Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Black hole quasar NASA.jpg

A Quasar Black Hole

Original - A growing black hole, called a quasar, can be seen at the center of a faraway galaxy in this artist's concept.

Reason: This is a stunning image of a growing black hole, also known as a Quasar.
Articles this image appears in: Black Hole
Creator: NASA (uploaded by - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 03:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Support as nominator - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 03:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Question Are the halos around the background galaxies deliberate? Durova^Charge! 03:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Durova. Thanks for you support on one of my images. Also, I do believe the halo's were added deliberately, to show a better conception of the Black Hole. - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right: Support Durova^Charge! 04:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Neither the image description ("A stunning image of a quasar black hole") nor its use in the article help me understand what it going on in this image, or advances my knowledge of black holes. Also strikes me that a lot of 'artistic license' has been used. Therefore I can't see very high encyclopaedic value. --jjron (talk) 07:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, FWIW an identical image, Image:Quasar.jpg, exists in the Quasar article, except that was uploaded three months ago by Gingojo, rather than this one that was uploaded what looks like today by the nominator. --jjron (talk) 08:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other image tagged accordingly (because I'm lazy). MER-C 11:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - heavy artifacting, bad quality generally, artistic license goes a little too far methinks. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξ φ 11:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose heavily artifacted, unclear enc value. de Bivort 20:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per jjron. Cacophony (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose Technical issues are overwhelmingly bad. Not the best of Wikipedia, by far. --Shark face 217 01:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This image is not "real", it's heavily retouched - maybe totally an artist's conception. --Janke | Talk 08:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 05:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]