Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Moon

The Moon

Reason: Much better then the current image of the moon, very encyclopedic
Articles this image appears in: Moon, Monday, Navigation, Double layer, List of artificial objects on extra-terrestrial surfaces, Va'etchanan, List of natural satellites by diameter, Observing the Moon,
Creator: User:Mdf

Support as nominator — Chris H 02:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What does this picture do that this one does not? I guess there is no rule that says you can't have two featured pictures of the same subject, but it seems kind of silly. I prefer the other one because it is a full moon. Cacophony 03:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The other is not a full moon, and if you flip from one picture to the other, the current FP is of much worse quality and should really be delisted. This is the picture that is used more prominently on the wiki. Also your example that is a full moon, is not a wikipedia FP, its a commons FP. Chris H 04:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- I personally like the clarity and lighting of this one over the current FP, but the current one is larger. Althepal 04:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I prefer this image, it is bigger and a full Moon. Alvesgaspar 09:02, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where's that been hiding? It's easily the best of the three and should replace the moon FP we have, IMO. Well spotted! mikaul^talk 14:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted - This one seems to have escaped everyone's notice. I'll stick it back up the top for some more comments. Raven4x4x 05:36, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support version 2, as it's the nearest to a full moon that we have. I also support delisting of the current FP on the same basis. Techincally all three(? – four?) here are quite close (current FP is the worst, even if it is bigger) but the Luc Viatour one has the technical edge, especially in terms of exposure. mikaul^talk 09:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at a 50% downsample of ~~the current FP~~ (Lune_nb, version 3) and it's better than I imagined, but still overexposed. I'm getting confused.. the current FP is up for delisting down the page. The current nom is clearly better quality than the current FP, but not as worthy a candidate as Version2 here. Ok, now I'm going for a little lie down :o/ mikaul^talk 10:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus. MER-C 11:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC) Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 03:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expired nomination. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]