Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Moons of solar system

Moons of solar system

Reason: Very encyclopaedic and attractive image, high res and easy to understand. Couldn't really illustrate the natural satellites of our solar system any better.
Articles this image appears in: Natural satellite
Creator: NASA
Nominator: Jack · talk · 19:20, Thursday, 1 February 2007

Support edit 5 — Jack · talk · 19:24, Thursday, 1 February 2007
Oppose. Artifacts on Charon and Titan. Can someone advise whether this would render in svg? Pstuart84 Talk 00:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not aware of any higher quality Charon photos, but I've replaced Titan. I don't think SVG would work out very well in this case. --KFP (talk | contribs) 01:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- These are photos, not drawings, so SVG doesn't make sense. And that's as good as it gets for Charon, AFAIK. It's far away. --TotoBaggins 02:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment NASA chose a curious title to display in the image. "Scaled to Earth's Moon" may indicate the method the artist used in figuring out how big to make the photos, but from the viewer's perspective, the words are irrelevant, as the result would have been the same if they had scaled to any other moon or to the Earth. Also, the Earth is included without any indication that it's not a moon. It just gets curiouser and curiouser... Fg2 01:40, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support Edit2~~ - In Edit2 I've made the same changes as Edit1, plus replaced the Earth drawing with a photo to match the other photos, and changed the title, per Fg2. TotoBaggins 02:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support All of them are good. This gets my support through encyclopedic quality only. Kind of like a poster in a science class. -Midnight Rider 04:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit 2. No opinion on edit three. Like midnight rider, I'd be happy to pass this on its encyclopedic qualities. We shouldn't oppose it if there's no better picture available of the artefacted moon left in there. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Please lower the Mars and Asteroid Ida moons to the level of the Saturn and Uranus moons. The image of Ganymede also seems a bit blurry. Michaelas10 (Talk) 11:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support Edit 3~~ Edit 3 is Edit 2, plus, per Michaelas10: I aligned Mars and Ida moons. Aligned "others". Replaced blurry Ganymede with public domain image from http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Ganymede . --TotoBaggins 15:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I support now. Michaelas10 (Talk) 14:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support all versions generally, and Michaelas10's comment. However, Edit 3 has introduced a very reddish Ganymede − which is misleading. If a normal colour image can't be found, this Ganymede picture should be made greyscale. Deuar 16:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've now implemented this in "Edit 4". Deuar 16:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak oppose~~; 1) It's only selected moons, and their selection makes it look like Saturn has a lot more moons than Jupiter. 2) Others? Are these moons? If so, who do they orbit? Very shoddy that the image doesn't say. It would be like having all of the moons listed except for Mars, then say "Other: Phobos, Deimos". 3) Triton needs a better picture, at least one of the full orb. I can live without this one, though I would suggest we turn it so the dark area is on the side rather than the top. --Golbez 20:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support TotoBaggins' edit (#5), BUT I suggest we also mention moons that aren't shown; like, "Plus at least 60 other moons" for Jupiter, or what not. --Golbez 04:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support with thanks for the editing, which has really improved this. Fg2 01:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Omg!!! There are way too many edits!!! Oh well I guess it's for a good cause though. I like the fourth edit.--γιατί ^{Sign Here | ESP.} 03:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 5 -- Per Golbez, Edit 5 has Triton tilted, unaesthetically-named cubewanoes removed, and Dysnomia labelled as orbiting Eris. Last edit for me (promise!). --TotoBaggins 04:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 5 And now, can Earth please move over to the right... Yes... Now, everybody, SMILE. (No, seriously, if Earth is brought into an axis with Charon it will line up to the right with Dysnomia. OK, I'll stop complaing now.) ~ trialsanderrors 09:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support consensus image. Good diagram and quite encyclopaedic and interesting. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 23:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support consensus image. High encyclopaedic value and interesting, as Diliff pointed out. S .D. ¿п? § 21:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — I think we've got enough edits, so I uploaded the last image (edit 5) to Commons:Image:Moons of solar system v7.jpg, including a list of changes made by each of the editors. ♠ SG →Talk 17:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit 5 Wow, so many edits! It's much better like this IMHO. · AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 17:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You might want to specify that the scale (1 pixel = 25 km) is at full resolution. IronGargoyle 21:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, and I think the scale would be easier to understand if there was a graphic scale bar. <nitpick> Also, I think the first letters of the words "Moons" and "Scale" should not be capitalized. </nitpick> --KFP (talk | contribs) 18:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Moons of solar system v7.jpg Raven4x4x 01:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]