A Quasar Black Hole
- Reason
- This is a stunning image of a growing black hole, also known as a Quasar.
- Articles this image appears in
- Black Hole
- Creator
- NASA (uploaded by - Ohmpandya We need to talk... ♦ contribs 03:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC))
- Support as nominator - Ohmpandya We need to talk... ♦ contribs 03:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Question Are the halos around the background galaxies deliberate? Durova Charge! 03:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Durova. Thanks for you support on one of my images. Also, I do believe the halo's were added deliberately, to show a better conception of the Black Hole.
- Ohmpandya
We need to talk... ♦
contribs
04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- All right: Support Durova Charge! 04:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Durova. Thanks for you support on one of my images. Also, I do believe the halo's were added deliberately, to show a better conception of the Black Hole.
- Ohmpandya
We need to talk... ♦
contribs
04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. Neither the image description ("A stunning image of a quasar black hole") nor its use in the article help me understand what it going on in this image, or advances my knowledge of black holes. Also strikes me that a lot of 'artistic license' has been used. Therefore I can't see very high encyclopaedic value. -- jjron ( talk) 07:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Incidentally, FWIW an identical image, Image:Quasar.jpg, exists in the Quasar article, except that was uploaded three months ago by Gingojo, rather than this one that was uploaded what looks like today by the nominator. -- jjron ( talk) 08:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Other image tagged accordingly (because I'm lazy). MER-C 11:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
-
Oppose - heavy artifacting, bad quality generally, artistic license goes a little too far methinks. —
Vanderdecken∴
∫
ξ
φ
11:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC) - Oppose heavily artifacted, unclear enc value. de Bivort 20:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose per jjron. Cacophony ( talk) 23:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Technical issues are overwhelmingly bad. Not the best of Wikipedia, by far. -- Shark face 217 01:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose This image is not "real", it's heavily retouched - maybe totally an artist's conception. -- Janke | Talk 08:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 05:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
A Quasar Black Hole
- Reason
- This is a stunning image of a growing black hole, also known as a Quasar.
- Articles this image appears in
- Black Hole
- Creator
- NASA (uploaded by - Ohmpandya We need to talk... ♦ contribs 03:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC))
- Support as nominator - Ohmpandya We need to talk... ♦ contribs 03:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Question Are the halos around the background galaxies deliberate? Durova Charge! 03:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Durova. Thanks for you support on one of my images. Also, I do believe the halo's were added deliberately, to show a better conception of the Black Hole.
- Ohmpandya
We need to talk... ♦
contribs
04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- All right: Support Durova Charge! 04:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Durova. Thanks for you support on one of my images. Also, I do believe the halo's were added deliberately, to show a better conception of the Black Hole.
- Ohmpandya
We need to talk... ♦
contribs
04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. Neither the image description ("A stunning image of a quasar black hole") nor its use in the article help me understand what it going on in this image, or advances my knowledge of black holes. Also strikes me that a lot of 'artistic license' has been used. Therefore I can't see very high encyclopaedic value. -- jjron ( talk) 07:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Incidentally, FWIW an identical image, Image:Quasar.jpg, exists in the Quasar article, except that was uploaded three months ago by Gingojo, rather than this one that was uploaded what looks like today by the nominator. -- jjron ( talk) 08:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Other image tagged accordingly (because I'm lazy). MER-C 11:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
-
Oppose - heavy artifacting, bad quality generally, artistic license goes a little too far methinks. —
Vanderdecken∴
∫
ξ
φ
11:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose heavily artifacted, unclear enc value. de Bivort 20:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose per jjron. Cacophony ( talk) 23:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Technical issues are overwhelmingly bad. Not the best of Wikipedia, by far. -- Shark face 217 01:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose This image is not "real", it's heavily retouched - maybe totally an artist's conception. -- Janke | Talk 08:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 05:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)