Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Image:Land on the Moon 7 21 1969-repair.jpg

Land on the Moon July 21, 1969


This photograph was taken by Jack Weir (1928-2005) the day after the astronauts walked on the moon. I don't know the uploader or the person in the photograph or the photographer, but when I first found this image -- I felt like I knew them. There is nothing that can make this image a better photograph of that day and that year. If you were alive that day, be you a member of the Flat Earth Society or one of those "it was all a hoax" people, and had access to a television set, a radio or a newspaper -- this image is just exactly what it was like.

This image appears (as of today) on:
 * Apollo 11
 * The Washington Post
 * Apollo 11 in popular culture

Comments:
 * Nominated by: carol 23:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Judging by the lines in the curtains, a slight cw rotation is in order. The other concern is enc. Why is a picture of a girl holding the WP preferable to a scan of the actual front page itself? --Malachirality (talk) 03:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I rotated the image using the edge of the drapery.


 * Perhaps the number of people who watched that landing on whatever media was available to them is less than several events since then but the percentage has not been beat. (I cannot cite this fact at this moment though). To me, it is a single image (although a photograph of a family watching it on television might be more encyclopedic for this -- it would also probably be posed to not look posed) which shows the people whose money and nation and education system accomplished this.  A scan of the newspaper article would be not as complete as the text on the page about the event.  The publisher of the paper (as well as the network your dad was watching) has very little to do with what the image is about.  The pages about the landing have a lot of information about the astronauts and the landing, and they should.  There is not an image of the world that watched though;  this image is more symbolic of that than encyclopedic -- I see a lot of beautiful images that are being excepted for FP where perhaps a map or an svg diagram with labeled anatomy or location would be more encyclopedic.... -- carol 17:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Seconder:
 * Always worth a try, I guess. --Malachirality (talk) 21:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

