Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Plasma-lamp 2.jpg

File:Plasma-lamp 2.jpg

 * Reason:By current standards, it's a fairly soft, blurry, noisy, and slightly low-res image, and you can hardly even discern from it the actual shape or structure of the globe that the plasma is in. As with most of our delisted images, it's clearly not awful, but I don't think it would ever pass these days, and that should really be what we need to ask ourselves with delistings. It's clearly used in a number of articles, but we're not debating the usefulness of the image, just its status as FP. We do also already have this video which I think is superior in illustrating the subject.
 * Articles this image appears in:Anisotropy, Potential energy, Plasma globe, Degree of ionization and Plasma (physics)
 * Previous nomination/s:Featured picture candidates/Plasma lamp
 * Nominator: &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)


 * Delist &mdash; &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  20:36, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Why? There is a better picture now? --Luc Viatour (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It isn't about whether there is a better picture, although that would certainly be a good reason too and as I said, we have also featured this video which I would argue is more illustrative. The issue is mainly just about whether this image meets the current standards we expect of a FP now. &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  13:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. pending a better picture.--Luc Viatour (talk) 06:26, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 07:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)