Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/STS-131

STS-131
Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2013 at 06:05:06 (UTC)
 * Reason:Extremely high resolution, professionally done, color-timed, done with a sense of humor, the best STS crew shot I came across in looking at others for the below nom.
 * Articles in which this image appears:STS-131; (note: I just added this to film poster, but it's not 7-day stable yet. I actually believe its EV may be greater at this article.)
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Others
 * Creator:Created by NASA, uploaded originally to en.w by RadioFan


 * Support as nominator --– Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 06:05, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support &mdash; This one had me laughing... Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 09:25, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I was doing research on this poster, looking for sources and such, and it turns out there are dozens of these things, including a Harry Potter one (I didn't realize this one was already uploaded; it's missing a category). – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 11:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Note Featured picture candidates/STS-134, though I'll grant that this one is better done. I'm afraid I don't see the EV for film poster; seems to me the lead image for that article should be a film poster, rather than something that looks like one but isn't. Chick Bowen 19:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I can both agree and disagree with your comment regarding the film poster. I agree that an actual film poster should be used on an article about that—except that there are no free film posters that are even remotely recent. The other posters in the article are dated and have good historical value, but are still unfree. Any film poster could probably suffice, but even if this isn't a poster from an actual movie, in a way, it excels and exceeds most film posters already, including the one it's emulating, Armageddon's, in terms of production value. There's a lot that film poster article can talk about that hasn't been discussed or even remotely mentioned. For example (this is currently WP:OR), that shade of orange, or even the use of orange tinting, is important for action film posters, often used diametrically with a cool blue. Also the formation of the people in a V pattern (here is more like an M) to show hierarchy (the other pattern is a / or diagonal line of people, like in Back to the Future Part III). The split-screen of dark versus light. I was disappointed when I saw the article didn't even touch upon these subjects because they are very common in film posters. So in effect, the EV for this poster can only go up, if someone were willing to expand the film poster to discuss more modern techniques. This poster is also massive and free to print out, so it's great for the kids, too. (ok I'm kidding there.) I trust everyone's judgment on this board, so if you don't think it's ready for FP yet, then maybe I can expand the film poster article at some point farrrrrrrrr into the future and we'll see what happens. I really did do some digging on this poster and I still failed to find the actual PDF source, so I'll contact the latest uploader. But what I'm looking for mainly is how they created the poster, because that would be an important addition—although I'm 100% positive each person was photographed with a green screen (no shadows on any of them) and their compositing is professionally done (I'm assuming a different team worked on these posters than for the official crew posters, which are less than impressive), none of this can really be discussed because it'd be OR. But this image could also be used in the discussion of graphic design, compositing, color for effect (color-timing?), etc. Having said all that, it's a direct inspiration from film posters, done better than most of them, and again the sense of humor adds greatly to it, plus its high resolution, and in a way, it really is one of the best images on Wikipedia, I do think my nom has some relatively good standing as is. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 20:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose I could add that this is technically a historical image now and, like Adam mentioned below in the other STS-131 nom, it can no longer be replaced by any more recent STS missions, but the very important thing here is why it was created, which is to increase the excitement and interest in space exploration and space study. Perhaps this is the true calling for this poster, and maybe I should hunt around for another article on space or NASA or similar for this to be inserted into. That would increase its EV to a third, and perhaps more proper, level. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 21:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment This would probably have much more EV in an article or section about NASA's Space Flight Awareness Program, were it created. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support This is the best example of this eccentric but fairly long running NASA tradition I've seen, and I think that it has just enough EV at present. I do agree with Paul's suggestion that a dedicated article on these posters would be a good idea, and this would be my pick for the lead image. Nick-D (talk) 10:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Quite well-done. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. What am I missing here? There is obviously no EV in film poster, as this isn't actually a film poster. The mission is better illustrated by the crew photo, the craft photo or photos taken on the mission, and not this silly poster. The fact that this is just tacked into an unillustrated section in the article is good proof of this. We don't need to feature everything NASA produces... J Milburn (talk) 20:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Someone had the same thought; it was removed from film poster. I agree it would serve well on the Space Flight Awareness Program since it's directly associated with that. Sorry about the film poster thing, guess that was a bad idea :P – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 22:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Unless this NASA tradition is discussed in detail in the article, a standard crew portrait would have more EV. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:01, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose per J Milburn. Sanyambahga (talk) 07:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 08:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)