Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mars Spirit rover
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2011 at 16:35:12 (UTC)
- Reason
- Reasonably irreplaceable, high resolution, technical flaws excusable, given the shooting conditions.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Cleaning event, Mars Exploration Rover, Spirit rover
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Space/Looking_out?
- Creator
- NASA
- Support as nominator --Aaadddaaammm (talk) 16:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support This'd be perfect if there was a similar shot taken when it was clean to compare it with though. JJ Harrison (talk) 22:44, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- For your interest, there's this shot [1], but it's never going to be a FP. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Related cartoon [2]. I really do feel sorry for the little rover. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 08:16, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support I had the same thought as JJ, though. Cowtowner (talk) 18:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's kind of interesting, but I'm not really buying the EV (yeah, so the panels get dirty...), and I don't like the projection and composite image. --jjron (talk) 09:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- The fact that the panels got dirty was ultimately the reason for the rover's demise. We have a whole article on the fact that the panels get dirty (Cleaning event) so I think its EV is well justified. Also, the projection and composite are more or less inevitable. The only way to get a photograph of the rover on Mars is for it to do it from the overhead camera. Cowtowner (talk) 00:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I checked that before voting. The article is on (as its name suggests) the cleaning event, not the dirty rover, and this doesn't show the cleaning at all (and FWIW, having now looked closer I'm starting to question the WP:NOTABILITY of that article - the key claim for its inclusion seems to be that "The term cleaning event is used on several NASA webpages"; hmmm, so that qualifies it for an article? Is it actually a meaningful term? But anyway, I digress). And I know this is more specialised, but it's kind of like claiming a picture of a dirty car was high EV for Car wash. --jjron (talk) 03:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, if the car was on Mars! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 07:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- These comments illustrate why a clean companion shot would be so nice. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Such an image does exist, the question is, where is the original? Although I would argue even having a smaller version would increase the EV of this one. Cowtowner (talk) 02:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Found it. Will add to article. Cowtowner (talk) 02:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Added to article and nomination. Support Alt 1, (or the nomination as a set). Cowtowner (talk) 02:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Found it. Will add to article. Cowtowner (talk) 02:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Such an image does exist, the question is, where is the original? Although I would argue even having a smaller version would increase the EV of this one. Cowtowner (talk) 02:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- These comments illustrate why a clean companion shot would be so nice. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, if the car was on Mars! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 07:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I checked that before voting. The article is on (as its name suggests) the cleaning event, not the dirty rover, and this doesn't show the cleaning at all (and FWIW, having now looked closer I'm starting to question the WP:NOTABILITY of that article - the key claim for its inclusion seems to be that "The term cleaning event is used on several NASA webpages"; hmmm, so that qualifies it for an article? Is it actually a meaningful term? But anyway, I digress). And I know this is more specialised, but it's kind of like claiming a picture of a dirty car was high EV for Car wash. --jjron (talk) 03:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- The fact that the panels got dirty was ultimately the reason for the rover's demise. We have a whole article on the fact that the panels get dirty (Cleaning event) so I think its EV is well justified. Also, the projection and composite are more or less inevitable. The only way to get a photograph of the rover on Mars is for it to do it from the overhead camera. Cowtowner (talk) 00:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 03:50, 5 June 2011 (UTC)