Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Endeavour docked to ISS

Endeavour docked to ISS

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 May 2016 at 12:09:45 (UTC)

Reason: It illustrates two great space programs: the International Space Station and the now retired Space Shuttle program. It also shows them to scale.
Articles in which this image appears: International Space Station, Space Shuttle Endeavour and STS-134. Cropped version in Space Shuttle program.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator: Paolo Nespoli

Support as nominator – Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:09, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT1 - Good EV for ISS. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ – there is a ghost image with ~30 pixel offset, visible on the right side of the space station, and easy to see all over at 200%. Perhaps caused by reflections from a viewing window. The ghost can probably be erased in software. Also the highlights are blown (which I am Ok with in this case). Very good EV, great image. Bammesk (talk) 15:32, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added ALT1, where the ghost artifacts have been digitally removed around the structures. Mikael Häggström (talk) 21:19, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support ALT1 – Nicely done (i.e. excellent work). There is one inadvertent deletion which needs fixing: around x,y=3285,2740 (relative to upper left corner) where Kepler attaches to the space station. Other minor improvements say at x,y=2490,2630 and x,y=2343,693 are possible, but they are too minor. Bammesk (talk) 01:45, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing this, so that I could now have it fixed before any people therein were harmed

Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ - stunning image, and willing to overlook small flaws in image quality due to the relatively rarity/challenges of space photos and the high EV. 2607:F6D0:CED:5BA:F510:A79A:A5B5:B9A8 (talk) 23:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Struck !vote, as IPs can only comment on nominations. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:44, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Armbrust: Really? I highly disagree with this policy (shouldn't we AGF and take me on my worth that I'm not sockpuppetting - which I'm not - and that I understand FP criteria?) 171.66.209.8 (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter, whether you agree with it or not, the lead of WP:FPC cleary says: "anonymous votes are generally disregarded". Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:06, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I know, I see that now. I'm commenting on the policy and not on your enforcement of said policy. I don't see why my voice should matter less in building a consensus if there's no evidence of sockpuppetting or lack of understanding of FPC rules. 171.66.209.4 (talk) 23:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But wouldn't your willingness to vote even though the requirements are clearly spelled out indicate an unfamiliarity with the FPC rules, in and of itself?Crisco 1492 mobile (talk) 06:26, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But isn't Wikipedia about ignoring all rules? :) 128.12.246.6 (talk) 04:53, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unhuh. That only means there's another page to add to your reading list. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Chris Woodrich – Jobas (talk) 18:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT1 Great capture, and good clean up done. I miss the shuttles...... gazhiley 10:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT1 - Spongie555 (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support either Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 20:42, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Endeavour docked to ISS.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:11, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a clear consensus to promote alt1. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:11, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]