rafting
Creator
Redmarkviolinist Drop me a line 21:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 01:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rain on a smoke tree leaf

edit
 
Original - Rain on a smoke tree leaf.jpg
Reason
Aesthetically appealing, reasonable proportions, vibrant, and possibly a useful image in other artistic articles.
Articles this image appears in
Smoke tree
Creator
Kris Miller from Issaquah
What do you mean? LOTRrules (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See Where's the Beef. Exhange "beef" with "encyclopedic value" ;-) --Janke | Talk 09:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think this photo might be better suited for the Commons Featured Pictures. I don't see much encyclopedic value to this photo, but I'm still on the fence about supporting it. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 23:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give more details? This is my first nomination. LOTRrules (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Commons FP are for artistic quality photos with little or no consideration given to encyclopedic value. But as Alvesgaspar says, there are some focus issues that might be considered less than stellar. Being an ametuer photog, my standards are lower than what most of the voters at the Commons have. I think its a nice photo, but it doesn't really show anything except a leaf... and for a nice enclyopedic photo of a leaf, one might want a picture without distractions, such as dew drops. Thats just my opinion. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 00:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 02:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



1915 San Diego United States Building, the arcade.

edit
 
Original - There were arcades by major Exposition buildings, such as this decorated one on the United States Building. Spanish Colonial architecture was used, with such open pergolas and many small spaces.
Reason
This style of architecture was not widely used in San Diego before the fair. This example is more elaborate than most of the archways, yet was on a temporary building which was intended to be demolished. The Museum of Art now resides on this land.
Articles this image appears in
Panama-California Exposition (1915)
Creator
Photographer Harold A. Taylor in book by Winslow, Goodhue, Stein, Taylor, Elder.

Not promoted MER-C 02:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Just seen this for the first time in my 35 years of life... Was like "Want to see something strange?", to the ppl beside me... Thought only humans knew how to waste time, smh. Then again- how else can the creature warm up the fluid? *************Amazing God************* — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejw9 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC) u[reply]

Wasp bubble blowing

edit
 
Original - A paper wasp (Polistes dominula) heating a bubble of regurgitated fluid at the sun light. This is a common practice among many winged insects, and it is believed to be a way to regulate body temperature
Reason
A detailed high quality depiction of insect behaviour, adding enc value to the articles
Articles this image appears in
Wasp, Polistes dominula
Creator
Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Promoted Image:Wasp March 2008-1.jpg MER-C 02:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



The sun, street light and Parallax

edit
 
Original - I've noticed that the reflection of the sun is seen at the reflection of the street light while the sun itself is much higher than the street light is. I've asked Andy Young to explain my image. Here's what he says:
"the answer is parallax. The reflection in the water shows the view as seen from a point that is the camera's reflection in the water -- i.e., as far below the surface as the camera is above it.
The street light is much closer than the Sun; so parallax mainly affects the position of the light's reflected image.
These perspective effects are *always* present in pictures of reflections in water -- but not often as obvious as in your picture, which is a "textbook example" of the effect."
Reason
A good quality, high resolution image, which greately illustrates an interesting effect
Articles this image appears in
Parallax
Creator
Mbz1 - Edited by Richard Bartz

Promoted Image:The sun, street light and Parallax edit.jpg MER-C 02:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Gasshukoku suishi teitoku kōjōgaki (Oral statement by the American Navy admiral)

edit
 
Original - Three men, believed to be Commodore Matthew C. Perry (center), with Commander Anan and Captain Henry Adams, during their meeting with the Emperor of Japan. These meetings led to the Convention of Kanagawa which opened Japan to the West after centuries of isolation.
Reason
Of historical importance, and the art is typical of Ukiyo-e, which we have very little really high-quality work of (with no offense meant to the excellent, and already featured Image:Suikoden.jpg). Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
Matthew C. Perry
Creator
Unknown

Promoted Image:Gasshukoku suishi teitoku kōjōgaki (Oral statement by the American Navy admiral).png MER-C 02:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Hurricane Katrina

edit
 
Original - Hurricane Katrina as a category 5 in the Gulf of Mexico
Reason
Shows a famous storm, NO THERE IS ONLY 2 HURRICANE FEATURED PICTURES!!!
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Katrina, Disaster
Creator
NASA

Not promoted MER-C 11:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



1863 Meeting of Settlers and Maoris at Hawke's Bay, New Zealand

edit
 
Original - An 1863 meeting between Maoris and settlers in Hawke's Bay Province, New Zealand. This was during the Invasion of the Waikato, and, although the Maoris and setters in this region had always gotten along fairly well, the situation grew somewhat tense, and so this meeting was held to allow them to talk things over, and resulted in a reaffirmation of friendship and peace between the groups.
Reason
I think this is a wonderful image, showing a snapshot of life in New Zealand in 1863, particularly the all-too-rare view of Maori life at that time. A note on restoration: I've attempted to compromise in the restoration between the two possibilities of dealing with the lines between the glued-together woodblocks: I made them less visible, and edited them out as much as possible from important parts of the image such as faces, but allowed some traces of them to remain.
Articles this image appears in
Hawke's Bay Province, Māori, Pā
Creator
M. Jackson
  • Support as nominator Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 14:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Historic, ridiculously high resolution, and as you say, an interesting snapshot of life. Dr. Extreme (talk) 14:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I noticed a couple of lines, but they don't detract from the overall image. Would it be completely blasphemous to suggest a reduction in overall resolution? The nature of the woodblock print means that it has to be viewed from some distance--as it is now, you can't really tell what it's supposed to be at full resolution. --jonny-mt 15:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those will be the gaps between the woodblocks I mentioned - removing or not removing them has proven controversial in the past, so I tried to compromise by leaving some traces of them, but removing them from all the important areas. As for a reduction in resolution - well, it's an A3 engraving, and probably needs to be about this size to reproduce well at its original size when printing it. However, you do have a good point, so I've set up some sub-pages to assist viewing. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Defer to others the degree to which woodblocks gaps should be preserved, although I err more on the side of more preservation. I do have a question though; what's with the grey smudges visible in white spaces in the foreground (especially the man's hat on the right)? I would expect the original is just white and full-black from the ink. - Enuja (talk) 05:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think that's mostly the remains of text-bleedthrough from the other side of the paper, mixed with dirt, smudging from the page pressed against it, etc, etc, etc. - in the end, this was from a very old newspaper, with all the problems that causes. It was much worse before the cleanup, but I probably missed a few spots, as going for perfection is all too often a case of "that way madness lies". And, of course, the final shrinking down from 8250px wide to 6000 px may turn some small black marks into grey itself. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. - Enuja (talk) 20:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:1863 Meeting of Settlers and Maoris at Hawke's Bay, New Zealand.jpg MER-C 11:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Flagellum base diagram

edit
 
Original - A flagellum (plural: flagella) is a long, slender projection from the cell body, whose function is to propel an organism. The depicted type of flagellum is found in bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella, and rotates like a propeller when the bacterium swims.
Reason
i have recently noticed that when my images are featured they become more viewers and this increases the chances for them to be translated and to move into other wikipedia proyects. i want to try to feature my main diagrams so that they can get improved and or better distributed... plus i think it is of a great enciclopedic value...
Articles this image appears in
Flagellum
Creator
LadyofHats
  • Support as nominator LadyofHats (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Top notch diagram. Only thing missing is the disclaimer not to use it under mousetrap --Mike Spenard (talk) 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minor point Does not say what type of flagellum it is, and this editor is far too sleep deprievd to be trying to deal with this =) Sheesh, I thought "Well, clearly there's the Type III secretory system in there, the one used by plant pathogens and Yersina pestis so it's Eukaryotic."... god, I'm stupid before my coffee. It's Bacterial, of course. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support - I will support strongly if the text background is made transparent - at the moment, the two columns of text are on white boxes which seem randomly distributed and don't even touch the edges of the image. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 12:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can not take the white squares away since they are there so that text can be readed ( when removing them there are still colors bellow that would make reading the text confusing). would it help you if i extend them so that they go out up to the borders?. i can not make them both have the same width becouse it would be useless empty space on the right.so what do you sugest?.-LadyofHats (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I might suggest having a white background under the whole thing. I can't see any reason to have a transparent bg on this image. I might also suggest changing the stroke color on the L-Ring to be black or blue other than red, which looks weird. You may want to add a label that says Cytosol. I'm also confused about the label Cell Wall, my understanding is that the inner and outer membranes, together with the periplasmic space in-between, all together make up the cell wall. Is there a reference to check? Otherwise very nice image, Support. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, make the entire background white, just so that the sections of BG don't stand out. Remove the current white boxes, then fill the entire BG with white again. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support--Mbz1 (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support,Oppose I'd like to see a mention that this is from a Gram-negative bacteria in the caption because Gram-positive flagella and eukaryotic flagella are quite different. I also believe this type of flagella also moves in a rotational fashion, not so much a whip like action.D-rew (talk) 21:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • i do have a diagram of an eukariotyc cillia. but tell me what is the diference between a gramm positive flagella and one gramm negative? if it is so big maybe i should do 2 diagrams -LadyofHats (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's big enough that its not trivial. The main differences are in the attatchment points, because think about it, for a Gram-positive its gotta go through one plasma membrane, but in Gram-negative its gotta go through two which involves a whole other smattering of proteins. Here are some outside links to other diagrams to give you something to work with. Scroll down to section figure 2.47 about 2/3 the way down the page. There are also some good diagramshere. This page fig 1.4 should show you some of the differences in how they move(note it is a Eu flagella that acts like a whip (a la sperm), but a Pro flagella that spins like a propeller).Also note that eukaryotic cilia aren't the same thing as eukaryotic flagella. Here are the differences between cilia and flagella put simply.D-rew (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't even get me started on spirochete flagella. My point is that there are a lot of different types of flagella, and a lot of them don't look like this, so I think some specification is in order.D-rew (talk) 00:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • ok i got what you mean :P geesh, i think the more diagrams i do the more complicated they get. I have changed the description page to astop it


to do :P -LadyofHats (talk) 11:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support de Bivort 22:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • OpposeSupport The flagellum looks straghely squeezed against the outer membrane, and shouldn't it the junction be a ~45 degree angle compared to the rotor? And the caption should mention what type of bacteria it is (a proteobacterium?). And it doesn't have any references. Narayanese (talk) 00:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • squeezed against? i didnt got that part, can you explain?. my source makes the hook 90 degrees. but i changed it a bit since some other sources do show it less inclinated. I added some information on the description of movement. and none of my sources metioned a specific kind of bacteria. so i have no idea if it is or not a proteobacterum or not. Plus if you read a bit up in this discussion you can see the links to some of my sources. The reason why i dont place them on the description page is that they are external links and with the time they tend to become invalid. -LadyofHats (talk) 03:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've only seen unipolar flagella myself and they point out from the cell and only start bending a lot further out, but at second thought I suppose the amphitrichous/peritrichous; ones do lie close to the membrane like in the picture. Now I see your sources, good. I looked up the hook angle, it's 65 degrees in Salmonella (Foruta 2007, PMID 17142059), so your current bend is ok.Narayanese (talk) 08:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Is there issues regarding the caption lines at different sizes or is it my browser? -62.172.143.205 (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I changed the caption, likening it to a propeller. (source: [15]) and specifying organism. Narayanese (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Flagellum base diagram.svg MER-C 11:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Acapulco Bay

edit
 
Original - A 1628 Spanish relief map of Acapulco Bay.Acapulco is a city and major sea port in the state of Guerrero on the Pacific coast of Mexico, 300 km (190 miles) southwest from Mexico City.
Reason
Excellent image
Articles this image appears in
Acapulco
Creator
A. Boot ?

Promoted Image:Puerto de Acapulco Boot 1628.png MER-C 11:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Los Gatos Union High School

edit
 
Original - Main building and a portion of the grounds of Los Gatos High School, Los Gatos CA
Reason
Great picture of the school
Articles this image appears in
Los Gatos, California, Los Gatos High School
Creator
user:Mike24



Not promoted . --John254 02:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph of a Greta morgane

edit
 
Original - (Translation from German on commons) Greta morgane (Geyer, 1833) source: Own admission - photographer: Achim
Reason
I feel that the picture definitely meets most of the 9 criteria with only a couple of doubts.

Is of a high technical standard.   Done

Is of high resolution.   Done more than meets 1000x1000 criteria

Is among Wikipedia's best work.   Done defintitly IMO, is compelling and would make reader want to learn more (both in optics and the page for the reature itself), well lit and amongst best insect photographs on WP

Has a free license.   Done licensed under GNU 1.2

Adds value to an article  Done illustrates insect well in its own page as well as a useful tool for shoing transparency

Is accurate. (only criteria I'm unsure on)

Has a good caption  Done is decribed within its page well and includes links to appropriate articles.

Is neutral.  DoneNo POV issues.

Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation? not in a position to comment as I'm not a photographics expert but it's free of the most obvious usual distortions.

Articles this image appears in
Transparency (optics), Greta morgane, Greta (genus)
Creator
Achim Lehle (Commons Username)



Not promoted . --John254 02:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco Harbor, 1851

edit
 
Original - San Francisco harbor in 1850 or 1851, with Alcatraz Island in the background.
Reason
A rare daguerrotype showing San Francisco's economic activity during the California gold rush. Merchant ships crowd the harbor and freshly constructed clapboard buildings fill the foreground. Hardly any of this scene could be replaced with a later photograph: the gold rush ended shortly afterward, construction projects began on Alcatraz Island in 1853, steam ships replaced sailing ships, and the great San Francisco earthquake/fire of 1906 destroyed most of the city's early architecture. Restored version of Image:SanFranciscoharbor1851.jpg. This is San Francisco 55 years before the earthquake and more than 80 years before Alcatraz became a federal prison.
Articles this image appears in
History of San Francisco, California, Alcatraz Island, California gold rush
Creator
unknown

Promoted Image:SanFranciscoharbor1851c sharp.jpg MER-C 08:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Tower Bridge, City of London and Thames at sunset

edit
 
Original - The River Thames, with Butler's Wharf on the South left, Tower Bridge spanning the river, and the City of London on the right
Reason
This is an uncommon view of Tower Bridge (as many tourists/photographers don't walk this far down the river beyond the city), showing most of the span of the bridge, and also the skyscrapers towering above the office blocks of the City of London. It was taken shortly after sunset, allowing for a beautiful red glow in the sky. It is aesthetically pleasing, but still quite enc as it shows the detail of the river, bridge, construction of the city, the skyline and St Paul's cathedral in the background, etc.
Articles this image appears in
London, Tower Bridge and River Thames (controversial, but I think it is settled now - see its talk page for more info)
Creator
User:Diliff

(UTC)

  • Support Wow. It almost looks fake... - Milk's Favorite Cookie 03:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Sorry not to join the bandwagon but I prefer the actual Tower Bridge FP on enc grounds. This one is artsy and beautiful but much less detailed. Also, the denoising process was a little too radical in my opinion -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • There actually was no de-noising processing on this image at all. It was downsampled significantly from 13126x4876 so even if there were any noise reduction, this would largely mask it anyway, but I can confirm there is none. Can you be more specific about your complaint? If you're referring to the river, it was a relatively long exposure so movement would soften the texture. And if you're referring to the buildings in the background, any lack of texture can be explained by atmospheric haze. Also, this image is not intended to compete with the existing FP (unlike the Big Ben photo). It isn't even supposed to show the Tower Bridge in detail. The point is to show the Tower Bridge, the Thames, the wharves and the city skyline as a single composition. I'm not intended to try to convince you to change your opinion, but I wanted to set the record straight. :-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 11:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, the softness is explained. I would probably support this picture at COM:FPC, as I am quite sensitive to artsy works. But I also think that the enc interest is somehow affected by the lack of detail and unnatural colours. Why not re-shoot this during the day? - Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • It just doesn't look nearly as aesthetic during the day. I still maintain there is more than enough detail visible though - the softness is extremely minor. A daytime shot of this same scene would not really give you any detail that this one does not. In fact, I suspect that many features would be less distinct during the day due to the lack of lighting, but as I don't have an equivalent daytime shot, I can't say for certain. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Weak Support You're actually allowed to upload up to a 20 meg file - how about a little more resolution? =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I keep them for my commercial photography. Withholding ultra high resolution images is probably the one thing I can do to prevent pilfering of my best photos without my consent, unfortunately. And it does happen. Regularly. :-( Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 12:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Alvesgaspar and also the image is too small.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't mean to be following you around Mbz1, but as I mentioned in reply to Alves, his arguments were a bit weak since they mainly related to the incorrect assumption that it was primarily illustrating the Tower Bridge. So in a sense, I feel that you are agreeing with point that is unfounded and therefore a bit null and void... And as for size, it is more than large enough as per the guidelines. Plenty of smaller images with less visible detail are featured. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 16:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Fantastic Image which enhances the articles it is in. It's a shame that the photo hasn't been uploaded at the maximum resolution possible, however I can sympathize with the author over their decision not to upload a higher resolution copy. --Dave (talk) 20:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support For the most part, it's a very nice image. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 22:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This image has been brought forcefully to my attention,and as it is being proposed as a Featured Picture this gives me an opportunity to explain exactly what I think is wrong with it.
  • As an editor I am looking for pictures that support the text of the articles I am working on. Given the limited space available, the pictures need to be information-rich without being crowded and if possible tell more than one story at once. If I was looking for an image to illustrate any article, I would definitely not choose this one. In terms of content it is primarily a mass of nondescript buildings with a mid-distance floodlit image of a well-known bridge. This is an interesting bridge because it is the only bascule bridge on the Thames, and it is designed to match the Tower of London alongside. Neither of these elements is illustrated in the image. St Paul's Cathedral behind it is simply a poorly-placed sillouetted dome, and the Gherkin lacks interest. Some isolated cranes on the skyline do not say much about building activity on an uninteresting selection of the skyline. As for the river itself it looks like a stagnant pond with nasty bits floating on it. There is no life in this picture. Would anyone consider proposing it if it the same scene was seen in clear day light?. I think that is very unlikely. That means that only story this image tells is that the sky goes a funny colour when the sun goes down.
  • The image is double width and in consequence has to be shown larger than conventional images in order to be a reasonable height.
  • Another editor has described it as a picture postcard view, but in terms of composition I don't not think it even qualifies as that. The vertical centre line is emphasised by the dip in the suspension cables which splits the image into two. If this is a deliberate ploy, it does not work - it simply makes the image look like two bad pictures stuck together with nothing pulling the whole together. The picture lacks depth - everything is fused into the middle distance with no significant foreground highlights to create perspective. There is a lack of compositional balance and no dynamic interplay between the elements to keep the eye interested. Finally there is the issue of the colour. I can quote another editor in referring to the "lurid red". For some the shock effect may have an immediate dramatic impact, but others find it unpleasant. I would challenge those who have responded positively on first impressions to see how long they can stand looking at the picture. Several have commented that the colours look artificial which does not in fact count in the image's favour. It is a personal view, but it is not an image I want to be hit in the eye with every time a go in to revert a vandal or edit a page on which I have much editorial work to do. I do not believe it has a place on Wikipedia, let alone as a Featured Article. In the latter respect I have a serious concern that pictures like this encourage people to illustrate articles with uninformative sunsets because they think they look pretty, rather than pictures that, however crude, at least provide informational value. I further believe that given the desparate need to obtain illustrations for articles that do not have them, priority should be given to images that address uncharted territory rather than rehashing well covered areas.
  • I hope the contributor will welcome my input rather than assume an "attitude" beause I have objected to the the manner in which this image has been forced onto an article. Motmit (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I won't respond to your points individually (suffice to say that while I disagree with most of them in general, I do welcome your input), but I will say that I'm glad for Wikipedia's sake that not everyone agrees with your sentiments as I think the project does benefit from photos such as this one, or I wouldn't upload them and try to find a home for them in the first place. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 01:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I really like the atmospheric perspective, it reminds me of a certain painting of the Canale Grande. --Dschwen 03:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - it's named "Tower Bridge, City of London and Thames at sunset" so saying it's too artsy or that it should have been taken during a day is irrelevant.--Svetovid (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Honestly, it's one of the better pictures of Tower Bridge. crassic\talk 18:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It is a beautiful picture of the Tower Bridge and the photograph gives a adequate view of the bridge and it surroundings (City of London, Tower of London, Thames, etc.) The fact that it was taken by sunset gives a beautiful side-effect. I support the opinion of Svetovid saying that earlier made comments don't really make sense. Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:London Thames Sunset panorama - Feb 2008.jpg MER-C 08:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



A mosquito (Culiseta longiareolata)

edit
 
Original - A female mosquito of the Culicidae family (Culiseta longiareolata), one of the largest species of mosquitoes, about 10mm body length. Notice the long proboscis, used to suck blood from mammals (including humans), and the compound eyes.
Reason
A high resolution and detailed depiction of a small insect, probably the best available photo of a biting mosquito.
Articles this image appears in
Mosquito, Culiseta
Creator
Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Not promoted MER-C 08:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Great Basin Bristlecone Pine

edit
 
Original - The Utah Juniper. a tree species in the southwest united states.
Reason
I took this not thinking about wikipedia but maybe for an iStockphoto upload or just a art shot. Then I looked at it and thought it was pretty damn illustrative. It is a wide-angle perspective which adds a ton of interest and I was shooting with a polarizer which enhanced the blue of the sky. The image is sharp at full res (vote on the full res, not the 800px description page). Also, this is a good example of the bristlecone pine as most of that species are more weather beaten.
Articles this image appears in
Juniper, Juniperus osteosperma
Creator
User:Fcb981
  • Support as nominator Fcb981(talk:contribs) 01:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The caption seems a little off - It's not the Oldest tree species (a claim that would be very hard to quantify, anyway, as evolution means there's no hard-and-fast borders between species) - it's a species with the oldest living trees. Also, it would be nice if it weren't cut off at the bottom. Still, it's a good photo, and I can't bring myself to oppose outright. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 03:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose For encyclopedic value, the horizon angle kills it. It's a smashingly beautiful, fantastic art shot, but the fact that bristlecone pines are weathered and strange and often at odd angles is part of the encyclopedic value of this specimen. Straightening it up a bit (while crazy tilting the horizon) takes away from that. - Enuja (talk) 05:28, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I know the horizon is pretty near to level... Not that it looks straight. The tree was tilted at that angle from vertical, there wouldn't really be a good way to show that with the surroundings of jagged hills. Also, I'm not totally sure the horizon would need to be perfectly level for this picture of a tree, the same way it doesn't really matter if a macro horizon is level. If it was a landscape, sure, but I think it isn't that important. Just my feeling... -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 05:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose as the species is incorrect - not capable of being encyclopaedic unless it's identified. It seems certain it's not a Pinus aristata as the leaf, branching, coloration and bark are wrong. Per Ragesoss the structure is indicative of a Juniper...I'm tempted that it's a Juniperus osteosperma but am not sure - Peripitus (Talk) 05:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Damn it, sorry guys. I should have doubled checked the species. The cheap field guide I picked up at a gas station showed the scaly bark of this tree as as the Bristlecone Pine. Actually, I'm pretty frustrated over this... I have been trying to avoid a mix-up of this kind but alas, I could have been more careful. Anyway, it looks quite like the Juniper species Peripitus mentioned above and I'm tempted to call it that but for the problem of changing the file name etc. Let me know what you think, I'd be willing to upload a fresh version with a good title and have this one deleted. I'm just not sure if this would be worth keeping this nomination or what? -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 06:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have got to be kidding me. look at this nom of YOURS in which you changed your identification of the flower almost 4 times. Shall we delist that image? Anyway, I'll see to it that all the appropriate changes are made tonight. (In a couple of hours unfortunately.) The image will be added to the appropriate articles and it will be neat and clean. No worries. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 02:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is strange. You asked a question: " I'm just not sure if this would be worth keeping this nomination or what?" and I responded it without even opposing the image and you got angry with me? About my own image - I'll be the first one to support the delisting of this nom of mine . It is not my kind of an image, and I really do not care about keeping it as FP. You know what, it might be a good idea, I'll nominate it for delisting myself. How that?--Mbz1 (talk) 04:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listen, I'll vote Keep on that delist nom. Why? Because yours is a good image. The same reason that I nominated this image. I didn't oppose your image in the initial nomination and I believe it is a good image deserving of being a featured picture. You voted support as nominator on your initial nomination and you cannot change that fact. You can do nothing to prove that you don't hold a double standard and that is really what I care about. Anyway, vote as you will, If the tree is not the central subject god knows is someone could take a picture that illustrates anything. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 05:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak conditional Support - Conditional in that it's only valid if the species is cleared up . Weak because of that purple fringing all over the mountains farther back ... --Mad Tinman T C 22:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support It's a very good image, but that angle is very odd. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 22:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose IMO this very beautiful image is more about the scenery and not about the tree whatever this tree is.Sorry. Whatever--Mbz1 (talk) 05:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Image has been replaced and is now in two articles appearing above. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 06:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changing to weak support - I really like the picture and it now seems to have the correct name and be in the right place. Well composed and well taken. Weak support as, although it looks very likely, I can't be sure we have exactly the correct Juniper as this is such a well weathered specimen - Peripitus (Talk) 09:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - It's a great shot, but it doesn't show the whole subject; it would probably be better as a Commons FP. It also seems like we're shooting from the hip with the species identification.--ragesoss (talk) 14:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opposse - Per Ragesoss--CPacker (talk) 07:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, full ack rageross. It's fairly pretty though, and I'd support it on commons. --Dschwen 18:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Commons is a joke. It serves a reasonably important purpose for the community but it encroaches on Wikipedia featured pictures with, IMO, distorted and wavering standards. Look, the people here, at wikipedia FPC and POTD, serve what I think of as an important purpose. They help get good images for en.wikipedia and make the encyclopedia look better for all the visitors. Commons FP serves no good purpose IMO. Save, perhaps, making it easier for people to find only the very best images to use commercially for free. Nobody outside the commons community visits commons for anything but free stock photos. Commons mission is flawed and not one I support. I will not nominate this image at commons and if nominated, I would oppose it. Look, why should en.wikipedia have to suffer having only dull and boring pictures as FPs? Why can't we show something of beauty on our main page. A main page that is for the cause of promoting knowledge. Not the mission of promoting lower wages for photographers. Just my two cents. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 03:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sorry to hear you think this way. wikipedia FPC and POTD, serve what I think of as an important purpose. They help get good images for en.wikipedia. As I expressed above I do not think this picture has enough encyclopedic value. And I do not see FPs as mere eye candy. --Dschwen 03:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus MER-C 08:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Grand central Station Outside Night 2

edit
 
Original - Grand central terminal on Manhattan.
 
Edit 1 - Last chance.
 
Not for voting- this is the image from the previous nomination.
Reason
This is a re-nomination of sorts... This was the first nom which failed because of distortion issues. So I went back to the source files and re-stitched and labored to get all the lines as best as they could be. This is the result which I feel is better. It also has some added sharpness to boot. I would encourage people to vote on the full sized image (as per the criteria), not the 800px image description page, where what's left of any distortion is unnoticeable to my eyes. Anyway, I hope this one fares better as it took a lot of work to take this and I doubt the sharpness and composition could be improved upon.
Articles this image appears in
Grand Central Terminal, Rail transport in the United States
Creator
User:Fcb981

*Oppose for the unfortunate distortion. Building is bowed upwards in the middle. The centre line of the road forms a long S bend. The straight Stone walkway curves in two directions, rather than simply curving away at the left as it should. A bin (bottom left) is distorted far from rectilinear. Check out the people at the stand (bottom left) - appear to be very wide and the bottom left corner of the stand is stretched from square. Taxi (front left) wheels are no longer round - Peripitus (Talk) 06:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Image-Grand central Station Outside Night 2.jpg MER-C 08:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



New York Harbor Tug boat

edit
 
Original - The Justine McAllister, a tugboat, in New York Harbor
 
Alternative -A slightly different view
Reason
Its about as illustrative a picture of tugboat as I can think of. Its technically well executed with a tight composition, good sharpness, and good light. It was taken in the late afternoon and I think it does a good job of drawing the reader in...
Articles this image appears in
Boat, Tug boat
Creator
User:Fcb981
  • Support as nominator Fcb981(talk:contribs) 00:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either, with a slight preference to original. I just love the heat-smudged horizon behind the smokestacks! - Enuja (talk) 05:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either, with slight preference for the number 2.--ragesoss (talk) 23:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both Just not up to quality standards. Need sharpening I think. Dengero (talk) 10:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • MER-C, if you happen to close this nom, I think you should take into account that the above voter called Diliff's big ben picture small and noisy when to my fairly well trained eye there is no visible noise. Aside, this image has been downsampled from a damn sharp original size and was processed for extra sharpness. There is no more available sharpness at this image size. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 06:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have disregarded the Big Ben picture comment as a mistake. I stand strong this picture just isn't FP quality. Dengero (talk) 07:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Could you elaborate a bit? In what way is it not up to FP standards? Sharpness? Because it is as I said above down-sampled and sharpened and processed for optimum detail. All you said is that it could use sharpening. Adding extra sharpening would start to make halos become visible. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 15:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Let's take the original as example. Spare the bit where the smoke fuzzes out the background (this can't be changed due to physics) The rest of the background is all fuzzy-ish. If that doesn't make a point (since we're talking about the tug boat), then like Mikespenard says, everything is so dull. Dengero (talk) 00:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ok, the fact that you think the colors are dull is valid enough IMO. While I don't share that view, one can point that out. Actually, the fact that the rest of the background is "fuzzy" is also, in part, due to physics. See, the image was shot at... f/5.6 or f/6.3 or something and with a relatively long focal length lens somewhere between 150-300mm because of this. There is a limited DOF (Depth of field) Many people (myself included) find the background separation afforded by limited DOF appealing and desirable. If you take a look at Bokeh you'll see some examples. Cheers -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 04:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support both. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 23:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose to many dull tones. Then again its a tugboat operating in a dirty harbor near a dirty city.--Mike Spenard (talk) 06:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either. A much more intriguing photo of a tugboat than I thought possible. Mangostar (talk) 23:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A pretty good photo of a tugboat. Could probably be improved on by showing it tugging a much larger boat, but as for the boat itself, I have no complaints. Sharpness is fine, the background is about as in focus as you could reasonably expect, as per Fcb981's explanation above, and is incidental to the image, not critical. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 14:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Tug Boat NY 1.jpg MER-C 08:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Ammonite-Design streetlamps

edit
 
Original - The ammonite-design streetlamps reflect the town's location on the Jurassic Coast, a World Heritage site. The bird is a herring gull, Larus argentatus.
Reason
This was recently re-touched, and the image was made much more clear than before.
Articles this image appears in
Street light, Street furniture, Lyme Regis, Twilight
Creator
MichaelMaggs
It's just you. This is an actual photo and there is no cutting or pasting. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just you. I see it too, though I think it's probably the result of downsampling (it's 2MP from an 8MP cam) rather than cut and paste. The relatively low dpi of computer moniters just isn't good at displaying this level of detail. Thegreenj 02:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 00:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Euphorbia milii var.milii

edit
 
Original - It is a succulent climbing shrub with densely spiny stems, the straight, slender spines up to 3 cm long, which help it scramble over other plants. The leaves are obovate, up to 3.5 cm long and 1.5 cm broad. The flowers are small, subtended by a pair of conspicuous petal-like bracts, variably red, pink or white, up to 12 mm broad
Reason
Rare, Quality, complimentary to its article etc
Articles this image appears in
Euphorbia milii
Creator
Alok Prasad



Not promoted . --John254 00:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

edit
 
Original - A chocolate chip cookie.
Reason
Very high resolution, free image, and very tasty-like.
Articles this image appears in
Cookie, Chocolate Chip
Creator
Sarge Baldy/Pathoschild



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 19:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rhean rings

edit
 
Original Caption Released with Image: This is an artist concept of the ring of debris that may orbit Saturn's second-largest moon, Rhea. The suggested disk of solid material is exaggerated in density here for clarity. Due to a decrease in the number of electrons detected by NASA's Cassini spacecraft on either side of the moon, scientists suggest that rings are the likeliest cause of these electrons being blocked before they reach Cassini.
Reason
  1. scientific artwork of the highest technical standard
  2. high resolution
  3. among Wikipedia's best scientific artwork
  4. free license per default policy of NASA/US Federal gov't
  5. Adds value to an article by helping readers understand the new astronomical concept of ringed moons
  6. accurate, to the extent of our current scientific knowledge
  7. Has good captions on the two pages where it is used
  8. neutral: clearly drawn in the style of an artist's impression, so as to not give the false impression that it is a photograph or otherwise based on more data than the article and source suggest
  9. Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation: this is the unaltered, full res file straight from NASA
Articles this image appears in
Natural satellite and Rhea (moon)
Creator
NASA
I restored the votes. Should we have a talk with Elena about this? Dr. eXtreme 21:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's rather more serious than being a bit mischievous. Especially when last week she just stripped three candidates off the FPC page - see here. She's only a new user, so may just be finding her feet, but someone may need to at least tap her on the shoulder. --jjron (talk) 08:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To be quite fair, the stripping three off of the page was one possible interpretation of a suggestion I made, and they were all her own. Dr. eXtreme 12:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Which doesn't alter the fact that it's entirely inappropriate (and not something that should have been suggested to her). The point remains that she may not fully understand what is and isn't acceptable. --jjron (talk) 06:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 19:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tripe à la mode de Caen

edit
 
Original - A French dish made of tripe, the stomach of an animal, usually a cow.
Reason
I wanted to try and nominate something a bit different, and this looks good enough to eat. Another good, but somewhat less appetising image is Image:Trippa2.jpg.
Articles this image appears in
Tripe
Creator
Yun Huang Yong



Not promoted . --John254 00:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wormian bones

edit
 
Original - In addition to the usual centers of ossification of the cranium, others may occur, giving rise to irregular isolated bones termed sutural or Wormian bones
Reason
Itwas already once nominated as set, together with other bones. it was then sugested to be nominated apart. so i am now placing each image at a time -LadyofHats (talk) 12:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
Wormian bones
Creator
LadyofHats

Also i did not copy an existing case of wormian bones, instead i gave already done skull some extra sutural bones following more or less my sources. -LadyofHats (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Wormian bones.svg --Malachirality (talk) 05:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Apache helicopter killing

edit
Original - Video footage taken from the gun camera of a US Apache helicopter on active duty in Iraq and showing the killing of people whom the U.S. military regarded as Iraqi insurgents. Originally shown on ABC TV on January 9, 2004.
Reason
It's a difficult decision to nominate a recent video where people die, particularly of an ongoing war. No disrespect is intended toward the surviving families, and no political statement is implied in this nomination. This is war, though: not sanitized by selection or distanced by time. And war is important and encyclopedic.
Articles this image appears in
Human rights in post-invasion Iraq
Creator
United States Department of Defense
  • Support as nominator DurovaCharge! 09:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Considering the source, the rather sensitive nature involved, and the relatively high quality. Dr. Extreme (talk) 09:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Because it's highly disturbing. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but I think we can do without the scare quotes in the caption; whatever your feelings are about the situation, the men shot were suspects, and putting quotes in there makes it sound like an ironic statement, which is POV. Matt Deres (talk) 11:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Feel free to modify for maximum neutrality. It looked like neutral distancing to me, yet in subject matter as sensitive as this it's important to take a full range of perspectives into account. DurovaCharge! 20:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral The video was first released on a right wing forum by a member of the U.S military (filmed december 2003?), rather than through an official source, this is taken on a farm and there is a tractor on the left, the tube like object may not necessarily be a weapon, but a marker pole used for plowing irregularly shaped fields. I don't think the encyclopedic value is great because of the caption, if it's used in the article about human rights in Iraq it should go into how that they may not have been insurgents and the fact that the wounded are also killed and the act depicted in this video in particular was criticized by many including a retired general. If you change the caption I will change to support. Shifthours (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if scare quotes removed from caption - Wikipedia guidlines are to not use scare quotes. Saying they were suspected insurgents is a fact. Whether they were insurgents or not does not change the fact. Johntex\talk 17:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
actually to be npov would means you should state the U.S military believes they were suspected insurgents while others have disagreed. Shifthours (talk) 18:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good point; changed description per request. DurovaCharge! 18:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is not just the US military that uses the phrase "suspected Iraqi insurgents" with no qualifier or scare quotes. The main source in the article uses the same phrase.[16] Johntex\talk 21:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The new caption doesn't assert that the suspicion was unique to the U.S. military. Go ahead and modify the caption if you think it's important to forestall that misinterpretation. DurovaCharge! 21:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, your caption is a nice improvement - thank you. I made one change I think is better, which is to remove the "suspected". Now that we are stating who believes they were insurgents, I think it is clear that the US military believed the actually were insurgents, not just suspected insurgents. OK with everyone? Johntex\talk 21:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with you if this was the highest quality video there was in existence. But it isn't. This is analogous to a poor scan of an encyclopedic image. All it would take was getting access to some recorded news footage from when this was played and ripping it. It's very doable. gren グレン as 128.175.80.58 (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Apache-killing-Iraq.ogv --Malachirality (talk) 05:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Buzz Aldrin and the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander

edit
 
Original - Buzz Aldrin gets equipment out of the SEQ bay of the Apollo 11 Lunar lander
Reason
There are minor technical problems such as the crosses that overlay the image. So what? It's a picture of Mankind's first journey to the moon, and it's not exactly a repeatable photograph, unless you believe the conspiracy cranks and can find the sets used by the studio in California.
Articles this image appears in
Apollo 11, Apollo Lunar Module
Creator
Neil Armstrong
  • Support as nominator Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 04:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I think tech quality is entirely OK. The crosses are from the pressure plate in the Hasselblad camera, so all shots have them. Support is weak because we see only the back of Aldrin. Threr are better Apollo 11 shots, so if we get an alternative, I can change my vote in favor of that. --Janke | Talk 13:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC) Changing to full support, this indeed shows the LEM to advantage. --Janke | Talk 11:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think this is the best shot of the Lunar Lander on the moon, at least that's been uploaded to commons, and as NASA has released all photos of the Apollo missions, Commons (presumably) has the best of them. Here are the other options.
 
Shot from Apollo 15. A very good shot, but probably not as encyclopedic for the pages where this one is used. If we were going to switch, though, this is the one to switch to.
commons:Category:Apollo 16 also has a couple, but similarly lack focus. (Also, we'd have to get better resolution photos for those, though the NASA site probably has them).
 
An Apollo 17 photo, similar to the Apollo 15, though not as good.
And, well, for the record commons:Category:Lunar modules
There are some excellent photos from the Apollo missions, but for encyclopaedic value about the Lunar module, I think this one is the best. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 14:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 14:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Apollo 11 Lunar Lander - 5927 NASA.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 05:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Riverboat

edit
 
Original - An 1850s daguerrotype of a paddle steamer riverboat.
Reason
A high resolution daguerrotype of a paddle steamer riverboat, taken 1852-1860. By far the oldest photograph of its type in either of the articles where it appears, it predates the next oldest by 60 years and is the only paddle steamer photo that dates from the era when this was cutting edge technology. Fortunately the archival version Image:SteamboatBenCampbell.jpg was in unusually good condition for a daguerrotype and needed relatively little restoration.
Articles this image appears in
Paddle steamer, Riverboat
Creator
Unknown

Promoted Image:SteamboatBenCampbellb.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 05:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Big Ben on blue sky

edit
 
Option 1 - Original - The Clock Tower of the Palace of Westminster, colloquially known as "Big Ben", in Westminster, London, England.
 
Option 2 - Existing FP of the same subject.
 
Option 3 - Re-processed version of existing FP.
Reason
A very similar photo to this was originally featured but I was never 100% happy with the sky, as it was a bit overcast and hazy, so I endeavoured to take a new photo at some point. Well, its been sitting in my collection for 9 months now and I've just got around to stitching it and fine tuning it. The angle is slightly different (better?), as the last one was taken from a slight angle, and the tower appeared to lean. This one still has the issue, but as a photographer you're quite limited in where you can take a photo, and I think this is close enough. I'm proposing to de-list and replace the old FP if this one passes (either automatically or by nominating it for de-listing, whichever procedure dictates). Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
Clock Tower, Palace of Westminster and Secular Icon
Creator
User:Diliff
  • Support as nominator Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The slight tilt and the blurry tree in the foreground are a little distracting, but otherwise it's gorgeous. Definitely makes the original seem a bit drab. CillaИ ♦ XC 18:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I might wish for a bit more panorama of Westminster Palace to the right, and a bit more view downward, but I can't deny that what we do see is a fantastically good image. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I hope the old one won't just be delisted automatically; I think I like it a bit more than this one. Both are superb, but I think the original has a better angle (getting to see another side of the tower and removing that unsightly tree from the lower left corner), and the shadows just look better, softer somehow. I certainly wouldn't oppose this, but I do prefer the other one. Thegreenj 01:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not that I mind the overcast sky in the original shot; it is London, after all. But this one is so sharp, great detail. I agree that tree is distracting, but that's small potatoes, certainly no reason to oppose IMHO. faithless (speak) 04:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Oppose - I'm with Thegreenj, the other one has a better composition -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Way too small, and noisy even at that size. Dengero (talk) 08:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC) Disregard and Weak Support There were 4 other windows open and I was looking at the wrong picture before, sorry. But weak support anyway mainly because I think there's no need to replace/upload the new one. Dengero (talk) 07:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Small and noisy? Are you familiar with the guidelines?? This image is 2500 × 4986 in resolution (almost 5 times the minimum and larger than the vast majority of images submitted here), and emphatically almost noise-free. It was taken with a Canon 5D, renown for being one of the least noisy digital SLRs on the planet, and has been processed with noise reduction software. Please point out the noise you're refering to. ;-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Perfect, brilliant quality. @Dengero - er, wut? This image is massive and has no noise whatsoever. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We already have almost the same Existing FP. Do we really need the two of them? I'd say, if Diliff (the creator of both images) likes his second version better, he could nominate the first one for delisting, and after, and if it gets delisted, renominate the new image.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thats a silly reason to oppose. I don't see any reason why we can't image AFTER this one is successful. I agree, we don't need two FPs, but what if I requested a delisting of the first one and people supported it on the proviso that the second one replace it, and then the second one was not promoted to FP? It makes far more sense this way. I'd like to see you provide a legitimate reason for opposition to this specific image, as I stated quite clearly that I'd be happy to have only one of them as FP. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 14:43, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • The reason is in this very nomination. Have you read the comment from User:Thegreenj? He/she likes the first image better. To answer your question about what happens, if you requested a delisting of the first one and people supported it on the proviso that the second one replace it, and then the second one was not promoted to FP,it is going to be very hard on all of us, but I hope we'll survive. On the other hand may I please ask you, what happens, if the second image gets promoted and the first one will not get delisted? May I please also ask you do not use a word "silly", while talking about the reason of my oppose. I do not find it to be civil and/or polite.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Just noticed that user:Alvesgaspar likes the first vesion better too.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • You're still being silly though, and if I think you are, I will say so. Just because someone else thinks something, it doesn't mean you don't have to explain your reasons for opposing. Others have their own vote and you have yours, and you have to provide your reasons, even if just to say you agree with them, but you still haven't provided your own reasons. You've only alluded to Thegreenj and Alvesgaspar's reasons for opposing, without actually stating yours. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 16:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • May I please ask you once again to stop making personal comments/attacks and to stop being uncivil Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • Look, saying your reason for opposition is silly is not a 'personal attack'. I'm being slightly less than courteous mainly because you frustrate the heck out of me! ;-) And can I ask that you keep some semblance of order by using intents correctly? I'm having to place all over the place in reply to you because you're inserting them randomly and making it very confusing to follow. :-) If you want to reply to something I've said, put it directly below and intent it. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 16:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                • Here' what you said: "You're still being silly though, and if I think you are, I will say so" and IMO it is a personal comments/attack. I posted my comment excatly after the comment of yours, where a personal attack has occured.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                  • And for the record, the two people you mentioned who prefer the other image haven't actually opposed this nomination. It has been discussion and nothing more. There are more than two people who DO support the image, however, so it isn't as though the opposition is overwhelming. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 16:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I believe I spelled out the reason of my opposing few times already. Let me repeat it once again: IMO if the second image gets promoted and the first image does not get delisted we would have one (or maybe even two) FP images too many.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • <restart indent> May I please ask you once again to:
1. Place indents in the correct location as you have made this page extremely messy as a result.
2. Stop being so sensitive as I was criticising your actions and decisions, not you as a person.
3. Provide a reason for opposition to this image according to the criteria, not your opinion on how you think the nomination/denomination process should occur.
Thank you in advance. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I stated the oppose reason, which is a valid one IMO.criteria # 3 states :"Is among Wikipedia's best work." Some people might like your first image better, other might like better the second one. Wich one is the best for the given subject? Few weeks ago I saw a delist nominatin (cannot find it now) which was actually delist/replace nomination. I'm not sure, if it is a valid option at the present time, but I believe it should be an option for such situations. In one of your comments you said: "Anyway, note to closer: could you please note my issues with Mbz1's opposition when closing this nomination". I believe it is what you should have started with. May I please ask the closer, if he/she belives that the reason for my oppose is invalid, please disregard my vote. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Great photo but I prefer the very similar previously featured pucture (mentioned and displayed above) which I think has much more detail and a better angle (the tower looks a bit 2-D in this one). I also find the colour of the sky quite harsh around the area of the clock face - although that could just be personal preference/my moniter settings. It seems logical that only one of them should be used in articles as they are so similar so it doesn't seem possible that they could both meet criteria 5. Guest9999 (talk) 19:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've started a discussion about the use of the image in Clock Tower, Palace of Westminster here. Guest9999 (talk) 21:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per nomination. Seems preferable to the one already promoted. Rudget. 20:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. The angle is better on this one. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 22:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I think that blue skies are indeed pretty the tower comes out worse in the new version. First of all the dead frontal perspective is not preferable to original slanted view IMO. Secondly the light, seems to come from pretty much behind the camera, which makes the tower look flat. All the pretty masonry relief work is almost invisible. Don't get me wrong, this probably is a 90% picture competing with 95% picture, but for the reasons I pointed out it does not represent Wikipedias best work (in the field of Big Ben pictures ;-) ). And what really tips the scale toward an oppose is that despite my fondness of blue skies I would't want to see only fair weather pictures among the FPs (yeah, take that last reason with a grain of salt). --Dschwen 01:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In reference to your comments on the pretty masonry, I uploaded this comparison  (apologies for anything my quick cut and paste did to the image) which I think it shows pretty clearly the original image does show greater detail. Guest9999 (talk) 02:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Comparing the two - now that it has been brought up - the masonry looks too flat in the new proposal. In the FP, you can clearly see the relief. For this reason, enc is lower in the new one. I don't care so much about the sky - it's the building that matters. --Janke | Talk 08:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The new one is nice but I think the old one provides better resolution of the stonework. However my comment relates to the time. Would it not be nice if the clock showed the hour or a time with some significance that an editor could pick up on rather than a random disposition of the hands. I know this means waiting for the right moment but I think it is worth it. Motmit (talk) 10:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  • 'Oppose' Per Guest9999 --ErgoSum88 (talk) 12:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Given that your main complaint of the proposed replacement is the 'flat' view of the tower, but many of you have prefered the vibrancy of it over the original, I've taken it on board and decided to go back to the RAW files and re-process it, as looking at it again, I can see plenty of room for improvement without messing with the accuracy, as I think the sky was actually not quite as dull in the original as it seems (poor processing in the first place on my part, I think). I'm going to upload a new version as a third candidate (as I said, using the original's RAW files), and see what you think. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. OK, here we go. A re-processed version of the existing FP. Comparing this to the original FP, this is far more accurate in my opinion. I originally assumed that I processed it properly in the first place but looking back on it, I can't believe how badly I messed it up. The colours are far more accurate now (compare the white balance on the clock face, for starters), and the sky is no longer dull (I didn't have to pull any fancy tricks to do this either, just got the white balance and exposure right and a little squeeze on the saturation trigger). The tower itself is also more accurate (I think). Hopefully this is the one we can all agree on. I suppose we can always hope. :-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 14:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The blue sky isn't enough to overcome the loss of texture to the facade, and the angle of the earlier photo gives a better view of the dimensions of the structure--with the side walls partly visible. Both are very good photographs, but I prefer the current FP. DurovaCharge! 21:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose All are wonderful pictures, but I prefer the current FP, the reprocessed current FP is second, and the nominated image third. The masonry detail is best in the current FP, and I like the tilted angle better, as well. The reason I don't like reprocessed current FP is that some of the detail in the gold is missing. Thanks for nominating the new one, though, Diliff. I understand why you weren't happy with the sky, but I actually prefer the sky in the original. - Enuja (talk) 04:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion: Since I definitely prefer Option 3, the cleared-up edit of the current FP - I think that Diliff would be entirely within his rights to upload that edit over the original, preserving its FP status. Only contrast and color balance are changed, the picture is the same... --Janke | Talk 07:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support any, but with a preference for the already featured one. I'm not so sure the new edit of the existing FP is so much more accurate. I like the warm tones of the old one (personal tastes). Should the white color of the clock really be a white balance reference ? Wasn't lighting actually a bit warm ? . Also, the most recent shot doesn't show as much details. Still, I think they are all great pictures. -- Blieusong (talk) 07:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a current FP or the edit of the current FP because IMO they show much more details than the nominated image. All the images are great and involve a huge amount of work.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I prefer the existing FP - it has more detail. The new one is tilted and some details are washed out in the bright sunshine. The cleaned up existing FP is the best of the three. SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 10:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support option 3. the detials are really good. Yahel Guhan 07:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Option 3 (to replace existing version) per general reasoning above and Diliff's statement. --jjron (talk) 09:14, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • commentHi, Diliff, I am not asking who was being silly, but may I please ask you who was right? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just meant that IMO I was right that in such situations (where the images are almost the same) the current FP and the nominated image should be discussed and voted at the same place and at same time.I have one more question, but I put it to your talk page.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted (+12/-8) for original, no consensus for option 3 --Malachirality (talk) 06:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC) [reply]


FLOWERS ARE MY WIFEYYYY

Male White-tailed Trogon

edit
 
Original - The White-tailed Trogon, Trogon viridis, is a near passerine bird in the trogon family. It occurs from Panama south to southern Brazil, and on Trinidad. White-tailed Trogon's are a relatively large species about 29 cm long and weighs 82 g. Trogons have distinctive male and female plumage, with soft, often colorful, feathers. The head and upper breast of the male are blue and the back is green, becoming bluer on the rump. The lower underparts are golden yellow. The undertail has a black center, broadly edged with white, and the wings are black, vermiculated with white.
Reason
Image I found while surfing the commons in a category I created. I moved it immediately to the article it is in now. The image is high quality, very encyclopedic and has with its addition to the article it's in, has improved the article quality greatly.
Articles this image appears in
White-tailed Trogon
Creator
Commons:User:Mdf

Not promoted MER-C 09:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Fernão Vaz Dourado nautical chart

edit
 
Original - A pre-Mercator nautical chart of 1571, from Portuguese cartographer Fernão Vaz Dourado (c. 1520-c.1580), one the best cartographers of his time. It belongs to the so-called plane chart model, where observed latitudes and magnetic directions were plotted directly into the plane, with a constant scale, as if the Earth were plane. The text in the border reads: in this sheet it is drawn all the coast of Africa and Guinea up to S. Tomé Island (Portuguse National Archives of Torre do Tombo, Lisbon
Reason
A high quality reprodution of a gorgeous old nautical chart from one the best cartographers of the 16th century, a category which is very poorly illustrated in Wikipedia
Articles this image appears in
Fernão Vaz Dourado, Nautical chart, Cartography
Creator
Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Promoted Image:Fernão Vaz Dourado 1571-1.jpg MER-C 09:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Madame de Pompadour

edit
 
Original - Madame de Pompadour, official mistress to Louis XV of France. Memorial portrait finished after her death.
Reason
Not long ago a few FPC regulars commented about the shortage of women in Wikipedia's featured pictures. So here is one of the leading figures of eighteenth century politics and intellectual life: Madame de Pompadour. She ran a salon where Voltaire was a frequent guest and she encouraged Denis Diderot to pursue his Encyclopédie project, which became the first modern multi-volume encyclopedia. During the 1750s she determined a good part of France's military and diplomatic policy. A commoner by birth who rose through talent and determination, her physical relations with the king ended in 1750 and she selected later partners for him, while as official mistress she functioned as the equivalent to an important minister of state. A good portrait for its era on technical merits and a quality file large enough for nomination.
Articles this image appears in
Madame de Pompadour, Bonnet (headgear), Embroidery hoop
Creator
François-Hubert Drouais

Not promoted MER-C 09:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Arches National Park Map

edit
 
Original - Map of Arches National Park detailing the location of many of the more well known arches (as well as many other physical features).
Reason
Many hours of work have been put into this map. This map shows predominant features such as arches, peaks, rivers and streams, mines, and roads. I hope to do more maps of Utah Parks and areas in the near future. I feel this map meets the criteria for selection. I submitted this first to the Picture peer review for constructive feedback, to which I got.
Articles this image appears in
Arches National Park
Creator
Justin Morris
One week = 7 days = 168 hours = ... ;-) --Janke | Talk 15:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Arches National Park Map.jpg MER-C 09:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Siberian Chipmunk

edit
 
Original - The Siberian Chipmunk is a member of the chipmunk genus, Tamias. Ranging across northern Asia from central Russia to China, Korea and northern Japan (Hokkaidō), it is the only member of its genus found outside North America.
Reason
Great photo of enciclopedic value.
Articles this image appears in
Siberian Chipmunk • List of mammals of Korea
Creator
User:AndiW

Not promoted MER-C 10:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Crepuscular Rays

edit
 
Original: Crepuscular Rays.In the middle left of the image one could also see a different set of the rays coming upward from the lake. The light source for these rays is the Sun's reflection.
The image was taken at Stow Lake in Golden Gate Park,San Francisco
Reason
Beautiful, and very clear.
Articles this image appears in
Golden Gate Park, Crepuscular rays
Creator
user:Mbz1

Promoted Image:Crepuscular rays in ggp 2.jpg MER-C 09:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Better Version of Wilma

edit
 
Original - In this image, the storm eye is about to cross Cozumel, a small island just off the Yucatan Peninsula coast. Winds were peaking at 230 km/hr (145 mph) as the eyewall passed over the island, and hurricane-strength winds extended for 130 kilometers (85 miles) from the storm’s center. As of Friday afternoon, Wilma was projected to continue into the Gulf of Mexico, bringing powerful winds and heavy rain to both western Cuba and the Yucatan Peninsula before turning toward southern Florida. Florida residents have already begun to prepare for the storm’s arrival.
Reason
better version of Wilma, the strongest storm in the Atlantic.
Articles this image appears in
2005 Atlantic Hurricane Season, Hurricane Wilma
Creator
NASA

This needs to appear in at least one article and a caption before it gets considered for promotion. MER-C 08:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Further comment. Honestly, this is just flouting our basic conventions if this is promoted. It's been nominated deceptively (as mentioned above it was never in the claimed article), and if not for the OTHER FIVE hurricanes that had been nominated in the couple of days before this, by this same user, people may have actually been bothered to check this one out. It's also a concern that all those that supported evidently never bothered to check the "encyclopaedic value", i.e., whether it was adding value to an article. Because it's now been shoved in somewhere and given a caption doesn't make things right, and is not how things should be allowed to be done. This just makes a joke of the process. --jjron (talk) 06:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 09:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Mock mirage of the setting sun

edit
 
Original - Mock Mirage and w:Brown Pelicans,P. occidentalis carolinensis in San Francisco.
Reason
In San Francisco the setting sun is rarely round. It is due to mirage, which in my opinion is a really fascinating subject. The image has high encyclopedic and educational values and IMO as FP image would make Wikipedia readers to want to learn more about mirages.
Articles this image appears in
Mirage
Creator
Mbz1
  • Support as nominator Mbz1 (talk) 17:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It's certainly very pretty. One might wish for the shillouettes to be a bit sharper, though. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your comment Shoemaker's Holiday. May I please mention that this image is not about being pretty, it is not just another pretty sunset. This image shows a very interesting, rarely observed and even more rarely photographed phenomenon of complex mock mirage sunset. Because the cause of mirage is strong ray-bending in layers with steep thermal gradients the image quality of this mirage is as best as it gets for such images. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Ogh, I understand that, but aesthetic quality + encyclopedic value makes for the best iimages. I just don't know enough about mirages to vote on it, so comment only =) Shoemaker's Holiday

(talk) 19:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is great words:"I just don't know enough about mirages to vote on it, so comment only". Thank you!--Mbz1 (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'm not so sure about the encyclopedic value, as it's just one of many sunset mirages in the gallery (which BTW probably should be moved on the grounds of WP:NOT#REPOSITORY). howcheng {chat} 19:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    You are absolutely right. This is one of many sunset mirages. May I please ask you, if you also noticed that all of them were taken by me? Yes, in San Francisco I see mirages 20-30 times per year, but I wonder how many times people from different parts of the world see a mirage? May I please also mention that all sunset mirages are quite unique and that's why all and every one of them have encyclopedic value.Scientists around the world are trying to explain my images. That's why I kind of hoped that it might be nice to have one sunset mirage as FP. About moving the images to the gallery. I'd rather moved them to sunset mirage article. I tried to find somebody to write an article about sunset mirages, but could not. The people I talked to are afraid that they would put lots of work in writing and then somebody, who's never seen a mirage would change their work. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Nothing in this image is in focus and the image has no caption in the article. Kaldari (talk) 00:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, that's enough. I withdraw the nomination and I am really sorry I uploaded to Wikipedia "so many" "out of focus" sunset mirage images. I truly believe Wikipedia would have been much better off without any one of them. I'd like to end up my contributing to FP project with three quotes that I really like:
    " I just don't know enough about mirages to vote on it, so comment only =)" by Shoemaker's Holiday
    the second quote from Commons FP criteria:
    :"A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject."
    The third quote from a friend of mine after I showed few nominations to him:
    "Are you sure you put it in the right place? Is it really encyclopedia?"
    Thank you all for comments and for the vote--Mbz1 (talk) 01:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't take it so hard, Mbz - Commons is a totally different place, and the quote there doesn't necessarily apply here - Wikipedia FPs need both high quality and a lot of encyclopedic content (I'm not saying your image lacks it) - and often, that is the stumbling point for many candidates. Keep nominating, don't take comments too personally. We all try to make a better 'pedia, and photos are always welcome. Whether they will make it all the way to FPs is another matter - it's a tough test! --Janke | Talk 09:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mira-- you're a valued contributor (with what, at least 7 FPs that were personally taken by you?). Please don't take comments personally. Spikebrennan (talk) 17:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't mean anything personally, just trying to judge the picture based on the FP criteria. Kaldari (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't feel bad about it, you didn't do anything wrong. Threatening to quit WP or FPC is just poor style. --Dschwen 00:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cannot agree with you more,Dschwen. It is a poor style and I am sorry, if the statements I made offended or upset somebody. Thank you all for the comments.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 13:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn.



Pot-de-fer

edit
 
Original - The earliest known depiction of a European cannon (a pot-de-fer).
Reason
I think it's fairly notable that this is the earliest known depiction of a European cannon. However, I'm not sure if that grain is from the photograph, or from the age of the diagram.
Articles this image appears in
Cannon, pot-de-fer
Creator
Walter de Milemete

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 13:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn.



Maj. Gen. Charles Griffin

edit
 
Original - Charles Griffin ( December 18, 1825 – September 15, 1867) was a career officer in the United States Army and a Union general in the American Civil War. He rose to command a corps in the Army of the Potomac and fought in many of the key campaigns in the Eastern Theater.
Reason
Greatly illustrates the article Charles Griffin and of course has great enciclopedic value.
Articles this image appears in
Charles Griffin
Creator
Unknown, mabye Brady?

Promoted Image:CharlesGriffin.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 18:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Apollo 17 lunar rover

edit
 
Original - Astronaut Eugene A. Cernan, commander, makes a short checkout of the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) during the early part of the first Apollo 17 Extravehicular Activity (EVA-1) at the Taurus-Littrow landing site. This view of the "stripped down" LRV is prior to loading up. Equipment later loaded onto the LRV included the ground-controlled television assembly, the lunar communications relay unit, hi-gain antenna, low-gain antenna, aft tool pallet, lunar tools and scientific gear. [from the original NASA caption]
Reason
Although there are things that could be better - the full set of equipment could have been attached to the rover, for instance - the Lunar rover was only used on the last three Apollo missions, and as such, if we want an image of it in use on the moon, our selection is limited. I think this image has superb composition, has a wonderful shot of Cernan [in his spacesuit, of course], and is just generally exciting. It must be said that it looks better at lower resolutions than full, but I'm uncomfortable downsampling, due to, well, loss of information from an irreproducable photo.
Articles this image appears in
List of Apollo astronauts, I've added it to Lunar rover as it's the best shot of it in operation I know of.
Creator
Harrison H. Schmitt

Promoted Image:NASA_Apollo_17_Lunar_Roving_Vehicle.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 18:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Baggage claim area at Hong Kong International Airport

edit
 
Original - 300 degree indoor panorama of baggage claim area at Hong Kong International Airport near midnight.
 
Edit 1 - brightened
Reason
It completely illustrates the article Baggage claim and the Baggage carousel. It also displays other things in an airport such as baggage cart, baggage enquiry desk, busy arrival on the right.
Articles this image appears in
Baggage claim
Creator
Base64
I don't usually like panoramas either, but when you look at this one in full resolution and scroll from left to right, it feels like you're looking around. Very well put together, would be cool as an animation too. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:VHHH_baggage_claim_area.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 18:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Klöntalersee Lake

edit
 
Original - Klöntalersee, a natural lake in the Canton of Glarus, Switzerland
Reason
Breath taking, the image was taken during the exact right time.
Articles this image appears in
Canton of Glarus, Klöntalersee
Creator
Ikiwaner

diffuse lighting, the contrast between sun/shade detracts from the image IMO). Cacophony (talk) 03:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Malachirality (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Fireline of the Rotterdam

edit
 
Original - The Fireline of the Rotterdam in a commemoration of the Rotterdam Blitz in May 1940.
Reason
Nicely done, for the image is very clear and sharp.
Articles this image appears in
Rotterdam Blitz
Creator
Commons:User:Trebaxus
Conditional support if caption is further revised to something like "A "line of fire" memorial on May 15, 2007k commemorating the 1940 Rotterdam Blitz. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:HerdenkingVuurgrensRotterdam1940 2007 edit1.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 18:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Sadko

edit
 
Original - Ilya Yefimovich Repin's Sadko in the Underwater Kingdom (1876).
Reason
This is a extremely clear image, very sharp.
Articles this image appears in
Slavic mythology, Ilya Repin, Sadko (opera)
Creator
Butko

Promoted Image:Sadko.jpg --Malachirality (talk) 18:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Morning Fog at GGB

edit
 
Original
Reason
Stunning picture - FP on Commons.
Articles this image appears in
Golden Gate Bridge
Creator
Grombo

regards, —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Not promoted MER-C 09:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Ptolemaic geocentric model

edit
 
Original - Figure of the heavenly bodies - Illustration of the Ptolemaic geocentric model of the Universe by Portuguese cosmographer and cartographer Bartolomeu Velho (?-1568). Taken from the his treaty Cosmographia, made in Paris, 1568 (Bibilotèque National, Paris). Notice the distances of the bodies to the centre of the Earth (left) and the times of revolution, in years (right).
Reason
A gorgeous picture and the best available old illutration of the Ptolemaic geocentric model of the Universe.
Articles this image appears in
Geocentric model, Bartolomeu Velho
Creator
Bartolomeu Velho (? - 1568). Photo by Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Promoted Image:Bartolomeu Velho 1568.jpg MER-C 09:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks to Sultan Mehmed IV of the Ottoman Empire

edit
 
Original - Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks to Sultan Mehmed IV of the Ottoman Empire is a painting by Ilya Yefimovich Repin. Created over 11 years, from 1880 to 1891, it shows a scene set in 1676, based on a legendary reply that the Cossacks sent the Sultan of Ottoman Empire in response to their demand that the Cossacks submit to Turkish rule. The Cossacks, led by Ivan Sirko, replied with a letter full of insults and profanities, and the painting exhibits the Cossacks' pleasure at striving to come up with ever more base vulgarities. During Repin's time, the Cossacks enjoyed great popular sympathy. Repin also admired them: "All that Gogol wrote about them is true! A holy people! No one in the world held so deeply freedom, equality, and fraternity." (Caption adapted from Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks)
Reason
Do I really need to give a reason for why I tink this is one of the best images on Wikipedia, and encyclopedic to boot? It is one of the great artworks, wonderfully reproduced, with historical interest, wide usage, and a liveliness that few artworks manage.
Articles this image appears in
Ukraine, Cossacks, Ukrainians, Mehmed IV, Flag of Ukraine, Khokhol, Ilya Repin, Zaporozhian Cossacks, Islam in Ukraine, Dmytro Yavornytsky, Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks, Bashlyk, 100 Great Paintings
Creator
Ilya Yefimovich Repin
How can you have blown out highlights on a painting? O.o TheOtherSiguy (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Depth of color in the scan of the painting. (Are there, in fact, blown highlights in this scan, or are the white areas in the original really that white?) Spikebrennan (talk) 14:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 09:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Tibetan thanka

edit
 
Original - 17th century Central Tibeten thanka of Guhyasamaja Akshobhyavajra, Rubin Museum of Art.
 
Alternate 1 different color balance.
Reason
A quality historic image of Tibetan Buddhism iconography.
Articles this image appears in
Thangka, Guhyasamāja tantra
Creator
unknown, Image taken from here (commons) and some adjustments, cleanups and color work by Jaakobou.

Promoted Image:17th century Central Tibeten thanka of Guhyasamaja Akshobhyavajra, Rubin Museum of Art2.png MER-C 09:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: replaced with Image:17th century Central Tibeten thanka of Guhyasamaja Akshobhyavajra, Rubin Museum of Art.jpg, see [17]. MER-C 08:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Cow (Swiss Braunvieh breed)

edit
 
Original - Cow (Swiss Braunvieh breed), below Fuorcla Sesvenna in the Engadin, Switzerland.
Reason
Nicely taken image, with good enc. value. It's hard to get a cow like this with such a background.
Articles this image appears in
Transhumance in the Alps, Livestock, Cattle, Braunvieh
Creator
Daniel Schwen
Just so you know: How an image performs on Commons has nothing to do with Wiki FPs... Here, encyclopedicity is of prime concern - on Commons, lack of that means nothing... --Janke | Talk 06:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is "Pricture of the Year" a Freudian slip? And should we just automatically promote all pictures from that competition with Super Strong Supports for that reason? --jjron (talk) 08:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! I was wondering the same thing. Who knows, maybe I'd have won that competition... --Dschwen 21:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:CH cow 2.jpg MER-C 08:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Zippers

edit
 
Original - Plastic and nylon zippers
Reason
Already a featured image on Wikimedia Commons, this juxtaposes two types of zipper in detail. Good textures and resolution.
Articles this image appears in
Zipper
Creator
Rabensteiner
Those diagrams are 80px (FP here and on Commons) and 80px. Durova removed it from the Zipper article and added this one. Not cool. Cacophony (talk) 01:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree - removing an existing FP from an article to substitute with a new candidate is not cool. --Janke | Talk 06:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's featured? Apologies in that case. I'm a member of the textile arts wikiproject and hated to view that article because the animation gives me a headache. (Converting animations to links here because otherwise I'd have to stop revisiting this nomination). DurovaCharge! 08:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're a member of every wikiproject -_-;; I agree that the animation is wayy too busy for the image at the top- my suggestion is to put this nom at the top of the article and put the animation down at the bottom (which isn't far for that article) :D\=< (talk) 12:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Teehee, I'll blindfold myself and try. DurovaCharge! 22:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support once this picture finds a stable home in an article. (as of this posting, it isn't in any). Spikebrennan (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Having thought about this for a couple of days (after the surprise of seeing it nominated) I'm now going on more than a gut reaction to oppose. OK, reasons? No 'wow', bland colouring, really weird arrangement of having two zippers arranged like that and no information on why they are so, ordinary composition, especially the way the two zippers feed out the top of the photo differently, and finally, limited encyclopaedic value (what does it tell me about zippers that I can't see just looking at one? It doesn't show how they link together, etc). --jjron (talk) 08:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. IT does have good resolution, and the photography work is good, but what point does this picture have? It's just two zippers. Good quality isn't the only featured picture criteria. And it a little bright, too. -- Ketchup Krew Heinz 57! 21:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. per quality concerns, M.K. (talk) 13:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not sure of the EV. crassic![talk] 05:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Chancy Brown

edit
 
Original - Chancy Brown, sergeant-at-arms for the Liberian senate, 1856-1860. Daguerrotype.
 
Edit 1 - Colour fringing removed, right eye fixed (appears to be evidence of damage across the eye) and general levels adjustment.
Reason
An early daguerrotype by an early African-American daguerrotypist about a uniquely African-American topic: the repatriation of African-Americans to Liberia. A difficult piece of history and a striking portrait. Restored version of Image:ChancyBrown.jpg.
Articles this image appears in
American Colonization Society, Augustus Washington
Creator
Augustus Washington
  • Support as nominator DurovaCharge! 23:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Edit 1 only Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Either one. faithless (speak) 02:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either, although I actually like the original more; it gives off a more historic "vibe." Dr. eXtreme 15:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question. Could you elaborate on how this image illustrates the article? (i.e., the first one - I hardly regard Augustus Washington as an 'article', and this probably isn't the best possible illustration for it anyway). This individual is not mentioned at all in the article, and I don't see how he illustrates the content very well. --jjron (talk) 18:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • 13,000 African-Americans moved to Liberia during the early- to mid-nineteenth century under the aegis of the American Colonization Society and this had a long term impact on Liberian culture because these people brought Southern plantation culture with them, setting themselves up at the top. Note the thoroughly Westernized apparel of this African state official: epaulette, tuxedo front, velvet jacket, and satin or silk vest--all status symbols. The article had no image at all until I added this, and a mid-level government employee illustrates that cultural juxtaposition better than a president or cabinet member, who arguably would have needed to imitate European/North American fashions for diplomatic reasons. DurovaCharge! 08:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's rather interesting, but I still can't really buy this as a good illustration of the particular article/s. It almost seems that it's been a picture in search of an article, and I don't feel it's found a particularly good home (admittedly I have been wondering what would make a particularly good illustration for this article; I haven't got a good answer, but I don't think this is it). Also the fuzziness that Janke mentions helps sway me. So, on the balance, have to Oppose. Sorry. --jjron (talk) 08:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too low quality scan. Very fuzzy in full size. --Janke | Talk 06:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The scan was up to the usual superb Library of Congress standards: 50 megabytes on a clean high resolution machine. The original was soft focus. I sharpened as much as I dared without introducing too much noise. For this subject I doubt we'll find much alternative imagery. DurovaCharge! 08:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment and no vote. I agree with comments above that this image doesn't really effectively illustrate any of the articles in which it's presently located. How about History of Liberia or someplace like that? Spikebrennan (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, despite being a quite compelling portrait. I'm sure it would make a good illustration somewhere, but you would have to find a scan of an original print, rather than a photo of a framed copy, to get the quality up to FPC levels. --mikaultalk 15:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you know: A Daguerrotype is a unique original, and cannot be printed, only reproduced by photography or scanning the original silvered metal plate! It is this plate that is framed, often in elaborately decorated frames. We're talking of the very first photos - there were no negatives at that time! --Janke | Talk 06:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, right enough, I missed that. It doesn't excuse the poor repro though. Image quality wise, these weren't so different to wet plates and scan equally well; this one was photographed in the frame, which if you look closely at the scratches etc on the original, has resulted in a double-image, making the image look really blurred. --mikaultalk 11:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Gif of a Cicada

edit

Original - Gif of a Cicada (Tibicen sp.) Molting.

Reason
Very nicely done animation, has good encyclopedic value.


Articles this image appears in
Ecdysis, Cicada, Exoskeleton, Moult, Tibicen
Creator
T. Nathan Mundhenk, (edit: CarolSpears)

Promoted Image:Cicada molting animated-2.gif MER-C 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

William-Adolphe Bouguereau - Sewing (1898)

edit
 
Original - William-Adolphe Bouguereau was considered one of the painters of the late 1900s. Tastes changed in the 1920s, and his work was forgotten for a time, but interest was renewed by 1984, and his works have returned to popularity, being displayed in museums worldwide. In the late 19th century, and, indeed, well into the 20th, sewing was considered a necessary accomplishment for any woman, and young girls were trained in it from a young age, and this painting captures a scene of a young girl practicing this art.
Reason
Like many people, I'm a huge fan of William-Adolphe Bouguereau, and this is a fine reproduction, showing off his very delicate use of flesh tones, and ability to capture expressions extremely well.
Articles this image appears in
William-Adolphe Bouguereau (gallery), Sewing (Note: Newly added)
Creator
William-Adolphe Bouguereau

Not promoted MER-C 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



High Performance RAM

edit
 
Original - High performance DDR2 RAM with integrated heat sinks.
 
Original - An edit to remove the logo.
Reason
A high quality image of DDR2 computer memory with a second module added for aesthetic purposes. It has very high encyclopedic value for people with and without knowledge of computer hardware.
Articles this image appears in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR2
Creator
victorrocha



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 16:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Piazza del Duomo

edit
 
Original - The Piazza del Duomo is a large walled area in the heart of Pisa, Italy, noted for its mediaeval art and architecture. It was also named the Piazza dei Miracoli by the poet and author Gabriele d'Annunzio, and Campo dei Miracoli after a location in Pinnochio. The ground in this area is unstable, leading some of the buildings to be tilted out of the vertical, most famously the Leaning Tower of Pisa, seen in the background on the right, but the Baptistry of St. John, seen in the foreground, is also tilted out of true. Between them is the Duomo, a massive mediaeval cathedral. The outer wall of the Camposanto Monumentale (Monumental cemetary) can be seen on the left.
 
Edit1 - Quick edit to straighten verticals to show how the Leaning Tower looks so far out in the original, plus some LCE - Mfield.
Reason
Great depth of field, and collects together all the main elements of the Piazza del Duomo in a compelling way. NOTE: Yes, it's supposed to be tilted. The Leaning Tower of Pisa is only the most extreme example.
Articles this image appears in
Pisa, newly added to Piazza dei Miracoli to replace a very blurry overhead shot.
Creator
Massimo Catarinella
  • Support as nominator Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral to Weak Oppose It could be a little sharper in certain areas. diego_pmc (talk) 21:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unacceptable perspective distortion - mostly because the non straight verticals are actually making the Leaning Tower appear less leaning than it should. Mfield (talk) 23:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Every single one of those four buildings are leaning. The tower of Pisa only leans the most out of those four. Therefore it appears less leaning then it could appear like from a different angle. This picture represents how Pisa is. The tower of Pisa thus isn't as leaning as most people think, since it isn't as leaning from every corner. Therefore I truly don't understand your arguments following your rating. The Edit1 version of my photograph gives a wrong impression of what the Campo dei Miracoli is really like. The other three building appear to be not leaning in the edited version. Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They may all be slightly unstraight in reality BUT... unless they are all leaning in the exact directions such that an a centered perspective distortion correction would straighten them all perfectly then what was clearly evident to anyone with any photographic experience is that the camera back was not horizontal when this photograph was shot and thus perspective distortion has caused them all to appear to lean backwards. I am pretty certain that the verticals on the arches of the building in the rear left are true and that's what I judged the correction by. If you need any further proof, look at how the top of the building in the foreground appears narrower than the base. It's perpective distortion. And it shouldn't be there in an encylopedic architecture shot. If people don't know how to/don't bother to photograph architecture correctly then it should be left to people who do. If this photo had been shot correctly in the first place then we would be able to see how the buildings lean in reality. This is an argument for opposing any version of these images. Mfield (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is not distortion. The building in the foreground is leaning in the same direction as the tower. They are both leaning to the right. I can prove by the way that it isn't distortion through other photographs. I've made a lot of photographs with different cameras. And as for your remark: "If you need any further proof, look at how the top of the building in the foreground appears narrower than the base." The top of the building is narrower than the base! Just type in Google the words: battistero and Pisa. Massimo Catarinella (talk) 17:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC) 85.223.118.251 (talk) 17:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you google it and find some better taken pictures you will discover what I am talking about. I am not talking from a position of ignorance either - I have been to Pisa multiple times. It is clear that from the position the original was taken and wide angle lens involved, that it is suffering from distortion. I may have overcorrected it in my example edit (that I didn't support either) but it is impossible to correct the distortion accurately without an accurate reference and that would be having the camera back vertical. This makes it useless as an accurate depiction of the subject. End of story. Mfield (talk) 17:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I rest my case. This is a never ending discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Massimo Catarinella (talk • contribs) 17:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well fair enough if you will. I did some additional research. According to Baptistry (Pisa), the Baptistry only leans 0.6 degrees toward the cathedral. That is barely visible given it's away from the viewer in these images rather than L-R. More interestingly, according to Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa, the tower leans 3.97 degrees. Well, if you open up my edit in Photoshop and use the measuring tool on it, you get 4 degrees which is pretty close. I still suspect thus that my edit is far closer to reality than the original based on facts from WP itself. Mfield (talk) 22:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Edit 1 But definitely oppose original per Mfield. faithless (speak) 14:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, despite wanting to support at first glance. Lighting is great & should really carry the whole shot, but the opportunity wasn't well taken. Lens wide open (why??) ruins all chance of good fine detail, obvious distortion isn't countered by camera orientation, perspective correction has helped the all-important "leaning" issue but left the battistero looking squashed. It needs to be more of an architectural shot, not a tourist snap & there's any amount of those of this subject on Flickr which are no worse than this one. --mikaultalk 14:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It's a better shot than that panorama at the top of the article which goes all over the place, but it has problems. If it had been taken from further to the right the line of buildings would have been better and we could have lost that weak white wall to the left of the dome. Probably needs to be taken from higher up as no amount of cutting will disguise the camera tilt which confuses the real tilts. Also although the replaced picture was fuzzy it actually gave good context and should be put back somewhere. Motmit (talk) 22:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 00:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keizersgracht, Amsterdam

edit
 
Original - The picture was taken at night on the corner of the Keizersgracht and the Leidsegracht on the 25th of February 2008.
Reason
I think it is a beautiful photograph. We don't have a lot of good photographs of canals in Amsterdam on Wikipedia. Also, I would like to know, how you people would rate this photograph.
Articles this image appears in
Keizersgracht, The Netherlands
Creator
Massimo Catarinella
  • Support as nominator Massimo Catarinella (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The photo is quite good, though it may fail here on purely encyclopedic grounds. A little digital manipulation of the sky would fix some noise issues. Some of the streetlamps are a bit overblown (that is, they're so bright that detail is lost around them), but that's probably unavoidable and I refuse to hold it against this photo =) ). I think I like your photo of the Prinsengracht (Image:PrinsengrachtAmsterdam.jpg) better, as, having visited Groningen regularly, it seems a more typical Netherlands sight. If it doesn't pass here, try it on the Commons FPC (fix the sky first - WP:GL/IMPROVE can help with that), but be warned that people there aren't always as friendly as one could hope. commons:COM:QI is friendlier. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, I don't see much noise at all. One thing that I would recommend, though, is that since you obviously have some sort of support for you camera to take a five second exposure, it surely can't hurt to stop down to f/8 and make it a 12-second exposure (risking a little more noise, but it would likely get much better sharpness, especially in the corners). Thegreenj 15:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'd add to other recommendations (esp Thegreenj) by suggesting you shoot with a level camera. This one would have been better with less sky and more foreground, yet the camera is pointing upwards, resulting in that unpleasant perspective distortion. Slightly earlier in the evening would have been better, too. --mikaultalk 14:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would love to make more photographs with a "higher-level" camera. Will you buy me one?...... Really, I'm not opposed to critique, but this comment doesn't add any value to the conversation, whether this is a good photograph or not.Massimo Catarinella (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • A "level camera" just means that it's parallel with your subject so that the buildings don't seem to become skinnier as they go up. Thegreenj 20:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • And to be fair I thought the criticism was quite constructive, even allowing for the misinterpretation of level/high level. For example, less sky, more foreground - check; that means we don't have as much sky but say get the lights on all the arches fully reflected in the water. Same for other remarks; you may disagree with some, but they weren't just throwaway comments like many nominations get. --jjron (talk) 05:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • The only throwaway comment in my opinion was the remark about the camera and that rose out of a misinterpetation. More foreground was not an option while taking this photograph. There is a large rail just below the point from where I took this picture. Massimo Catarinella (talk) 17:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • If this anonymous reply is from the creator/nominator, then you've misinterpreted another comment - perhaps spend a bit of time here getting familiar with the process before nominating again. If it's from someone else, then it doesn't make much sense. --jjron (talk) 13:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - you are brave to put this up and you have asked for feedback so I hope you will find my comments helpful. Compositionally the picture is an absolute No-No. You have a very sharp corner pointing at the viewer and strong direction lines driving straight out of the picture in all directions. Everything screams "get out of here". The only picture I have seen in 600 years of Western art that has anything like this (Rain in Paris) has strong components blocking the run out and pulling against it. Incidentally, if you look at it in terms of Feng Shui you are disturbing the viewer by pointing a sharp edge. On top of that it is really a picture of light bulbs. I read in the article that there are some 1550 monumental buildings in the area, so why black them out? The article makes it look as if the place is inhabited by vampires. Surely with all that water there must be boats and people on the bank and interesting reflections to give the pictures life (and I wont comment on the one daytime one). Perhaps you are limited by winter conditions so I beg you to go out on the bright summer day or warm evening and take some pictures that show what it looks like and give atmosphere instead of another set of indistinguishable lights. Furthermore think of the composition - have a focal point that draws the viewer in. In addition, successful paintings typically have three key points that make the eye move round the image and keep it interested. - Whoops forgot to sign - Have looked at your other pics - again think of the composition and where the lines are taking the eye. All the best Motmit (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 00:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Us capitol in day light

edit
 
Original - The United States Capitol
Reason
I am nominating this picture for Featured Picture status because I believe that this is truly one of the best pictures on Wikipedia, it simply is the best picture of the U.S. Capitol that we currently have on Wiki Commons. It is used in over 50 different articles and if you were to compare it to all the other Images of the U.S. Capitol that we have on the Commons [18] it truly is the best full view image of the U.S. capitol that we have.
Articles this image appears in
This is a widely used Image, and it would be in-practical to list all the pages that it is used in, if you would like the full list see here
Creator
Kmccoy



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 20:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crepuscular Rays in San Francisco

edit
File:Artificial crepuscular rays in San Francisco.jpg
Original - Crepuscular (sunlight) rays reflecting off an office block, through the remnants of night mist in San Fransisco
Reason
The picture is of reasonable quality and shows a quite remarkable meteorological effect. The picture is a striking image, well-framed and quite unique.
Articles this image appears in
Crepuscular rays
Creator
User:Mbz1
  • Support as nominator JBG (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment holy oversharpening, look at the halos around those buildings actually on closer inspection that may be a side effect of the fog and the limited DR of the camera. Neat image - I'd support a larger version that was better cropped and processed Mfield (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm afraid this is the only version I have. May I please tell you the story about taking of the image? I took it, few years ago. I got out of my office and saw the effect. I had no camera on me. I went back to my office and borrowed a bad point and shot camera from my co-worker. After this I tried many times to see the same effect, but it has never been so prominent as this first time. That's why I Support the image for now, but, if I am lucky enough to take a better picture of the same effect, I'll delist this one( if of course it ever gets promoted) and nominate a better one. Thank you. May I please also ask, if somebody could make it better in photo shop?--Mbz1 (talk) 21:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I Just tried playing with it in photoshop and aside from some noise reduction, there simply isn't enough information there in the original to permit much improvement. I think its this or nothing. Damn those early 0.75 megapixel digital P&S cameras - such a step backwards from P&S 35mm. Mfield (talk) 21:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Arc de Triomphe du Carrousel

edit
 
Original - The Arc de Triomphe du Carrousel, a triumphal arch in Paris. Completed in 1808, it is a notable example of the Empire style of design.
Reason
I think that it meets all the criteria. It's a large image without any technical problems that I can see, it's visually striking, and it's an important part of both of its articles.
Articles this image appears in
Arc de Triomphe du Carrousel, Empire (style)
Creator
Dan McKay
I'm actually kind of surprised that one passed with its lean to the right. Doesn't anyone like verticals to be vertical when they are so easy to correct/get right in the first place. Mfield (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Dungeness crab closeup

edit
 
Original - A close-up of the face of a dungeness crab. The two eyes sit on eyestalks, with two antennules on either side of the rostrum (center, above the mouth).
Reason
Proof of alien life on earth! Just kidding, it's the face of a dungeness crab. It's sharp, detailed, well-composed, and all the important parts of the crab face are in focus (with the known caveat of focusing in macro shots).
Articles this image appears in
Dungeness crab, Crab, Rostrum (anatomy)
Creator
Kevin Cole
  • Support as nominator howcheng {chat} 17:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Technically very well done image, but if you told me to look at it and tell what it is, I don't think I would have said "crab". I would have given a Strong Support, if the image showed a little more of its body. diego_pmc (talk) 21:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as a well done macro of a very strange looking crab! (Oh eyestalks, oh eyestalks, where are you? I didn't know they were so short as to be not noticeable as a stalk in dungeness crabs. It does look the eyestalks are probably just laying down and that they do normally stick up, but I'm more used to eyestalks like this.) - Enuja (talk) 00:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose My personal feeling is that in order for images like this to meet the EV requirement for FP's, they've got to help illustrate something important about the animal the reader isn't otherwise getting. Yes, the face is in great detail here, and it's a good shot. But the article mentions nothing about the face or eyes; I don't know from the image whether there's something special that I'm supposed to be seeing or whether it's just a cool shot. If the face is a pretty unremarkable part of the animal, and this image leaves out parts the article discusses relatively extensively, like the claws and shell, I don't see the EV as particularly high. At the very least it needs a caption that will answer the "what should I be looking for?" question.SingCal 01:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support high quality photo with lots of detail. Detail=information, in this case about the crab -> EV. de Bivort 03:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support For some reason, fugly isn't a valid reason to oppose ;-). While it's true there are parts that lack sharpness at full size, this thing is magnified to a huge extent. When I zoom out on it so that it's only, say, twice life size I find pretty much everything is tolerably clear. I would prefer a whole-crab shot with this same pixel count, but then DOF issues would really wreak havoc. Matt Deres (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment AFAIK, the 'face' of this crab isn't remarkable as crabs go. Although I hear the objections re. lack of sound reasoning for the close-up, I'd have supported a properly captioned entry at crab, where such detail would be highly valuable. --mikaultalk 13:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I disagree that the "face isn't remarkable as crabs go" this photo really helps illustrate what the face of a crab looks like, which must photos don't.--CPacker (talk) 06:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Dungeness crab face closeup.jpg MER-C 08:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Human arm bones

edit
 
Original - *Left: the names of the bones, Right: the main characteristics of the bones
Reason
one more of the images of the set to eat up all the skin.
Articles this image appears in
Acromion,Arm, Capitulum of the humerus, Clavicle, Coracoid process, Coronoid fossa of the humerus, Greater tubercle, Humerus, Lesser tubercle, Radial fossa, Radial styloid process, Radius (bone), Scapula, Ulna, Ulnar styloid process
Creator
LadyofHats
1. Fix inconsistent capitalisation (again); I'm not pointing them all out.
Done -LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2. As mentioned above the labelling is confusing. It makes it look like the bones in the two arms are different (despite the image description and caption). I'd rather both arms appear the same, maybe with the bones done as callouts to allow labelling of the characteristics. Or label bones in both arms, but with the extra detail on one using a different font/colour. I'm not sure, but perhaps there's a way to make it less confusing?
both arms are the same color now, labelings in diferent color.-LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3. Colour coding is confusing. Radius and clavicle the same colour, scapula and ulna the same colour. Why? It makes them look 'related'. And why are the same bones on the other side then different colours? This exacerbates the labelling issues.
no more diferent colors now but if you want to know what is confusing labeling then look at my source [19]-LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4. Why aren't the bones in the hand labelled? Not necessarily individually, but at least to the extent of carpals, metacarpals, phalanges? They're as much, if not more, bones of the forelimb as are the clavicle and scapula.
to cite the article, ... in colloquial speech the term arm often refers to the entire upper limb from shoulder to wrist... adding information who doesnt belong to the actual subject would make things even more confusing- LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then I'd say the article is misleading. If you look at it from a biological/evolutionary perspective (which is surely more meaningful than "colloquial speech") you'd get my point. Refer to Tetrapod#Limbs where these bones are discussed for more of an idea of what I mean. --jjron (talk) 08:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5. One hand is supinated, the other pronated, altering the layout of the forearm bones and hand/thumb positioning. Possibly this should be labelled or explained in some way.
bones, specially those in the forearm twist when changing position, if this wasnt this way it had been enough to do just one arm to explain everything. when you wish i would add a note in the description page but i do not think it is needed in the image -LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand supination/pronation, but isn't this meant to be assisting people who don't? I just think people will look at it and be confused by the different positions of the bones in the two forearms. --jjron (talk) 08:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
6. Is it just me, or are the arms exceptionally large and long in relation to the ribcage and spine? It just seems out of proportion.
the arms and the ribcage are coming from the image of the whole skeleton. as a (graphic) rule the tips of the fingers should reach the half of the femur.-LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Maybe it's just that it's been disembodied then, because my gut feel would be that the hands here would reach to about the knees. I was also talking about the thickness, not just the length, the arms just seem very thick compared to the torso. --jjron (talk) 08:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to carp on this, but I think there are some easy improvements. --jjron (talk) 17:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i dont mind critics, great part of nominating it here is presicely to improve the image, still i think that sometimes you ask far too much from a diagram, you should remeber the main sorce of information is the article and the image works together with it- LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Can I also ask for sources? This ought to be documented on the image description page. You could even create a heading for sources, just like an article. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 17:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose - Correct and good quality illustration, as usual. But I don't believe this is the best of the kind Wikipedia has to offer. As Shoemaker, I see little logic in the way the right and left arms are labelled. To be a FP, I would expect some more detail in the drwaing and the bones of the hand also identified -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion What if you used brackets at the ends of the lines to explicitly show the left side was pointing to the bones as a whole, whereas the right side was pointing to parts of the bone (or small bones, which should also get small brackets) This would make it a bit more explicit and clear. Also, doesn't the bit of cartiledge connecting the scapula and clavicle have a name? Finally, it's not entirely clear that the head and capitulum of the humerus are part of it, since they're coloured so differently. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • infook i changed it all again in order of changes:
    • maked it a white background
    • added the bones of the hand even when the article says nothing about it and no other internet reference i have seen counts it. actually must of them think the arm is just the space between the shoulder and the elbow.
    • i didnt add braklets becouse i dont know if you notice the radius and the ulna cros each other but i did changed the color of the outline. dont worry this time no color repeats itself.
    • i refuse myself to add more detail just to satisfy a need for complexity. if we are talking about people who can not distinguish between a hand looking foward and one backwards(supinated/pronated) then more detail would only be confusing and distracting. wich is exactly the oposite a diagram wish to do.if someone wants to know more about the subject they can always read the individual bones articles.
    • i added the name of the bones to the specific characteristics on the left. this makes the names extra long but now noone will come to the idea that they are "extra" bones. and if they come to this idea i would recomend them to read the article to come out of the doubth
    • i also doble check that the bones had the right proportion (wich they do)
    • i wrote a note on the description explaning what pronated and supinated means and seting clear no human being has two left hands and therefor the image has one hand looking foward and one looking backwards so that people can see the urna and the radius crosing themselves.
    • any further changes you may wish please write them below this text so i dont have to read all the above once again... thanyou -LadyofHats (talk) 12:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question. Are those arms really the average size of a human arm? They seem extremely wide/thick/muscular to me. Maybe it's dead on, but I just wanted someone else to do a reality check for me. Sorry to be picky. Everything else looks great to me. Kaldari (talk) 00:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless it is referenced. Diagrams need to be as verifiable as articles. Especially featured ones. gren グレン 03:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i will cite myself. on the 9 of march i wrote...**some of my sources:[21], Gray's Anatomy "williams & Warwick", Atlas der anatomie des menschen "Sobotta", Anatomia del cuerpo humano "Yokochi, Rhoen, weinreb", and a lamina printed by "rüdiger-anatomie GmbH"- LadyofHats (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC).. would that be enough for you? -LadyofHats (talk) 08:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, not fully ideal. The best would be "Gray, Henry. Gray's Anatomy Cambridge: University Press, 2005. p. 41" or whatnot... and not an image linked from image shack so that we can know that all images you based it on are themselves authoritative... if you can do that it'd be great but the closest you can get is still decent. gren グレン 09:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Human arm bones diagram.svg MER-C 08:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mathew Brady

edit
 
Original - Mathew B. Brady (1822 - January 15, 1896), was one of the most celebrated 19th century American photographers, best known for his portraits of celebrities and the documentation of the American Civil War. He is credited with being the father of photojournalism.
 
Alternative - recropped from the original image. Image:Matthew_Brady circa 1875.png is too large to display, but would be useful for retouching losslessly
 
Alternative no. 2 - removed the defects cause by aging and deterioration. I also cropped a small part of it, since the lower left corner was way too damaged, and didn't show any important detail, in order to be worthwhile fixing.
Reason
This photo has great enciclopedic value and adds to its articles, and I mean it is Mathew Brady.
Articles this image appears in
Mathew Brady, 1870s in fashion, Self-portrait
Creator
Mathew Brady

No consensus . Just renominate later. MER-C 08:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Painted Hills

edit
 
Original - Painted Hills is a part of the John Day Fossil Beds National Monument, located in eastern Oregon. The different colors of the hillside correspond to different layers of ash from early Cascade Mountain volcanoes and sedimentary rock deposited when the area was an ancient floodplain. As the Cascades matured, a rain shadow was formed that drastically changed the climate from very warm and wet to arid.
 
Alternate
Reason
Certainly a FP worthy subject, did I do it justice?
Articles this image appears in
Painted Hills, John Day Fossil Beds National Monument
Creator
User:Cacophony
It was taken towards dusk, but there was a lot of overcast. Normally the lighting there is very harsh as well. You are right about the brightness though, I uploaded a newer version but may have gone too far. Fir always does a good job, maybe he could help? Cacophony (talk) 18:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support orginal. Since the image was taken on a overcast day around dusk, the original looks to have realistic color balance to me. Oppose edit 1; it doesn't look like the lighting is harsh, it instead looks somewhat fake. - Enuja (talk) 19:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The composition looks a bit bland. Do you have any with any with some foreground features or some more three-dimensionality?? -

Fcb981(talk:contribs) 20:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus MER-C 08:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Mosquito on a Schizophyllum commune

edit
 
Original - Schizophyllum commune is the world's most widely distributed mushroom, occurring on every continent except Antarctica. The gills, which produce basidiospores on their surface split when the mushroom dries out, earning this mushroom the common name Split Gill. It has more than 28,000 sexes. On top you find a cluster flie from the genus Pollenia in the blowfly family Calliphoridae. All that happen on a dead birch Betula
Reason
Very clear, and sharp.
Articles this image appears in
links to the articles that use this image
Creator
User:Richard Bartz



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 19:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sec2tan

edit
 
Original - Animation of the tangent line at a point on a curve as the limit of secant lines.
Reason
It is a good example of using animation to visualize a tricky mathematical idea.
Articles this image appears in
Calculus
Creator
OSJ1961
  • Support as nominator OSJ1961 (talk) 22:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm worried that this is not getting any attention; people may be unsure of its significance given the terse statements in the caption and reason. I wonder if you would be able to provide a pretty straightforward paragraph or so saying what this is actually showing, what that means to a layperson, and why you think it's particularly valuable for the article. --jjron (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some further quick thoughts that may or may not be relevant:
  1. Axis labelling is sloppy (the x is labelled, albeit in a weird spot, the y isn't labelled at all).
  2. Isn't it still standard to put arrowheads at the ends of the axes?
  3. Wouldn't it make sense to include the equation/function that is being graphed? --jjron (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd rerender this with antialiasing first. --Dschwen 12:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. No idea what I'm looking at. Shouldn't there be an equation or something as part of the diagram? Kaldari (talk) 00:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The animation itself is very good. It would benefit from a graph that is not as stretched on the y-axis. There is a problem on your graph in that the x-axis is labeled to the right of the one and the y-axis is not labeled at all. Consider labeling the axis on the right and the top of the graph. Overall a very clean job that shows the concept well. victorrocha (talk) 9:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - A quite good animation but does not illustrate well the concept. I'm not sure how to do it better but I think the axes are not necessary and the curve could be simpler, without inflextions-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --microchip08 Find my secret page! Talk to me! I feel lonely! 10:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Brocken spectre in Tanzawa

edit
 
Original - a brocken spectre with a glory observed in a forest in Tanzawa, Japan
Reason
Beautiful subject, good composition, interesting illustration.
Articles this image appears in
brocken spectre
Creator
ja:user:Σ64
  • If I may, I'd like to answer your question please. IMO the size of the shadow alone cannot be a good indicator, if this is or it is not Brocken spectre. IMO the size of the Brocken spectre excatly as the size of a normal shadow deppeneds very much on the position of the sun and on how far down compare to the observer the fog is. Here are two examples of the Brocken spectre:
      and  . The second image was taken at night time and instead of the sun I've used headlights of my car (that's why there are two Specters). Both images were taken with the same 8 mm fisheye lens and both for sure show the Brocken spectre, but see how different the size of Brocken spectre is. IMO Brocken spectre is more about how the shadow looks. In both samples that I provided you might see that the shadows look more like the rays, which is a very clear indicator that it is Brocken spectre. I'm not sure about the nominated image, but I believe it does show Brocken spectre. In any case I'd like to Support the image before User:Froth would say "Oppose. Technical quality is, well, pretty terrible " without slightest understanding of the nature of the picture.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know much about this, but isn't the key feature that the shadow forms on the cloud/mist rather than the ground, thus giving the viewer the suggestion of a 'spectre' as the shadow moves around with the moving cloud/mist? The key aspect of the size is then I suppose that the bigger the shadow, and the further from the ground, the better that optical effect would appear. That is where a better representation would seem to involve bigger shadows forming away from the ground as described in the article where you had the opportunity to see this (and if I may add, as I think better displayed in Mbz1's Golden Gate Bridge picture); the shadow in this image looks to be mainly formed on the ground. --jjron (talk) 22:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm no expert (thanks for improving the caption) but the shadow remains equally distinct in the distance as the ground is lost in the fog. So it appears to me that the shadow is cast upon the fog, not the ground. As for moving with the clouds, that depends on cloud consistency, an independent factor. Examples using wide open spaces would be more encyclopedic, but leave little room for such beautiful composition :v) . Potatoswatter (talk) 04:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I'd never heard of this term until now, but it appears from the article that what separates it from a mere shadow on an uneven distant surface is the fact that it is projected onto mist/cloud below, and this image doesn't do that... I'm not sure that any of the images in the article are ideal to illustrate the concept, and incidentally, I found it difficult to understand from the article until re-reading it a few times. It didn't seem to clearly state that the phenomenon occurs when your shadow is projected downwards onto the cloud. I was confused as I could not understand how your shadow could be projected upwards onto the cloud. I know it does explain that in the article, but it could be a bit clearer. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 15:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Due to there being no votes although the 7 day period is now up, I am resetting this nomination, and will bump this to the top. Please await a further seven days ( from 13:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC) ) before closing this nomination. 13:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Microchip80 (talk • contribs)

I strongly disagree with this practice. Lack of comments show lack of interest. I might as well just oppose it then. --Dschwen 14:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Enuja (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Gen. Lysander Cutler

edit
 
Original - Lysander Cutler (February 16 1807 – July 30 1866) was a businessman, educator, politician, and a Union Army general during the American Civil War. In the first summer of the Civil War, Cutler, a respected 54-year-old businessman and Indian fighter, was commissioned colonel of the 6th Wisconsin Infantry on July 16 1861. The regiment would eventually become one of the units of the famous Iron Brigade.
Reason
Greatly illustrates the article Lysnader Cutler and of course has great encyclopedic value.
Articles this image appears in
Lysander Cutler
Creator
Unknown, Library of Congress
You mean studio portraits of american civil war union generals. Funny that there are about 15 old studio portraits featured, but portraits of contemporary political leaders don't get anywhere near the same support. I could also use a break from these nominations for a while. Cacophony (talk) 01:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's out of focus & has insufficient enc value to mitigate. --mikaultalk 13:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, we need MORE featured content from ACW, not less. MrPrada (talk) 00:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • What a bizarre 'reason' for a support, that incidentally addresses absolutely none of the criteria. Just for the record Wikipedia is an international project - would you be so ready to jump in and support every studio portrait of every general from say the Boer Wars using the same reasoning? --jjron (talk) 12:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, maybe if he was interested in that particular conflict he would. Also, I don't really see how Wikipedia being an "international project" should have any bearing on whether a America-centric photograph is featured. (Oh yeah, and support) -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 02:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Oh, for god's sake! That's exactly my point - he's supporting because it's a picture from the ACW, not because it addresses the FP criteria. And I suspect he's not the only one doing so. --jjron (talk) 06:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nice but not fabulous photo. Unimportant subject. Unsure why this should be Featured Picture quality. Some reviewers seem to vote for 19th century works merely because they are 19th century works. Oscar (talk) 15:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Enuja (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Magnificent Desolation

edit
Original - Edwin Aldrin, the second astronaut (after Neil Armstrong, descends the ladder of the Eagle landing module onto the surface of the moon during the Apollo 11 mission. After remarking to Neil on the beautiful view ("magnificent desolation"), he jumps from the lander's footpad onto the surface.
Reason
I think this is the only Apollo 11 video footage from the surface of the moon that we have.
Articles this image appears in
Apollo 11, Buzz Aldrin, Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files
Creator
NASA
  • Support as nominator Spikebrennan (talk) 21:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm a sucker for this. DurovaCharge! 23:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment What on earth is going on in the background from about 1:00 onwards? There seems to be a man not in a spacesuit skulking up from behind Buzz then off the right-hand side of the shot? TSP (talk) 01:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is weird. Purple Is Pretty (talk) 04:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Deduction says that would be neil armstrong, the first man on the moon, in a spacesuit. Potatoswatter (talk) 06:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • So who's holding the camera? --mikaul
          • Obviously, the studio cameraman at the backlot where they faked it. No, the camera's probably on a tripod that Armstrong placed before Aldrin came down the ladder, or else it's attached to the lander itself. Spikebrennan (talk) 19:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ah, yes, I see the spacesuit now. The low contrast had made it look like he had a much smaller silhouette where he blends into the background. I'd also assumed that Armstrong was holding the camera, as it's not a totally static shot (I wonder why that is - vibrations from machinery on the lander, perhaps?), but it is of course precisely the same viewpoint as the better-known shot of Armstrong's first steps on Mars.
            • As a sidenote, it's not utterly impossible that there could be non-moon-sourced material on this clip - the camera used was incompatible with the television broadcast technology of the time, so what viewers actually saw came from camera pointed at large screens, onto which were projected the images from the moon, so if the clip came from the TV footage it might include artefacts from this. TSP (talk) 11:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

talk 13:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question. Isn't all the NASA movie footage freely licensed like their photos seem to be? I'm not sure whether the reason is saying that this is the only such footage on Wikipedia or the only such footage in existence, because I thought there was quite a bit of this footage around, and at better sizes, and possibly quality. --jjron (talk) 07:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes it is (licensing). I think the issue is not enough people having the connection speed, the software (ff2mpeg) and/or the know-how to convert videos to ogg and upload them. Not to mention the 20MB upload limit: video files get very large very quickly (bug spam). A how-to would be ideal for the dispatches section of the Signpost. MER-C 09:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, low quality. And there is higher quality footage available somewhere--such as we can rip it from DVDs, etc., gren グレン 03:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "high-quality" footage of this, anywhere! It's a capture of the first TV transmission from the moon, using a "smeary" vidicon camera. In full-size (720 x 486) the quality is even more horrible... --Janke | Talk 08:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean that the footage was not recorded on film? 16mm and 8mm cameras were available in hand held size for many decades before the moon landing Thisglad (talk) 13:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This particular footage came from the camera mounted in an assembly on the lunar module's side, to capture the first steps onto the moon (when obviously there was no-one there to hold the camera).
They COULD have made this camera a film camera, but I'm not sure that people would have responded well to, "People have stepped on the moon - we'll have some pictures in a couple of weeks when the film gets to earth" :-) I'm also not sure how well a film camera would respond to a low-pressure environment. I think that all the motion picture cameras on the moon were for TV transmission, not film recording.
This article tantalisingly suggests that there may be better footage available - the generally-available footage is from the Apollo camera, projected onto a screen, then filmed with a TV camera. Apparently there was once recorded footage taken straight from the original signal, before the conversion to TV format; but it has been lost. It wouldn't necessarily be a *lot* better, though. TSP (talk) 17:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But, even the original TV signal at full or closer to full resolution would be MUCH better, right? I didn't expect DVD quality but slightly higher than 320×240. gren グレン 00:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
Photo of high-quality screen of transmission from Apollo_TV_camera, before scan conversion.
The original resolution of the video is approx. 220 x 220 pixels! Yes, there is also film footage from the Apollo missions, shot with Maurer 16 mm cameras, but only at 4 fps, IIRC. That footage was for other purposes, and due to the low filming speed, there is really no continuous movement - it's like a very fast slide show. Remember that this video was transmitted from the moon - with a rather low bandwidth due to the slow scan camera (see image at right) - and then recorded on earth. That partly explains the low quality. --Janke | Talk 19:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Enuja (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Haliaeetus leucocephalus-tree-USFWS

edit
 
Original - The North American Bald Eagle
Reason
Very detailed, well illustrates the subject and adds significantly to its main article, Bald Eagle.
Articles this image appears in
Bald Eagle Toledo Zoo
Creator
MPF

Not promoted As per nominators request. microchip80 I am Microchip08 in disguise! 11:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Rose Chafer

edit
 
Original - Cetonia aurata, is a reasonably large beetle, 20 mm (¾ in) long, that has metallic green coloration (but can be bronze, copper, violet, blue/black or grey) with a distinct V shaped scutellum, the small triangular area between the wing cases just below the thorax, along with several other irregular small white lines and marks.
Reason
Great close up showing nice detail to the species.
Articles this image appears in
Cetonia aurata
Creator
Chrumps

Promoted Image:Cetonia-aurata.jpg MER-C 06:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Close air support in the Korean war 1950

edit
 
Original - F4U-5 Corsairs provide close air support to U.S marines as they move forward to attack a Chinese position in Korea 26, December 1950
 
Alternative - F4U-5 Corsairs provide close air support to U.S marines as they move forward to attack a Chinese position in Korea 26, December 1950
 
similar image - F4U-5 Corsair drops napalm on Chinese position, 6 Dec 1950
Reason
An early example of close air support in warfare, high resolution and good composition
Articles this image appears in
close air support F4U_Corsair
Creator
Cpl. P. McDonald

Not promoted MER-C 06:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Animation of the Formation of an Atoll

edit
 
Original - This animation shows the dynamic process of coral atoll formation. Corals (represented in tan and purple) settle and grow around an oceanic island, forming a fringing reef. In favorable conditions, the reef will expand, and the interior island will subside. Eventually the island completely subsides beneath the water, leaving a ring of growing coral with an open lagoon in its center. The process of atoll formation may take as long as 30,000,000 years to occur.
Reason
Not many people know what an atoll is. This is a simple explanation in a picture. Also, it is original.
Articles this image appears in
Atoll
Creator
U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • Support as nominator Rj1020 (talk) 19:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (to try to get this started). Very useful and informative, but I don't see anything stunning in quality and presentation. I know there's no official limit on size with animations, but 320 × 237px, and total file size of 38kB - well compare that to what we expect of photos. Things such as the detail in colouring and textures are very basic, as is the quality of the illustrations themself. There also seems to be slightly varying definitions of what an atoll is, which don't necessarily consist of having a fully open lagoon within the fringing reef (though that clearly is one accepted definition). And this illustration appears to indicate that as the island erodes the reef builds up, suggesting that the reef is formed from the eroding island itself - I know that's not what it's intending to illustrate, but that's rather how it appears. --jjron (talk) 12:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I agree with Jjron - I don't think that the illustration gets it quite right, and I think the land as a whole generally subsides, but the coral builds up atop the shells of the old coral to keep at the proper depth, forming the ridge. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 06:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Daylily Stamens dry 01v2

edit
 
Original - Stamens of a daylily (Hemerocallis), thickly covered in pollen
Reason
A clear, well-focused macro shot showing pollen on the stamen of a lily in surprisingly good detail. I didn't notice any major color flaws or artifacting, and the picture is aesthetically-pleasing to boot. --jonny-mt 16:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
Stamen
Creator
Commons:User:Zantastik

Not promoted MER-C 06:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



2TE10U Russian Locomotive

edit
 
Original - Russian diesel locomotive
Reason
Besides being aesthetically pleasant, this picture shows a very typical locomotive for Russia, and in general it shows very well how locomotives look.
Articles this image appears in
Diesel locomotive, w:ru:2ТЭ10, w:ru:Тепловоз
Creator
User:Anthony Ivanoff

Not promoted MER-C 06:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Crab spider paralysing a fly

edit
 
Original - A crab spider (Xysticus sp.) paralysing a fly (Xyloma maculata). Notice the pollen covering the fly's body as a result of the struggle to get free. Crab spiders ambush on or inside the flowers from where they jump on preys coming to feed on nectar
Reason
A dramatic picture illustrating the behaviour of ambush spiders, not very easy to catch. Composition is a bit confusing but that contributes to suggest the struggle of the prey.
Articles this image appears in
Spider, Crab spider
Creator
Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Not promoted MER-C 06:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Purple leaf plum

edit
 
Original - A branch of a Purple leaf plum (Prunus cerasifera) showing the flowers, buds and leaves. These shrubs or small trees are among the first to blossom in spring
Reason
A conservative and minimalist depiction of a common subject, yet very detailed and sharp, clearly illustrating the flowers, buds and leaves of a Cherry tree.
Articles this image appears in
Prunus cerasifera
Creator
Joaquim Alves Gaspar
I wish you had a source for the caption though. Narayanese (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify: The text These shrubs or small trees are among the first to blossom in spring is taken from the article, but that bit does not have a source in the article. Narayanese (talk) 10:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I have verified it myself, spring is coming in Portugal! Anyway, that could be a problem with the article, not the picture. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take your word for it. Narayanese (talk) 13:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's quite nice, but only two petals and part of the branch are in really sharp focus. I'd need at least one whole flower to be in really sharp focus to support this image. - Enuja (talk) 01:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - nice piece of detail but it could be slightly better placed in the frame so that the top shoot goes deeper into the TR corner, and more of the lower stalk is given so that there is a bit of a support line before the branch - and this would centre the main blossom better. It replaces a very very fuzzy image of a whole tree, which was actually the wrong tree for the article - it is a nice detail but a shot of the whole tree would be more useful Motmit (talk) 16:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 06:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Dan'l Druce, Blacksmith

edit
 
Original - Dan'l Druce, Blacksmith, an 1876 play by W. S. Gilbert, was perhaps Gilbert's most critically-successful serious play and was revived repeatedly throughout the Victorian period. The lead was played by one of Gilbert's favourite actors, Hermann Vezin, and, in the words of the review that accompanied this image in the Illustrated London News, "electrified the house" with his performance. The first act was loosely based on the opening parts of Silas Marner, though moved to the time of the English Civil War instead of Silas Marner's setting on the cusp of the Industrial Revolution. Dan'l Druce has seemingly lost his capacity to love after one too many tragedies and betrayals, and has turned into a miser, treating his gold as his child. However, his gold is stolen by soldiers fleeing Cromwell's forces, who are forced to leave a child behind in its place after Dan'l tricks them and calls the guards, and Dan'l, a broken, half-insane old man, declares his gold transformed into the child, and, regaining some of his faith, claims the child as his own, against the others who would take her from him. The second act takes place fourteen years later, with Dan'l having returned to society and, through that, having recovered his sanity, but, the war being over, and the soldiers from the first act on the winning side, their return to the village threatens his family.
Reason
A fine image depicting an important actor, in an important (if now forgotten) play, by an important playwright, based on one of my favourite (and no doubt also important) books. Who needs more reason?
Articles this image appears in
Silas Marner, Hermann Vezin, Dan'l Druce, Blacksmith
Creator
Francis Sylvestre Walker (1848-1916) - Engraved by the Dalziel Brothers.

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 05:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Minimum supports not met.


Joan of Arc Statue

edit
 
Original - Joan of Arc Statue in Notre-Dame Cathedral, Paris.
Reason
I think it's a very atmospheric photo of the statue
Articles this image appears in
Creator
Sharon Lynette Taylor

Not promoted You are requested to read about what featured status is before nominating another picture, and to consider going to Picture Peer Review first (it tends to be a less harsh process). Hope to see you nominating another picture soon! --MicrochipL 08 11:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Metanephrops japonicus

edit
 
Original - Metanephrops japonicus

Reason: Encyclopedic photograph of Metanephrops japonicus.（＾＾）／

Articles this image appears on
Metanephrops japonicus
Creator
Dieno
ha ha ha, I agree. -- Laitche (talk) 20:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 03:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn.

Chitrakot Waterfall

edit
File:Chitrakot Waterfall Jagdalpur.jpg
Original - Chitrakot Waterfall is supposed to be the Niagara Falls of India. It is the broadest water fall in India. During Monsoon one can see its might. The River Indravati falls from a height of 29 m (96 ft) to form this waterfall. It is located 48 km (30 mi) from Jagdalpur and is accessible by road only. There is a helipad but it is used by government only. A few small hotels and restaurants are located near the falls.
Reason
Articles this image appears in
Jagdalpur
Creator
Alok Prasad

Not promoted MER-C 06:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Mosquito larvae, genus Culex

edit
 
Original - Mosquito larvae live in pools of stagnant water, where they feed for about one or two weeks before turning into a non-feeding but usually mobile pupa, one of which can be seen near the centre of this group, near the water's surface. The different genera of mosquitos have characteristic larvae, most obviously being distinguished by the structure of the siphons (or lack thereof in the case of the genus Anopheles) that are held up to the surface of the water to allow them to breathe. These larvae are from the genus Culex.
Reason
We have a lot of pictures of insects, but by and large almost all are of the adult stage, while the eggs, larvae and pupae are largely ignored. I think this is a fine image of mosquito larvae. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
Mosquito Culex, Siphon (insect anatomy)
Creator
James Gathany, Center for Disease Control

Promoted Image:Culex sp larvae.png MER-C 06:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Tristan und Isolde (original production)

edit
 
Original - Richard Wagner is one of the defining composers of opera, and his Tristan und Isolde was one of the most influential on the genre. Here we see husband and wife Ludwig and Malvina Schnorr von Carolsfeld, the creators of the title roles, in costume and on set, though, given the demands of early photography, most likely not in an actual performance. The opera was extremely difficult on its leads - it had to be delayed when Malvina temporarily lost her voice, and Ludwig died three weeks after the fourth performance. Nonetheless, it remains a cornerstone of the operatic repetoire.
 
Edit 1 - Attempts to repair some of the artefacting with levels adjustment and lots and lots of careful, selective blurs.
Reason
One of those "I can't believe this exists" sort of images - who'd have guessed that a photo of the original production of Tristan und Isolde was floating around? There's some degredation, but it is nearly a century-and-a-half since the photo was taken. In short, a surprising and wonderful find that I really think deserves recognition.
Articles this image appears in
Tristan und Isolde
Creator
Joseph Albert
I think the levels adjustment is probably an improvement, but the blurring to get rid of the white line is not an improvement. This is usually done with cloning, and I certainly don't know how to do it. - Enuja (talk) 22:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I used cut and paste to fix the white line - the blurring was to fix the JPEG artefacting. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Joseph Albert - Ludwig und Malwine Schnorr von Carolsfeld - Tristan und Isolde, 1865e.jpg MER-C 06:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Ortaköy Mosque and the Bosphorus Bridge

edit
 
Original - View of the Ottoman Neo-Baroque style Ortaköy Mosque on the Bosphorus, as seen from the Ortaköy pier square
Reason
Good composition and fascinating photo.
Articles this image appears in
Suspension bridge
Ortaköy
Tourism in Turkey
Ortaköy Mosque
Istanbul
Creator
Dietmar Giljohann

Not promoted MER-C 06:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Newtons cradle

edit
 
Original - An animation of Newton's cradle
 
Alternative - Edited in response to concerns about the second ball leaving the group before the first ball strikes. If the time still needs to be increased, the frames which show the cradle in its rest position are 1 and 19 (current time for these two frames is .05 seconds).
Reason
It's Enc. value Nicely done animation.
Articles this image appears in
Newton's cradle
Creator
DemonDeLuxe
Well done that's what it needed, I'm supporting this new version, changed vote above Mfield (talk) 03:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt. per above--CPacker (talk) 04:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support - alternative - very well done. diego_pmc (talk) 09:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Egad! A perpetual motion machine! Shouldn't the balls bounce to lower maximum heights in each cycle? Spikebrennan (talk) 13:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would be very difficult to accomplish without having the original computer animation, and without making the GIF file much larger (because of added frames). — scetoaux (talk) (My contributions.) 19:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's not a great reason to make an unencyclopedic animation featured. Pstuart84 Talk 19:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Then clearly the solution is to have a more explanatory image that exaggerates the decay rate (due to time/size constraints) but also explains within the image what is going on (either with a graph or equations). — BRIAN0918 • 2008-03-18 14:13Z
  • Oppose due to perpetual motion and background. Cacophony (talk) 19:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Pstuart84, Spikebrennan. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 02:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I wouldn't recommend that this be put in the article on Conservation of energy but it serves it's purpose to clearly and accurately depict how a Newtons cradle works in an encyclopedic matter, the whole perpetual motion issue is inconsequential when it comes to whether this is encyclopedic or not and adding the extra frames to show loss of energy would just make the animation larger in size without contributing much in how the image is currently used encyclopedically. Cat-five - talk 03:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It really doesn't "accurately depict how a Newtons cradle works in an encyclopedic matter". In fact, it's inaccurate for the reasons I give above. Pstuart84 Talk 20:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I wonder if a video of the real thing would be a good enc illustration of the phenomenon. Maybe not. IMO, the important concept to be illustrated here is the transmission of the momentum, rather than the friction damping of the motion. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. A quick 'back of the envelope' calculation suggests that this contraption (in the favoured Alternative version) is almost a metre tall, and the book below it would therefore be around two metres wide. If correct, this would be another slight parting with reality, as this is considerably bigger than typical Newton's Cradles which are about 15cm in height. Anyone want to check and see what figures they come up with? --jjron (talk) 05:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Much more than that, if we assume the "small oscilations" linear approximation. For a period of 3 s, the length of the pendulum should be more than 2m [L = g.T**2/(4*pi**2) ]! Did I make a mistake somewhere? This is a good way to make my point that a "realistic" animation is not very illustrative as it is too fast -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It takes awhile for the wave or whatever to pass through the middle bearings right? And what is jjron calculating based on? The thing could be a meter high or a millimeter, without some reference for size it's impossible to tell.. :D\=< (talk) 03:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Oh the amount of time it takes to fall, of course :D\=< (talk) 03:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yep, time. Actually that's probably a better way to do it, but I'm not sure where Alvesgaspar's 3s period comes from. I get a period of nearer to 1s, which gives length of pendulum ≈ 25cm, so the total height would be maybe around 30cm, which is somewhat more realistic. --jjron (talk) 07:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • The period is the time of a complete oscillation, not just the time of fall -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I know that, but (at least on my computer) I get a period of about 1s (with a 'time of fall' of about 0.25s, which was the figure I used in my first calculation). Do these things animate differently on different systems? --jjron (talk) 05:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Well yeah that's what you plug into the formula, but the gravitational force is your "some reference for size" that I couldn't see earlier :D\=< (talk) 16:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Yes, of course all calculations have been done on the assumption this thing is happening on Earth with g = 9.8ms-2. Also assuming the absence of friction, which seems to be fair enough since it's in perpetual motion ;-). --jjron (talk) 05:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • I have to disagree with the above estimates. Using   (see Pendulum), you get  . Taking the timing from the original GIF as 0.72s (there are 34 frames, all at 20ms except for two at 40ms), this gives  m, or about 1.8cm. This won't be exact, as it assumes the maximum angle to the vertical is small, but it's fairly close. Time3000 (talk) 14:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either. Excellent animation that contributes enormously to explaining the concept. That the speed is decreased and energy loss is neglected are both appropriate for this type of illustration, and contribute to clarity. (To :D\=<: Yes, it takes some time for the wave to travel – a very short time. The speed of sound in stainless steel is about 5790 m/s, so if these are 1-cm balls the travel time is about 5 microseconds, obviously negligible.) --mglg(talk) 21:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reluctant Strong oppose per perpetual motion concerns, but suggest it might qualify as encyclopedic under the GIF article as an illustration of GIF's animation potential. Reluctant because it is a very nice bit of work. Matt Deres (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted - I live in the real world. MER-C 06:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Coffea arabica

edit
 
Original - Illustration of Coffee plant from from Koehler's Medicinal-Plants 1887
 
Alternate Restored version of other copy. I think both have the wrong colours.
Reason
Not a particularly high resolution image, but a fantastic illustration from an old 19th century botanical book
Articles this image appears in
Coffee, Coffea arabica
Creator
Franz Eugen Koehler
  • Support as nominator - especially if colours of higher resolution image can be adjusted properly. My comment on accuracy of representation appears further down. CharlesC (talk) 10:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Wonderful, but way too small for the encyclopedia, let alone FP. Please check the criteria before nominating. If you can find a bigger version, I'd love to see it. --mikaultalk 10:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, I read the criteria and I came across this bit which made me think it might be OK: "Exceptions to this rule may be made for historical or otherwise unique images. If it is considered impossible to find a technically superior image of a given subject, lower quality may sometimes be allowed" --CharlesC (talk) 11:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I found one. Does anyone want to clean it up? MER-C 11:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • These old illustrations, as attractive as they are, are not always particularly accurate, and therefore not particularly encyclopaedic for our modern usage. I can't speak for this particular image, but I have been doing a bit of work recently with Australian birds and have come across a number of beautiful images by noted 19th century ornithologist John Gould. As nice as they are, I'm yet to find one that is entirely accurate with respect to its representation of the bird. The point of this is that it seems rather a long-shot to invoke the "Exceptions to this rule..." clause, when I'd need to be convinced it's actually completely correct. --jjron (talk) 15:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'd agree about the "exceptions" purely due to the fact that other versions clearly are available. I'd stand up for it's enc value though, as it has historical significance among other virtues.
          That bigger version is from another source – the flowers are white (uncoloured) and the colour repro is completely different. I really don't like it as much and we'll never squeeze that nice vibrant green of the original nom out of it. Good trawling though :o) --mikaultalk 15:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Besides the possible lack of accuracy I mentioned above, encyclopaedic value is further compromised here with those numbered small images around the bottom having lost the key they presumably originally had. --jjron (talk) 16:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • Abebooks has a reprint of Köhler's Medizinal-Plantzen for $30. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                • I think the perceived lack of accuracy is a red herring. Just because someone saw some inaccuracies in a another book by another person about birds (which let's face it don't sit still to be drawn), it doesn't mean that Franz Eugen Koehler was innacurate in his drawings. In fact he is renowned for his highly detailed and accurate representations. My feeling is that if someone has that amount of talent at drawing, specifically for a biologically focussed book, with a plant that doesn't move sitting in front of him - its not unreasonable to suppose that it is going to be as accurate as any representative drawing from a human being is possibly going to be. --CharlesC (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Considering the articles it appears in, one would expect accurate rather than historical depictions, i.e. photographs. Narayanese (talk) 06:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 06:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Baseball

edit
 
Original - A Baseball
Reason
Great enc. value, the image is very clear, and the detail is incredible.
Articles this image appears in
Too many to list...
Creator
User:UserB



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 12:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arnolfini Portrait

edit
 
Original - Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Wife by Jan van Eyck
Reason
I wonder why this hasn't been nominated before. This is one of the most famous paintings of all time. The depth of the symbology and era in which it was painted make it utterly unique.
Articles this image appears in
16 articles in total: History of Painting, Infrared, Oil Painting, Renaissance, Jan van Eyck, Las Meninas, Early Renaissance painting, Early Netherlandish painting, Arnolfini Portrait, Giovanni Arnolfini, Pentimento, Flemish painting, List of people from Bruges, Western Painting, Do Not Open, and National Gallery, London Collection Highlights
Creator
Jan van Eyck
  • Support as nominator Spinach Dip 05:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Is it that famous? I'm no art expert but I've never heard of it. I can think of plenty more famous paintings... Anyway, I'm guessing the reason it hasn't been nominated before is because at 100%, the quality is quite awful. Very blurry/soft and seems to have artifacts, but it is admittedly difficult to determine what was on the canvas originally and what is as a result of the capture of it. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because of low quality. Yes, it must be a bit famous, since I've seen it in a few art books... ;-) --Janke | Talk 11:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Yes, this is a very famous painting, and it's great that we have a fairly good quality image of it here on Wikipedia. However, because this is an image of a work of art, I'd like to really be able to see lots of details in the art by looking at the image. I'm afraid that, even thought the resolution is amply over the listed minimum requirement, it simply isn't high enough resolution to really see the kind of details of a work of art I like to see in featured images of works of art. - Enuja (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Yes, the painting is a little fuzzy. But, I believe it would be quite impossible to get a more detailed version at any resolution close to 2024x2777 (of course, if someone submits one, I would gladly support it). As for any artifacts, aside from doing a side-by-side comparison with the original, it will be impossible to tell what are actually artifacts, and what are the effects of 570 years of aging. Spinach Dip 06:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose. One of the most famous renaissance paintings but atrocious quality. Check out this closeup of the mirror. I want that quality in a full shot before I will support. :D\=< (talk) 03:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose for same reason as :D\=<. Visit the National Gallery in London, if you can, to admire the original. Motmit (talk) 16:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment In my experience, though I support the Yorck Project's goals, their reproductions tend to be of very poor quality, with loss of detail, poor colour reproduction, and so on. Comparing their reproductions to anyone else's, even of significantly smaller resolution, tends to show major flaws in theirs. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 10:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opppose per Froth (:D\=<). This is a wonderful painting, but we could have a far, FAR better quality image of it. J Milburn (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Grainy. SpencerT♦C 16:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 18:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

French Formal Garden in Loire Valley

edit
 
Original - French formal garden in the Loire Valley, France.
Reason
Very high quality and full of color. There is so much captured in the image without the feel of the picture being cut short.
Articles this image appears in
Garden
Creator
User:Daderot



Not promoted . --John254 01:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Ontario

edit
File:Lake Ontario.JPG
Original - A glimpse of Lake Ontario

Reason: A nice shot- natural and vibrant colors. A very different perspective view of the Lake.

Creator
User:Sidsizzle

Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 02:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schrödinger's cat

edit
 
Original - A basic illustration depicting the paradox of Schrödinger's cat.
Reason
Because it is pure awesomeness.
Articles this image appears in
Schrödinger's cat
Creator
Sloyment



Not promoted . --John254 20:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schizophyllum commune with Pollenia sp. male

edit
 
Original - A cluster fly rests upon a Schizophyllum commune (split gill) mushroom growing on a dead birch.
 
Cropped
Reason
Saw this on Commons FPC and loved it, and it provides images of things we didn't have before now. It combines encyclopaedic merit with artistic merit in a very compelling way. The use of colour is just gorgeous.
Articles this image appears in
Cluster fly (formerly no image), could reasonably be added to Schizophyllum commune, but I didn't feel comfortable replacing the image there myself, even if I think this one is better.
Creator
User:Richard Bartz



Not promoted . --- Milk's Favorite Cookie 00:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mute Swan

edit
 
Original - The Mute Swan (Cygnus olor is a common Eurasian member of the duck, goose and swan family Anatidae. Both cygnus and olor mean "swan", in Ancient Greek and Latin, respectively.)
File:Höckerschwan Cygnus olor 7b cropped.jpg
Cropped To remove blurry Bird from background.
 
Edit 2 Cloned out blurry bird
Reason
Very nicely taken shot. Sharp, and clear.
Articles this image appears in
Mute Swan
Creator
User:Richard Bartz

No consensus MER-C 07:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Panorpa cognata, a scorpionfly

edit
 
Original - Panorpa cognata
Reason
quality for main page picture of the day?
Articles this image appears in
Panorpa Panorpidae
Creator
Luc Viatour

Promoted Image:Panorpa communis 2 Luc Viatour.jpg MER-C 07:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Menderfish

edit
 
Original - Mandarinfish in aquarium-Muséum Liège (Belgium)
Reason
Crystal clear, you really can't miss on detail about the fish.
Articles this image appears in
Mandarinfish
Creator
Luc Viatour

Promoted Image:Synchiropus splendidus 2 Luc Viatour.jpg MER-C 07:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Illustration of a coconut tree (Cocos nucifera)

edit
 
Original - An illustration of a Cocos nucifera plant. Cocos nucifera is a member of the palm family, and is the only species in the genus Cocos. The term coconut refers to the fruit of the coconut palm.
Reason
Very encyclopediac, and it looks extremely clear and detailed.
Articles this image appears in
Coconut
Creator
Koehler's Medicinal-Plants. 1887
  • Ummm, that could take a while (i.e., more than the week this will be up here). Does the nominator want to withdraw the nom pending Shoemaker's scan, or wait for a restoration of the Beware one? --jjron (talk) 07:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I should (in theory) have it in a couple days. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The other question is: is this 1887 (or so) drawing still considering scientifically accurate? I know nothing about coconuts, but a modern illustration could work just as well. We also have no idea how big the original drawing is (do we?), so the current digital image might not be a whole lot smaller than is possible. However, I'll abstain until Shoemaker'sHoliday puts up his new version.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 13:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are some advantages to illustrations that photos may not have - stages of the plant's life, e.g. flowers, fruit, and seedlings, that do not normally occur at the same time can be collected together. That said, one could reasonably expect Köhler to be less accurate in his illustrations of tropical plants than ones that are native to Germany or even Eurasia. The trunk looks bizarrely spindly if you ask me. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re HereToHelp, refer to similar comments made on this nom, I believe by the same illustrator. I think the same considerations apply here, and would tend to oppose unless convinced otherwise. Re Shoemaker, my immediate impression was also that the trunk looked entirely unrealistic; I doubt this tree would be standing up to any tropical storms. I'm more interested in it being scientifically accurate than it being an attractive old drawing. --jjron (talk) 15:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 06:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


First satellite photo of Earth

edit
 
Original - The first satellite photo of the Earth taken from orbit, August 14 1959. It shows a sun-lighted area of the Central Pacific ocean and its cloud cover.
Reason
Can you believe we didn't have this picture anywhere? Yes, it's just a big white blur, but it's the first satellite photo of the Earth, for Pete's sake! Do you need another reason?
Articles this image appears in
Satellite imagery, Explorer 6
Creator
NASA
  • Comment The caption doesn't help at all. It says it's a sun lit patch of the south pacific, but all I see is a white smear on a scratchy black field. Historical importance is worth consideration, but not when the picture is this bad. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 20:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is an historically important but crummy image which I would not object to (except that surely a higher quality scan of this exists). --Uncle Bungle (talk) 20:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I looked for a larger version of that image too, but could not find anything bigger than what we already have. howcheng {chat} 23:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It almost seems daft to try to find a super high res picture of a very inherently low resolution image, similar to the first photograph linked above. I'm not being critical, and I know there are some other considerations because of resampling and it being analog, but there is a limit at some point. The first 'TV' image though does indeed seem somewhat more impressive/interesting, but a bit weasely because of the 'TV'. -- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 03:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: I'm not trying to push the TV as an alternative. I was merely using it to illustrate the level of crumminess which I would accept. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 03:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I was actually in the midst of writing a vote of strong support based on high historical value, but I just can't bring myself to do it. This is like... nominating Ansel Adams' first photograph even though he took it with the lens cap on or something... there's nothing there to feature. I'm glad we have this photo in the encyclopedia, but I can't think of a reasonable definition of "best" that would somehow include this. I could be convinced otherwise, I think. Matt Deres (talk) 04:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Being big and historically significant doesn't mean it's a good photo.The freddinator (talk) 00:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 06:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



2008 Australian Grand Prix

edit
 
Original - Nick Heidfeld and Nico Rosberg at corner 6 of the 2008 Australian Grand Prix
Reason
The first picture I've nominated for a while (yay for easter holidays!) and also the first I've nominated with my latest bit of kit - the Canon 400mm f/5.6L. Taking this shot was much more challenging than I expected - the moronic race organisers are killing the sport by giving general admission abysmal vantage points. The corner I had planned to photograph from (no. 3) is now fenced off an extra 30m from the track (needlessly I might add) and even has a huge piece of plastic covering the best viewing position!!! Ugh! What are they thinking? I can only guess they're trying to force people to pay for a grandstand! Anyway enough of the rant. I ended up after a considerable trek settling on corner 6. They had pulled a similar trick to corner 3 here (the track was probably 70m away) but at least there was no black plastic preventing a head on view! I had brought along a black permanent marker hoping to shade in the wire fence between me and the track (this improves the contrast loss when you shoot through it - I saw a pro doing it in 2004 :)) but they made another smaller fence so you were kept 2m back from the main fence. So that was another challenge. Anyway DESPITE all this I think the shot came out pretty well for a high speed sport (the 400mm blurred out the fence pretty well too) and shows an interesting bit of driving with Rosberg braking hard for the corner.

Summary of above (for the majority of people who can't be stuff reading the mass above!): good EV and excellent technical quality in a challenging subject

Articles this image appears in
Formula One, Albert Park, Victoria, Australian Grand Prix and 2008 Australian Grand Prix
Creator
Fir0002

Promoted Image:Heidfeld and Rosberg - 2008 Melb GP.jpg MER-C 06:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Heron

edit
 
Original - A Black-crowned Night Heron on a perch

Reason: One of the better pictures I have seen of a heron on the Commons. It shows great detail of the bird.

Articles this image appears on
Black-crowned Night Heron
Creator
User:Calibas

Not promoted MER-C 06:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Space Shuttle landing

edit
Original - Landing of Space Shuttle Columbia at Edwards Air Force Base, 14 April 1981.
Reason
A historic moment in space exploration: the first reusable spacecraft making its first safe landing.
Articles this image appears in
STS-1
Creator
National Aeronautics and Space Agency

Not promoted MER-C 06:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Four-spotted Chaser

edit
 
Original - The Four-spotted Chaser, Libellula quadrimaculata is a dragonfly of the family Libellulidae found throughout Europe, Asia, and North America.
 
Edit 1 - cropped by Fir0002
Reason
A good picture, already an FPand QI at commons.
Articles this image appears in
Four-spotted Chaser
Creator
User:Dschwen
  • Support as nominator Muhammad(talk) 16:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support nice. —αἰτίας •discussion• 19:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Properly identified, well composed, and certainly large enough. Definitely an encyclopedic photograph. DurovaCharge! 01:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - great picture and clearly encyclopediac. DOF (out of focus wings) is as good as you're going to get unless the creature is square on - Peripitus (Talk) 02:44, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A quality picture. crassic![talk] 03:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original -- Great composition, good quality -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unfortunate angle makes it very hard to get a sense of its body plan (covered by wing). Not as enc as it could be because of that. Mangostar (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Original - too much dead space + the sharpness/definition is lacking (check out the eyes) and the angle/composition isn't particularly good for EV. Weak Support Edit 1 Weak because of the reasons I just stated minus the dead space issue. --Fir0002 08:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yay, Fir is back. Hm, I didn't think there is that much dead space. To adress the EV concerns: there are plenty of body plan pictures of dragon flies. I even provide a top down view of this very specimen untder other versions. So instead of having yet another one, my intention was to illustrate something else, the resting position between hunting runs (plus giving a slightly different more spatial perspective as most other pics are dead on top-to-bottom or straight from the side). The dragonfly rested there, with its abdomen pulsating heavily (presumably breathing) then took off to fly around for minute or so, then coming back, and repeat. The straw it is sitting on actually shows claw-marks, I found that quite remarkable. --Dschwen 12:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • sure, we only have ten FP dragonflies and all of them look kind of alike. Why do not have one more? oppose — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.22.123.124 (talk • contribs)
    • Please sign your comments. Generally, only registered users' votes are counted, but if you would like to make a constructive contribution to the discussion, please feel welcome. It's probably worth noting that dragonflies encompass a large range of creatures that certainly do not all look alike, and opposes should typically refer to a failure to meet one of the criteria for FP. Thegreenj 18:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -Great Photo. Great Scene. Good Quality. I love that the fly is sitting on a broken stem or whatever that is. Much character in this photo. Rj1020 (talk) 04:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Dragonfly macro.jpg MER-C 06:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Scorpion fly

edit
 
Original - A female Scorpion fly (Panorpa meridionalis) collecting nectar. These insects are named from the up-turned genitals in some males but their main diagnostic feature is the stout beak. There are about 400 known species of scorpion flies from which 30 occur in Europe. They fly weakly and feed on dead animal matter, fruit and nectar.
 
Alternative
Reason
A detailed and high quality picture of a beautiful and somehow exotic species of insect adding value to the arcticle. It's not the author's intention to compete with the excellent picture of Luc Viatour, this was just a coincidence (it's a shame they can't mate, they are from different species...)
Articles this image appears in
Scorpion fly
Creator
Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Not promoted MER-C 06:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



A Busy Ha Long Bay

edit
 
Original -Vietnam's Ha Long Bay busy with boats passing through.
Reason
This photo is beautifully dynamic with the bay water as a stage, the rocks as a far wall, the foliage as a close frame, the sky and passage as "the beyond", and the boats are the life of the photo.
Articles this image appears in
Southeast Asia,

Vietnam, Halong Bay, List of World Heritage Sites in Asia and Australasia, Cinema of Vietnam, Template:Vietnamesefilmlist, List of Vietnamese films, User:Derlinus/Unesco User:Qweqweqweqweqweqweqweqweqweqwe

Creator
Ekstazo

Motmit (talk) 08:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 01:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Édouard-Henri Avril

edit

thumb|250px|Original - Hadrian having anal sex with Antinous in Egypt, portrayed by Édouard-Henri Avril.

Reason
Painting by Édouard-Henri Avril showing Hadrian having anal sex with Antinous in Egypt.
Articles this image appears in
Sexual intercourse
Creator
Avril, Édouard-Henri

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy closed per above discussion.



Black Madonna of Częstochowa

edit
 
Original - A mosaic of the Black Madonna of Częstochowa in Jasna Góra,Częstochowa.The Black Madonna of Częstochowa is an icon , according to legend, painted by St. Luke the Evangelist on a cypress table top from the house of the Holy Family.
Reason
A very good image and a good example of a mosaic.
Articles this image appears in
Black Madonna of Częstochowa
Creator
User:Yarl

This is suspended until Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01-removed from the wall.jpg is completed. MER-C 08:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Sour Cherry (Prunus cerasus) In Full Bloom

edit
 
Original - A Sour Cherry (Prunus cerasus) in full spring bloom.
Reason
It is a Featured Picture on the commons and I think that it is an absolutely stunning picture, it is used in a few articles here at the en. Wikipedia, and I think that it truly is one of the best pictures on the Commons and Wikipedia.
Articles this image appears in
Prunus ♦ Sour Cherry ♦ Nowruz
Creator
Commons user BenHur



Not promoted . --John254 04:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firefighters

edit
 
Original - Firefighters are equipped with a wide variety of equipment to accomplish this task. Some of their tools include ladder trucks, pumper trucks, tanker trucks, fire hose, and fire extinguishers. Very frequent training and refresher training is required. This photograph was taken during a major fire involving an abandoned convent in Massueville, Quebec, Canada. The fire was so violent that firefighters had to focus their efforts on saving the adjacent church instead of attacking the involved building.
 
Edit 1 by jjron - work on grain & sharpness.
Reason
This photo gives a good exapmle of the the kind of work firefighters have to do and the risks that can be involved in being a firefighter.
Articles this image appears in
Firefighters, Fire photography
Creator
Sylvain Pedneault
  • Support as nominator CPacker (talk) 21:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose looks grainy overall. The freddinator (talk) 01:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. First of all, for such an easily replicated photo this falls short of the highest technical quality requirements. Second, it fails at encyclopedicity. It actually doesn't show any firefighters really doing anything except standing back -- one guy has a hose, but it's concealed. The caption mentions ladders, firetrucks, and other equipment, but none of that is visible. It's a nice catch of the fiery gable collapsing, but it just doesn't seem like the strongest eample of either firefighting or fire photography.--Dhartung | Talk 05:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Edit 1. Have done a bit of work to improve technical quality. It's not as grainy as some may think, as there's a lot of smoke and water spray around. I like the dynamic nature of the photo, but as Dhartung says, it is oversold in the caption and it may be nice to see more action from the firefighters. Still it is well composed and taken at a opportune time. --jjron (talk) 06:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The image has two very strong messages driving the viewer away. The sharp corner of the building is a negative symbol and dissipates attention. And then the hose jets make an enormous "X" - (don't look!). This immediately loses the attention catching impact of the fire, and disguises the lack of composition. And as mentioned above the friefighters don't seem to be doing much. The long explanation explains why this is not, as it first appears, a training exercise, but the point of a picture is to save words. Motmit (talk) 08:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Poor quality and poor composition with the unseen building on the left being watered by firemen who are looking at the fire on the right. The figures lack the drama of the fire itself. SilkTork *YES! 15:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 14:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last Spike

edit
 
Original - Donald Alexander Smith, driving the last spike of the Canadian Pacific Railway. The photo was taken in the morning of November 7, 1885, in Craigellachie, BC.
Reason
This is probably the most famous photo of Canadian history. It is symbolically important as well, illustrating the coming together of the Dominion of Canada.
Articles this image appears in
Last Spike, Canadian Pacific Railway, British Columbia, Craigellachie, Donald Alexander Smith
Creator
National Library and Archives of Canada



Not promoted . --John254 14:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sun Voyager

edit
Reason
Just look at the clarity and how the object pops out of the backround. You can clearly see what this picture is about.
Articles this image appears in
Reykjavik
Creator
David Blaikie from Hampshire, UK

This is a suspected   copyright violation because freedom of panorama in Iceland is essentially for non-commercial uses only. Does anyone want to start a commons deletion request? MER-C 07:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But it is for non-commercial use, I don't see the problem. diego_pmc (talk) 09:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Licenses for FPs must allow commercial use... --Janke | Talk 09:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a two dimensional reproduction of a copyrighted two dimensional work... it's a sculpture and therefore originality... I'm not sure why that would be an issue in the first place. If it were a sign on the side of the building it would be... gren グレン 17:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This photo is a derivative work, see Commons:Derivative works. MER-C 06:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Not promoted . --John254 02:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RMS Titanic

edit
Reason
admittedly it doesn't meet the size guidelines, but take into account the quality of the photo and please do consider that this is the only good original photo we have of the most famous ship in history, then I think that's a good enough reason to support; after all the thing is now 3.5 km beneath the surface, its not like we can just take another one
Articles this image appears in
RMS Titanic
Creator
Uploader User:Daniel Chiswick, but the image would have definately been photographed in 1912 so all existing copyright laws are rendered invalid, so the image is, as far as i can tell, freely-licensed
  • It may well have been published years before 1923 or it may have been kept as a memento by the individual who took it and published by their great-grandchild in the 1990's. Without any source information we don't know and I don't think it's right to base copyright status on speculation. Since it has been published (or it wouldn't be here) it should be possible to find out where and when and confirm whether it is in the public domain (which I imagine it is). Guest9999 (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Kiwi (Actinidia chinensis) 2

edit
 
Original
Reason
Technically perfect image, high encyclopedic value.
Articles this image appears in
Kiwifruit
Creator
Lviatour

regards, —αἰτίας •discussion• 16:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused, you opposed a photo of the same exact kiwi due to color balance. How is this photo better? Cacophony (talk) 18:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At "3664 × 2738 pixels" DinA3 printing is without grain! --Luc Viatour (talk) 12:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No flash used;) --Luc Viatour (talk) 12:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Ortelius - Maris Pacifici 1589

edit
 
Original - Image:Ortelius - Maris Pacifici 1589.jpg
Reason
It meets the size and technical quality requirements. Though it is not certain, it is believed this to be the first ever printed map showing the Pacific Ocean.
Articles this image appears in
Pacific Ocean; Timeline of Colombian history; Maris Pacifici
Creator
Jan Arkesteijn
Stub started. SilkTork *YES! 00:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Ortelius - Maris Pacifici 1589.jpg MER-C 08:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Kiwifruit Actinidia chinensis

edit
 
Original - {{{Kiwifruit}}}
Reason
more quality for old featured here
Articles this image appears in
Kiwifruit Actinidain
Creator
Luc Viatour (talk)
Could it just be that these kiwis are less ripe? I rarely eat them so I have a poor frame of reference. -- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 01:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Hurricane Rita

edit
 
Original - Hurricane Rita at peak strength in the Gulf of Mexico on September 21 2005.
Reason
shows a well-defined storm in the Gulf of Mexico
Articles this image appears in
Hurricane Rita
Creator
NASA
A few editors suggested posting one at a time. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 02:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect they're "thermal anomalies" detected by the MODIS Rapid Response System - inconsistencies in the infrared and thermal infrared bands. There's a bit more info here. Time3000 (talk) 13:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Su-27 on landing

edit
 
Original - Su-27 from the Russian Knights aerobatic team on landing, Kubinka, Russia
Reason
Good quality, very close to flying aircraft
Articles this image appears in
Su-27
Creator
Dmitry A. Mottl

Promoted Image:Su-27 on landing.jpg MER-C 08:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Anime character

edit
 
Original - Anime-style illustration of a character combining design elements of Mahoro Andou from Mahoromatic and Haruhi Suzumiya from The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya.
Reason
A free, user-created typical anime character is hard to find. Plus, it's in SVG format. It has also attained Feature status in both Wikimedia Commons and Spanish Wikipedia, plus considered a Quality Image in Wikimedia Commons.
Articles this image appears in
Anime
Creator
Niabot from the German Wikipedia
As someone who's watched a fair bit of anime I can say with some confidence gradually fading confidence that the image is a good representation of an archetypal female "amine-style" character and I wouldn't be suprised to see a character matching the image in any number of anime series. Guest9999 (talk) 14:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it varies, often the hair over the face/eyebrows is translucent so that the detail beneith can be seen. I have just noticed the way the hair cuts off above the right eye - I'm pretty sure that's not normal, although my knowledge is far from comprehensive. Guest9999 (talk) 00:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen it fairly often. It depends on whether they draw the eyes on top last I guess. :D\=< (talk) 04:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the correction. Guest9999 (talk) 16:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus MER-C 08:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/March-2008&oldid=202255144"