Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Happy Birthday, Hubble

Happy Birthday, Hubble
Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2010 at 22:10:38 (UTC)
 * Reason:Good EV, and an eye-catching picture.
 * Articles in which this image appears: Hubble Telescopes 20th Birthday, Carina Nebula
 * FP category for this image:Space, looking out
 * Creator:NASA


 * Support as nominator --Gut Monk (talk) 22:10, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Aww, this reminds me, doesn't this mean the Hubble's gonna be retired soon? -- I'ḏ ♥  One  22:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Kinda. They have something that is "4x as powerful" in 2015, I've heard. Gut Monk (talk) 22:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh. Remember when Hubble was launched, and became a byword for failure? God, that changed quickly once it was fixed =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No I don't know. Fascinating, opinion changed that quickly? Gut Monk (talk) 22:25, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: It's a nice image, but there's no source link, and the image description says nothing about what it's an image of. (Nor do the image captions.) I don't see why someone's name should be in the file name either. --Avenue (talk) 23:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's kind of hidden. Under the 20th Birthday article, I put a | link and another here here at | 107. Gut Monk (talk) 23:28, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And thanks for the challenge ;) The caption is much more descriptive now. Gut Monk (talk) 23:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not descriptive enough for me, and I would like to see more of this information on the image description page. I'm also not convinced of the EV, either; the 20th anniversary is not that big a part of the Hubble telescope's story, and the image only appears in a gallery in the other article. --Avenue (talk) 09:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support But I think it's credited wrong and obviously missing the source link. I tagged it for missing source. By the description this seems to be one of the ESA/NASA images, like the other we recently discussed below. It needs tagged appropriately. — raeky  t  11:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to be obstinate in anyway, but I have no idea what you said. I'll rectify any error; give me links :) Gut Monk (talk) 22:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * As in according to here, the credit line is "NASA, ESA, and M. Livio and the Hubble 20th Anniversary Team (STScI)" When you upload images like this you had to of gotten it from somewhere, so you must provide the link where you downloaded it. Also if the site has specific credit lines, like this picture does, you must use the attribution line they provide. — raeky  t  00:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, good point. I see the need for consistency. (Updated) Gut Monk (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The credit line now seems fine, but the source link only seems to give access to a cropped version of the image. Where can we find this version? --Avenue (talk) 12:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I like the image, but there are problems with the sourcing (see above), and I don't see much EV at present. It's only used in a gallery in Carina Nebula, and all that's said about it there and in the Hubble_Space_Telescope article is that it was released for the 20th anniversary. That's a pity; it seems like there's a lot that could be said about what it shows (e.g. the pillars and the Herbig–Haro objects). --Avenue (talk) 13:21, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 23:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)