Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Orion's atmospheric entry
Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2024 at 03:09:05 (UTC)
- Reason
- Excellent encyclopedic value to the articles it is in and is very educational.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Atmospheric entry, Artemis I
- FP category for this image
- Not sure if Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Understanding or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there is right.
- Creator
- NASA's Johnson Space Center
- Support as nominator – Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 03:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – Visual information not readily intelligible to general readers/viewers, and 25 min. is too long for a TFP. – Sca (talk) 14:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how length plays a factor for POTD, it only matters about sourcing of the blurb. (Coming from someone who schedules mostly featured media) Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – per Sca. --Janke | Talk 14:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support – There's stuff I like here and stuff I don't. The EV is excellent; I've never seen an unbroken recording of a complete descent from space before. The fire trail during the initial atmospheric entry is phenomenal. But there's a lot of footage that's just banging sounds and visual glare. I get that this was probably the best video possible under these conditions, so that isn't enough to kill my support, but I doubt anyone is actually going to sit through the whole thing is wonderment. That said, I do still support the uncut video for EV purposes, and the argument that it's too long doesn't seem fair to me, given the number of feature-length films we've promoted. Moonreach (talk) 16:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- The banging sounds are trajectory controls. (per the first few seconds of video caption, also: [1]) Bammesk (talk) 02:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support – very nice, the sounds, glares, parachutes . . . . . (nice ride, I settle for the video!) Bammesk (talk) 02:31, 14 November 2024 (UTC)