Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Rhean rings

Rhean rings
[[Image:Rhean rings PIA10246 Full res.jpg|thumb|250px|Original Caption Released with Image:

This is an artist concept of the ring of debris that may orbit Saturn's second-largest moon, Rhea. The suggested disk of solid material is exaggerated in density here for clarity.

Due to a decrease in the number of electrons detected by NASA's Cassini spacecraft on either side of the moon, scientists suggest that rings are the likeliest cause of these electrons being blocked before they reach Cassini.]]
 * Reason:
 * 1) scientific artwork of the highest technical standard
 * 2) high resolution
 * 3) among Wikipedia's best scientific artwork
 * 4) free license per default policy of NASA/US Federal gov't
 * 5) Adds value to an article by helping readers understand the new astronomical concept of ringed moons
 * 6) accurate, to the extent of our current scientific knowledge
 * 7) Has good captions on the two pages where it is used
 * 8) neutral: clearly drawn in the style of an artist's impression, so as to not give the false impression that it is a photograph or otherwise based on more data than the article and source suggest
 * 9) Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation: this is the unaltered, full res file straight from NASA
 * Articles this image appears in:Natural satellite and Rhea (moon)
 * Creator:NASA


 * Support as nominator --M @ r ē ino 15:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's just an artist's impression... aka worthless. They just noticed Cassini picked up less electrons when its sensor passed on either side of Rhea so it must have rings. That's sooo far from a spectacular picture of the rings of Rhea. Also rhea itself is just splotches of grey, and the rings are somehow perfect vector shapes.. D\=&lt; (talk) 19:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There is precedent for approving artist's impressions -- even in the specific field of renderings based on data from spacecraft. If you read my nomination, I never claimed that this was anything other than an artist's impression, and I acknowledged the Cassini data. --M @ r ē ino 19:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose - may not be an accurate depiction. This is a concern - I've opposed other astro "art", too. --Janke | Talk 22:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose For me it doesn't have enough to justify being an FP, especially as it is a computer generated image. There's also the issue of accuracy in it's depiction, as Janke states. --Cpl Syx (talk) 02:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Same here, I've opposed artists impressions before and I'm opposing this one again. Too speculative and too little true information content for an encyclopedia. --Dschwen 03:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support I don't think the speculative nature of this image or the fact that it is computer generated disqualify it from being a featured picture. I believe it meets all the requirements for a featured article. Xasz (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh. Did someone just remove all the oppose votes, which was all but 1? D\=&lt; (talk) 21:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Snicker Yah. Someone revert I have to go NOW D\=&lt; (talk) 21:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I restored the votes. Should we have a talk with Elena about this? Dr. e  X  treme  21:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's rather more serious than being a bit mischievous. Especially when last week she just stripped three candidates off the FPC page - see here. She's only a new user, so may just be finding her feet, but someone may need to at least tap her on the shoulder. --jjron (talk) 08:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To be quite fair, the stripping three off of the page was one possible interpretation of a suggestion I made, and they were all her own. Dr.   e  X  treme  12:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Which doesn't alter the fact that it's entirely inappropriate (and not something that should have been suggested to her). The point remains that she may not fully understand what is and isn't acceptable. --jjron (talk) 06:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * oppose low encyclopedic standard - rings very conjectural and specifics of hypothesis not clearly illustrated. Potatoswatter (talk) 06:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

. --- Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  19:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)