Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/PaperAutofluorescence

Paper Autofluorescence
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2010 at 10:38:25 (UTC)
 * Reason:Great EV illustrating an interesting topic in a way we're not used to seeing.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Autofluorescence, Paper, Solid
 * FP category for this image:Featured_pictures/Sciences/Materials science
 * Creator:Richard Wheeler (Zephyris)


 * Support as nominator --— raeky ( talk 10:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support if moved to Commons - I'd rather see a visible-light image of paper in Solid and possibly paper, but it's hard to see how there could be a much better example of Autofluorescence. Think it should be on commons, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have now moved the image to commons. - Zephyris Talk 21:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment LOL. Personally, I would add it to the gallery in Micrograph, but it has tremendous EV in its current uses. Leaning support.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Micrograph is a stub with 6 images already, we probably shouldn't clutter it up anymore then it already is until it grows beyond a stub. — raeky ( talk 14:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Micrograph has a gallery that could accommodate this. Nonetheless, I Support.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well if this is promoted we might rearrange the pictures on that page to include it. I think this has higher EV then say the micrograph of a dog rectum. — raeky ( talk 14:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment (and shameless self-support) Please bear in mind that this image is 9 images stitched to a panorama so kee an eye out for any stitching errors, I do still have the original images if there need to be any corrections made. I also support a move to commons, I really should set up an account there! I have added an indication of scale to the description - the individual fibres are ~10 μm wide. - Zephyris Talk 13:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't have to setup an account, use the special page to create one automatically. :P — raeky ( talk 14:29, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Specialized technical photography should be encouraged. This is sufficiently well done and has high EV. I would prefer the caption used at Paper rather than this one, which is based on the caption used in Autofluorescence. The Paper caption, IMO, will reflect better upon Wikipedia by taking a common and widely recognized subject and juxtaposing that with a very scientific, high-end image. Greg L (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Generally, the captions used in PotD are much longer than the ones used here anyway. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: We really need a single FP category for the image. I would lean towards the science one. J Milburn (talk) 17:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I personally think we need another category in science for images of this type instead of Other... — raeky ( talk 17:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What would it be? We could always get a proposal going... J Milburn (talk) 21:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean something like micrographs? - Zephyris Talk 21:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe micrographs, not sure we have enough FP's of them to justify it though, open to suggestions. ;-) — raeky ( talk 04:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't worry too much: Generally, we split off a category whenever a number of images begin causing classification issues. When that happens, we go through and resort everything. I'm not sure Micrograph is the best idea, though, since a lot of those images are better classified under biology, plants, or animals. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. That said, Materials science is a very obvious one.... And one I'd been considering long before I left here for all that time. The need for it has only grown worse - created! Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with the addition, good work! — raeky ( talk 18:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea, I like it! - Zephyris Talk 21:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  T · C 13:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)