Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Earth's location in the Universe

Earth's location in the universe
Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2012 at 01:52:17 (UTC)
 * Reason:Crisp, encyclopedic, interesting, surprised it hasn't been nominated before.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Earth's location in the universe, Local Group, Milky Way, Observable universe, Solar System, Supercluster
 * FP category for this image:
 * Creator:Ras67


 * Support as nominator --Hadseys (talk) 01:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment User:Azcolvin429 is the original creator of this image. It appears Ras67 uploaded an edited version. I wonder if this should be in png format because it's a diagram, and one that is comprised of 8 files that were all originally pngs. Matthewedwards : Chat  04:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's very good though. Matthewedwards : Chat  04:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Conditional support The word "superclusters" in "local superclusters" and perhaps "interstellar neighborhood" should be decapitalized since they aren't proper names and the word "sol" is redundant. Btw, Google Chrome dealt well with the resolution. Brand meister talk   10:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. Wow. This is the most impressive diagram to come through in a while. Clegs (talk) 12:12, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per Clegs. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose The individual pictures are great but I don't think it is useful in this format. File:Earth's Location in the Universe SMALLER (JPEG).jpg has a more useful 4x2 format and a perfectly adequate size for both screen and printing up to A3 format. Using the Interactive large-image-viewer (flash-based) on my Firefox browser gives the most awful lossy JPG quality, and the non-flash one doesn't seem to work at all. I can download the full size image but it is a bugger to work with: to view the sequence, one has to pan right, but to do that reasonably, you have to reduce the size to fit the screen, which makes the ridiculously high resolution kind of pointless. If someone really is going to print poster sized images then they'll print the individual ones. I think there are better ways of presenting this kind of image. Colin°Talk 21:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: on a different computer I'm not getting the awful JPG artefacts with the flash viewer. But the Virgo Supercluster image has banding and the other issues still apply. Colin°Talk 22:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 03:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)