Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tvashtarvideo.gif

Image:Tvashtarvideo.gif, not featured

InfoSequence of five images taken by NASA's New Horizons probe on March 1st 2007, over the course of eight minutes from 23:50 UT. The images form an animation of an eruption by the Tvashtar Paterae volcanic region on the innermost of Jupiter's Galilean moons, Io. The plume is 330 km high, though only its uppermost half is visible in this image, as its source lies over the moon's limb on its far side.
Info created by NASA - uploaded by Serendipodous - nominated by Mbz1 --Mbz1 15:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very special picture --Mbz1 15:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's no moon! That's a spaceship! I can see the thrusters! </paranoid conspiracy theories>. Adam Cuerden 06:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --J-Luc 09:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Mhh, this is certainly a very special phenomenon depicted here and it's very hard to reproduce. But I can't see a thing other than some blurry blob of dust over a moon. --MichaD | Michael Apel 14:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Keta 19:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ziga 13:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose agree with MichaD -- Gorgo 14:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers Lycaon 16:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I am kind of astonished by the opposition. This image passed FPC on the English Wikipedia with great ease, and the image is possibly unique (you're looking at an animation of a volcanic eruption on a moon of another planet). Spikebrennan 21:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess it's reasonable to feature it on en.wikipedia for the encyclopedic value alone, but I think the artistic value required for fps here on commons should be valued a little bit higher than on wikipedia. (others may think different though) ... and this picture actually really is just a blurry blob ;) -- Gorgo 00:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Whar "artistic value" you are talking about. Haven't you read at the beginning of that very page: "Symbolic meaning or relevance…. Well, this is where opinion wars start…. A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject."--Mbz1 03:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
- Let me rephrase that. In my opinion FPC on en and on Commons serve different purposes. This image is certainly extremely useful for an encyclopedia. I think the term useful is used a bit different on commons. It doesn't have to be useful for a specific article for example. Technical aspects and the so called wow factor are more important here. And this image just doesn't wow me. It is interesting, but that's it. --MichaD | Michael Apel 08:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Has a very high wow-factor for people into astronomy. Movies of other planets are extremely rare.--Tos 11:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Second MichaD. --Derbeth ^talk 08:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CommentThat nomination is doing really great. Nobody yet complained about composition and it is already a very big progress.--Mbz1 12:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Support--Beyond silence 20:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC) vote cast after closing of nomination. Lycaon 20:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Lycaon 08:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]