Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aldrin saluting American Flag

Aldrin saluting American flag.
Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2011 at 21:14:09 (UTC)
 * Reason:Good EV, one of a kind picture, very high encyclopaedic value.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Apollo 11, Lunar Flag Assembly, 20th-century events, NASA.
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
 * Creator:NASA


 * Support as nominator --Dusty777 (talk) 21:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Historical picture, high res, good color ZStoler (talk) 03:05, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak support -- Many technical flaws, including lighting and sharpness. Considering the difficulty of the shot, I think it is acceptable... just not stunning. Also, I don't really like the lunar lander there. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support -- Per nom. JBarta (talk) 08:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Too many technical flaws for what is a photo of a fairly unimportant part of the mission. You can't even see him saluting properly. Mahahahaneapneap (talk) 14:17, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You have to remember this was 1969, technology was not near as advanced as it is now. It doesn't matter whether or not it was an important part of the mission, its historically significant. Dusty777 (talk) 17:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Err the photo was taken with a hasselblad camera. A modern hasselblad camera costs as much as a very nice car. In fact other than a few NASA group shots I'm not aware of any pics on commons taken with a camera of that quality.©Geni 02:53, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * For reasons of PR/politics/propaganda/call it what you want it was a very important part of the mission. (air)Wolf (talk) 22:28, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak support. EV seems slim for Apollo 11, particularly compared to the two images from that article already featured (and I see at least two more that are more compelling than this one).  EV is higher for Lunar Flag Assembly.  But I have to comment on Dusty777's comment that "technology was not near as advanced" in 1969.  Given that even the most expensive digital cameras cannot record as much total information as medium- or large-format film, the best cameras were, in a very real sense, better in the late 60s. Having never tried to shoot on the moon or in a spacesuit I'm happy to give Armstrong a mulligan on his technique, but the camera is top-notch. Chick Bowen 03:12, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support primarily for the historical notability of the moon landings. Aequo (talk) 07:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Historic image of the moon landings.  EngineerFromVega T 19:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose Poorly framed and doesn't show anything clearly - you can't clearly see Aldrin saluting and it's not a great photo of the flag due to all the other stuff going on in the composition. As such, it's below the technical standards for a FP (even after allowing for the fact that it was taken by a guy standing on the moon wearing a space suit!) and has limited EV. Nick-D (talk) 10:30, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support while it may have some flaws technically, it is such a historically significant picture. ~ Arjun  14:20, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose The many technical and also aesthetic issues here are too significant to be overlooked. It's certainly an important picture, but not an example of Wikipedia's Best Work. JFitch   (talk)  21:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Hell yes, but I guess I'd vote support for every photo taken on another world. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 09:56, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support High image resolution, high EV and historically significant. --High Contrast (talk)
 * Support per other comments. Pinetalk 10:43, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

--Xijky (talk) 09:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)