Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Earthshine
Earthshine[edit]
The phenomenon known as Earthshine or reflected Earthlight visible on the Moon's night side; Created by Nasa in the article Earthshine.
- Nominate and support. - Dbalderzak 22:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose it's just an overexposed pic of the moon, and grainy too. Yeah, I get it, you can see the part not lit by the sun, but I'm just not stunned. This is visible with the naked eye on a clear night.--Dschwen 23:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- And if I looked outside on the right day, I would see these, and if I went to the right part of Texas, this, or to the store three blocks away, this, or into my basement, these. These things are visibile to the naked eye as well (and I've never seen Earthshine, because there's too much light pollution where I am). The guidelines say that a FPC should "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." If this image doesn't illustrate the article content well, then I don't know what else can. I oppose this picture as well, because I don't think the article to which it links is that good, but I think you were too brash. - JPM | 23:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- :-) Point taken. Let's just leave it with I'm not stunned. And part of my brashness results from having to remove this very picture from WP:FP where an anonymous editor put it up woithout going through this voting process.--Dschwen 07:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good thing they couldn't put it on the mainpage also! - JPM | 17:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- :-) Point taken. Let's just leave it with I'm not stunned. And part of my brashness results from having to remove this very picture from WP:FP where an anonymous editor put it up woithout going through this voting process.--Dschwen 07:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- And if I looked outside on the right day, I would see these, and if I went to the right part of Texas, this, or to the store three blocks away, this, or into my basement, these. These things are visibile to the naked eye as well (and I've never seen Earthshine, because there's too much light pollution where I am). The guidelines say that a FPC should "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." If this image doesn't illustrate the article content well, then I don't know what else can. I oppose this picture as well, because I don't think the article to which it links is that good, but I think you were too brash. - JPM | 23:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Doesn't wow me either. enochlau (talk) 10:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose informative, but visually - nothing particularry appealing. Eyesclosed 08:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. I don't mind this picture, but it doesn't illustrate what Earthshine looks like to the naked eye. I would rather see a less overexposed picture that shows the lit crescent with just a faint hint of Earthshine, as we see from Earth. The Singing Badger 16:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose for all the reasons already given Calderwood 16:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted Alr 02:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)