Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cone Nebula

Cone Nebula

 * Reason:Another excellent and highly encyclopedic Hubble image. This one depicts the Cone Nebula, a truly interesting thing in our universe. Calm down, it's not a monster, it's just a dust and gas particle nebula. No, this disastrous looking thing is not coming at you, it is just providing an excellent view of the fascinating Cone Nebula.
 * Articles this image appears in:Cone Nebula
 * Creator:Hubble Telescope


 * Support as nominator  Lord    Sunday   00:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Conditional Support Obviously the caption has to be changed. In addition, the summary text basically constitutes an article to itself. Otherwise, it's beautiful, with good resolution - looks like a painting. I would say the sharpness is not perfect, but then again nebulae are not sharp to begin with, and the full resolution size is very large, so cutting it down in size could solve the issue. Wadester16 (talk) 05:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That is not the caption used in the article. smooth0707  (talk) 17:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I am just using the caption for the nomination, plenty of other noms use this, i have never gotten this before. -- Lord    Sunday   23:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the caption doesn't have to be what's used in the article, but it is meant to provide context on the picture for FPC users. I'd say the second half of what's here does that quite well, the first half is just 'advertising' - suggest if you want to use 'advertising', put the it in the "reason". Having said which, I don't see any of this as a reason to object. --jjron (talk) 02:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Wow! Great photo! Ecoleetage (talk) 03:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Good pic, caption needs to be standardized. Clegs (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Very grainy (oversharpened?) in full size. --Janke | Talk 16:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Huge wow, quality compares favorably to our other images of nebulae. (It's located 2,600 light-years away... think we will just have to accept a bit of graininess.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * For reference: current FPs are here, here, and here. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. Agree with . Cirt (talk) 19:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

--jjron (talk) 08:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)