Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aldrin Apollo 11.jpg

Buzz Aldrin on the moon with the United States Flag
I am nominating this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Buzz_Aldrin_with_U.S._flag.jpg  because it represents one of the greatest achievements of man: landing an astronaut on the moon. This image is (considering it was taken on the moon) clear, colorful, and in focus.


 * Nominate and support. -  --Ironchef8000 16:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Aldrin_Apollo_11.jpg (shown below nominee) is already featured. It sports a much higher resolution (and is more striking IMHO). -Matthew Cieplak (talk) (edits) 03:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Current FP is better. Enochlau 03:00, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Actually I like the picture a lot, especially the footprints in the foreground, but since there's already another one that is an FP, I oppose.  Jeeb 04:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the reasons stated above. --Dschwen 07:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ( + ) Support. Never enough space. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Why does it matter if we already have a space picture featured? Both pictures are very nice, but having one featured should not automatically exclude the other from being featured. The one I nominated is clear, colorful, and really says a lot about the acomplishments of the mission. --Ironchef8000 23:13, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't usually matter, but in this case, the current FP serves to highlight the deficiencies in the FPC. It's small and lacks detail. Enochlau 02:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support I like this image, one featured space image does not mean we should not allow others. I wonder if some of the oppose votes is because users are anti-us pov and dont want to see a non "universal" space image?  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 22:13, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * How does that work? Enochlau 00:15, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Has nothing to do with it. There are over 0.8 million articles now; to feature two pics of the same thing is not fair, especially when the one featured is as good or better, not to mention that most people have seen plenty of moon shots.  Jeeb 05:03, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * In what way would featuring this picture be 'not fair'? There isn't a limit on the number of featured pictures we have, and featuring this would not stop any other picture from also being featured. I'm afraid I don't quite see your meaning here. Raven4x4x 13:18, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is a limit: one FP per day. Moreover, on only 2 of every 7 days does the FP appear on the main page, where it attracts immediate attention.  Clearly, to feature >1 pic of the same basic thing means that other deserving pics will not make FP status.  In addition, there has to be consideration given to the uniqueness of the image and the extent to which it adds to the article(s) it appears in, as already stated.  Jeeb 17:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * No there isn't a limit. Each picture is voted in on its own merits. However, my comments that this FPC doesn't stack up to the current one stands. And in any case, we're missing the point here - Alkivar's suggestion is that we are somehow anti-American, and we just don't like the US flag, am I right in my interpretation of "universal space image"? Enochlau 09:37, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) I am not saying you in particular are somehow anti-american, just that I know we have many users who would prefer to be so neutral as to avoid anything that appears pro-america. 2) yes you are correct in my interpretation of a "universal space image" at first glance there is no way to visibly identify which country is responsible (although anyone with half a brain should know it was the Americans who landed on the moon). I just wanted to bring some attention to this problem. My support follows because I see no reason why we cant have more than one man on the moon picture featured.   ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 19:06, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * If every FP becomes a Picture of the Day (POTD), and there is only one POTD allowed per day, and especially if the number of FPs is limited, as it appears to be, then there is a limit, and I see no way two images of the same thing can be justified. Jeeb 22:17, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Why are you so adament that there cannot be two featured pictures from the same category? If you look on the list of FPs, you will notice that there are many that are similar. Under the Panorama category THERE ARE TWO OF THE SAME PICTURE TAKEN ONLY HOURS APART. Also, under the Ships category, there are multiple military vessals. Nobody interfeared with those nominations. I dont understand why you stand so firmly against this picture. It is a good picture and it should be voted on as an FP without interfearance from you due to some ridiculous notion that only one picture relating to an entire subject can be an FP. More than one picture can be an FP from a category. --Ironchef8000 22:44, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * To quote the first lines of the FP page: "Featured pictures is a list of images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article...the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article". So please explain to me how another picture of Buzz Aldrin on the moon, linked to an article for which there are eight pictures of Aldrin or Armstrong on the moon, five of which are of Aldrin, one of which is already an FP; explain to me how that picture adds significantly to the article?  It's not just two similar images, it's two images of the same person on the same mission from a page that is loaded with other such images. Why are you so fixated on this one picture?  Go find something that really contributes to an article and is a good picture and I'll vote for it.  Talk about ridiculous notions.  Jeeb 06:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Jeeb, note that the criteria for FP is not that is it somehow unique. That doesn't come into the equation. Also, note that we are promoting much less than one per day - eventually POTD will have to repeat sometime, and we'll have to see the same images again. What's the problem then with seeing a similar image? Of course you are most welcome to oppose for other grounds, but surely not because of that. Enochlau.
 * Then that policy needs to be changed. Are we going to have 50 astronaut pictures and none that illustrate the 1000s of other interesting and important topics out there that nobody knows about??  Jeeb 06:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Your exageration is unnecessary. I am nominating a second picture, NOT a 50th. Honestly, there are multiples of many different topics, some multiple pictures of the same thing! Who cares? You need to realize that A) Supporting this nomination is not the end of the world, B) There is no limit for FPs on Wikipedia, and C) You are being rather rude when supporting your opinion. If you do not like the picture, vote to oppose and let it be. I, however, enjoy this picture. --Ironchef8000 23:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The first four of us made our comments clearly. YOU made an issue out of our opposition. The picture does not meet FP criteria and that's all there is to it.  Jeeb 04:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * If you really want to change the policy, here is not the place to do it. Start a thread on the Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates page. Enochlau 06:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Striking picture, and I think there will be plenty of weeks for all deserving featured pictures to have their chance on the Main Page. —Cleared as filed. 17:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 04:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

