Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mary Jackson in a wind tunnel

Mary Jackson edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 22:28:47 (UTC)

Original – NASA engineer Mary Jackson poses with a model in a wind tunnel at NASA Langley.

Reason: While not the lead image, it helps illustrate the variety of work she did. She was NASA's first black female engineer, after all. She worked in wind tunnels.
Articles in which this image appears: Mary Jackson (engineer)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
Creator: NASA, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 22:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – thanks to you Adam, we have a FP of her here, why have a second FP? Bammesk (talk) 01:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? I think that, if we only accept one photo per subject, we end up with our good illustrations being lost in a sea of mediocre ones also in the articles. Better to accept multiple images that are each distinct than encourage a philosophy of all the other photos in an article being poor-quality. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 01:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bammesk That's the same image that's nominated here. Did you mean another image? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I meant this image, I fixed the link. Thanks. Bammesk (talk) 14:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm not loving the composition on this one. The lights at the top are especially distracting. I think a much tighter crop would be an improvement. Kaldari (talk) 17:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Quite cluttered snapshot. – Sca (talk) 12:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sca and Kaldari: I think that's inevitable for this image's EV. We could crop a bit, but a lot of the busy-ness is giving information about the wind tunnel, and if you crop out the wind tunnel, you're just left with an image redundant to and a bit worse than the lead one. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 19:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - In that case, it may just not be suitable as an FP. Kaldari (talk) 19:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree it is a poor composition. EV but not FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 18:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support high EV, in my opinion, outweighs aesthetic considerations. (t · c) buidhe 00:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:27, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]