Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Early flight 02562u.jpg

Events in early ballooning and parachuting history

Reason: Another find from the Library of Congress archives in high quality, with high enc (used in 20+ articles and today's "Did you know?") and high entertainment value. Proposed caption:; Two sets of late 19th Century collecting cards, depicting historical events in ballooning and parachuting history from 1783 to 1846. The cards show first flights, military accomplishments, triumphs and tragedies, such as the death of Tom Harris in 1824, who sacrificed his life when his balloon lost altitude and threatened to kill Harris and his fiancée.; For the accuracy of the depicted events, I recommend reading the article on Sophie Blanchard.

Articles this image appears in: Both sets: Balloon (aircraft); 1st Series – 1,2,4: Montgolfier brothers; 3: Gas balloon; 4,8: Jean-François Pilâtre de Rozier ; 5: Jacques Charles; 6: Louis-Bernard Guyton de Morveau; 7: Jean-Pierre Blanchard; 8: Aviation accidents and incidents; 9: Surveillance aircraft; 10: Battle of Fleurus (1794), History of military ballooning; 2,4,5,7,10: Timeline of aviation - 18th century.; 2nd Series – 1: Battle of Mainz; 2: List of early flying machines; 3: Louis-Sébastien Lenormand; 4: André-Jacques Garnerin; 5: Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac, Jean-Baptiste Biot; 6: First French Empire; 7: Sophie Blanchard; 2,4: Timeline of aviation - 18th century; 5,8,9,10: Timeline of aviation - 19th century.

Creator: Romanet & cie., c. 1890–1900

Support as nominator — trialsanderrors 03:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a set of individual images Looks good but I think it should be prmoted as a set of all the individual cards, not 2 overviews of the cards. --antilived^{T | C | G} 03:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- So who's gonna tag them all.. :-) ? I'm ok with it, but even featured sets need "lead pictures" that get the FP tag. ~ trialsanderrors 04:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I agree, but the individual cards won't make the size requirements... are we ok to waive that since it's a set? If there's consensus in that direction, then I'll support. tiZom_(2¢) 04:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- They're 972 × 1422 pixels each, that's far above minimum size. ~ trialsanderrors 04:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, what exactly is supporting as a set? Do we have a way to deal with that... feature picture sets? I would support as that if there is a way to deal with it... because I don't think having this many entries of the same type into FP is a good way of dealing with it. gren グレン 05:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- See thread on talk page. Bezier curves has just been promoted as the first official featured set, although by all accounts the Mandelbrot set one was our first de facto set. ~ trialsanderrors 05:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, thanks. gren グレン 06:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - The featured set template wasn't around when the Mandelbrot set set (ha ha) was nominated. That's not to say it couldn't replace the generic template we have on it now.--Here T oHelp 13:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support and Comment: there are only two images here, Tomtheman and Grenavitar. There are 20 cards, but there are two uncut sets of 10, and so only two pieces of paper and two images. Support because they illustrative, historical, and fun to look at. Enuja 05:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the reason we are talking about sets is because this image isn't the greatest resolution whereas each individual one is. I'm not particularly impressed by the usage of the uncut cards in the balloon article, but I am very impressed by the whole set and how they are used throughout Wikipedia. gren グレン 06:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - There are two versions to the full cards ("higher" and "highest resolution", this is easier to see on Commons). The only reason why I had to downsample the cards is because in the 13 megabyte version it wouldn't create thumbnails. ~ trialsanderrors 07:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support: It doesn't matter to me if the pictures are grouped or not--it's more applicable to the article this way.-129.170.50.27 11:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support cut up version By having the individual cards available, the event they portray can be illustrated without 9 other distracting images. As for the "lead" image, it should be the first card (chronologically).--Here T oHelp 13:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support either together or individually. —dima /talk/ 18:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support- see above --Penubag 08:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)penubag[reply]
Support I'd support promoting all 20 images, but only tagging for the front page one or both of combined images (so I guess that would be 22 images promoted). These images are well scanned, historical illustrations. They not only illustrate ballooning, but they have art historical significance. -Andrew c 17:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted as a set of individual images. --KFP (talk | contribs) 12:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]