Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Greenhouse Effect
- Reason
- An easy-to-read diagram with good gradient and blur effects.
- Articles this image appears in
- Greenhouse effect, Greenhouse gases
- Creator
- ZooFari
- Support as nominator --ZooFari 20:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too verbose. Just indicate energy at appropriate arrows, and give a legend or labels to identify IR vs. broad spectrum. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Where are irradiance numbers coming from? I can't see any references in the image or in the article. Noodle snacks (talk) 03:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- The incoming solar radiation (or energy) is 343 Watts per m2. So basically the numbers come from the sun's solar energy, starting at what is coming through the atmosphere, which is described as "incoming". ZooFari 03:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, my point is [citation needed] essentially. You need to state where the information comes from. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you mean. My references come from http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/maps/climatechange/figure_4.jpg/image_view. I will post it up on the image page. ZooFari 16:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but apart from being quite cramped and there being little to differentiate the Earth, the atmosphere and the greenhouse gas layer I just think I've seen more attractive, clearer images of the subject matter. Guest9999 (talk) 05:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose The arrows are wack and the majority of the text is badly placed. Try reading some articles on typography and re-submit. For example the vertical height of "Atmosphere" "Earth" "Greenhouse Gasses" should be uniform and the text is especially hard to read across the horizon line.Teque5 (talk) 06:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 07:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)