Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Organofluorine compounds

Organofluorine compounds

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2011 at 06:35:19 (UTC)

Some important organofluorine compounds: (A) fluoromethane (methyl fluoride), used in semiconductor processing; (B) dichlorodifluoromethane (R-12 refrigerant), a CFC; (C) tetrafluoroethane (R-134a), an HFC; (D) trifluoromethanesulfonic acid (triflic acid), a superacid; (E) isoflurane, an ether-derivative used as an anesthetic; (F) perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (main component of Scotchgard), a fluorosurfactant; (G) a section of polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon) polymer; (H) fluorouracil (Adrucil), an anti-cancer drug; (I) fluoxetine (Prozac), an anti-depression drug

Reason

EV (several accurate structures) and composition (organized order and doesn't take text wrap space)

Articles in which this image appears

Fluorine

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Materials science

Creator

Ben Mills, Pi.1415926535

• Support as nominator --TCO (reviews needed) 06:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
• Comment: I think I'd want to see this in svg format. J Milburn (talk) 09:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Conversion in progress. It's not trivial because of the gradients and such.TCO (reviews needed) 19:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
• Comment: We probably have hundreds of space-filled molecular models; I ran across this just yesterday. While they good and valuable work, I'm not sure what criteria would be applied to select a particular few for FP. I doubt there's any reason that this could not be done in SVG, and it would probably be better if this and similar images were in that format. It would be more than a matter of converting the format since SVG is infinite resolution and the resolution can only be decreased in in a format conversion. The best way of doing it would be recreate the image in whatever software was used to create the original. There are dozens of such software packages available, see List of molecular graphics systems.--RDBury (talk) 14:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree we have a lot of space filling molecule drawings. I would not for instance nominate the BF3 that is in article. I think the layout and content and such are special. Little something new with common tools. And if you read the article, there is a huge content of relevant topics incorporated in one visual (and I include captioning as an aspect of the figure). You may still not agree, not trying to sway you, but to answer the question, that was my rationale.TCO (reviews needed) 15:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comment: Well it's interesting. Perhaps the color scheme could be changed to make it more obvious which is fluorine (OTOH the picture is by itself in this case without the context of the article). It's already kind of obvious, but took me a bit to realize what was going on. Other than that though, while it's quite interesting, it's not beautiful, nor particularly novel, which is what I look for in featured pictures. Very good work, nonetheless. --TimL (talk) 19:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Good point on the color. I still think the layout and org and information density is special and much better than the typocal, where we would just have one of those suckers sitting like random on the page and not ginving any insight. I think you get a lot from the set of them and the caption and the inherent grouping. And I edit chem articles and had not seen it before. And I actually am interested in sort of Powerpoint-like methods of info transfer. Not just walls of text with pretty pictures. But...I lose!  :) TCO (reviews needed) 19:56, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose: Space filling models look cool, but generally obscure molecular structure much more than ball-and-stick models. Also, we really should have this in SVG. 63.225.116.49 (talk) 03:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • perhaps for a single structure, where you want to see geometry. You can see in Fluorine that for the BF3 structure, I did go stick and ball rather than space filling as it clarifies the trigonal planar geometry more. I think for this sort of array, the space filling is more space economical and we are not zooming on on each one of these but comparing them to each other. (Also more "correct" to real life.)TCO (reviews needed) 12:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support While SVG is the format of choice for skeletal formulae and similar, it is not for space-filling models. High resolution PNG is the best solution there. --Leyo 17:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

SVG unlikely here. I corresponded with the original uploader, who does a huge amount of these images (he said):

Hello there,

I don't have a way of making these images as SVGs - sorry. It is possible to re-draw such an image as SVG if you have appropriate software and crazy amounts of spare time, but I think it's a waste of time. Why not just use PNG? Tell the FA people to get over themselves. No molecular graphics software that I know of exports SVG.

Ben (talk) 17:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

P.s. I really think the png looks great and worry that we are being formulastic. We tried a conversion and it looked like crap because of the radial gradients. Evidently exporting in .svg is not so easy either!TCO (reviews needed) 02:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)