Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/MODIS Cloud Cover Map

MODIS Cloud Cover Map
Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2010 at 09:41:17 (UTC)
 * Reason:Another superb image from NASA. It illustrates the function of the Moderate-Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer very well, as well as providing some useful information concerning cloud formation on Earth.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Moderate-Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, Cloud cover, Earth
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Views of Earth from space and satellites
 * Creator:NASA Earth Observatory


 * Support as nominator --Nautica Shad es  09:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support, fantastic. I can't help feeling this would be better off in some other places, as well- Cloud cover, for instance. J Milburn (talk) 10:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Nautica Shad es  13:03, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support per J MilbernGazhiley (talk) 11:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose I oppose virtually any single-use image as having sufficient EV to be an FP. I too believe this image could find a home in other articles such as Cloud cover or Earth, but feel that this has been a lazy nomination in terms of evaluating the benefits of this image to wikipedia.  I think that while this is a current high-profile image at FPC, its use on wikipedia should be further evaluated and it should be considered for inclusion in other locations before granting it FP status.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No longer single-use, so I don't oppose. Still think it might be appropriate in Earth.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * EV ≠ Number of articles. Please check the actual Featured picture criteria, in particular criterion 5, and then read note 2 closely - to quote "An image has more...[EV]...if it contributes strongly to a single article, rather than contributing weakly to many. Adding an image to numerous articles to gain EV is counterproductive and may antagonize both FPC reviewers and article editors". --jjron (talk) 15:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As I said above, Tony, this kind of reasoning is not at all in line with what our FPC criteria are or should be. J Milburn (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I personally would add this image on the upper right of the Earth section for starters. I do think the nominator has been lazy in terms of determining how to incorporate this high quality image in WP.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * New discussion here. Nautica Shad es  16:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * O.K. let's discuss the propriety of adding this image in the upper right of the Earth section.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Earth is an FA put together by careful local consensus. I left a note on the talk page in case they wanted to use it, but I'm not going to put it in the article, lest I upset some editors. Let's let them make their own decision. Nautica Shad es  10:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What about using it directly in weather?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The main editor of Earth thinks it is a fine image. Could someone who knows something about this tweak my WP:CAPTION in the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Nautica Shad es  10:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support This contributes effectively to WP and is among its finest works.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Very nice map image! You don't usually see it with clouds, which makes it more interesting. Haljackey (talk) 16:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - Excellent illustration of the world's weather patterns, at least for that particular time of the year. Juliancolton (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I agree this is a very interesting picture in which its subject is concerned. But the choice of the map projection is all wrong, giving a very distorted image of the geometry of the Earth. A non-cylindrical equal-area projection (or approximately so) would be a much better option. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Odd… I had just researched a couple of days ago what earth’s average cloud coverage was. It is apparently around 70%, but this image shows it was less on this day. At any rate, featuring it on our Main Page for 24 hours would cast Wikipedia in a fine, scientific light. Greg L (talk) 01:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Good horizontal resolution and coloration apart from EV. Brandmeister[t] 08:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  T · C 16:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)