Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Unity-Zarya-Zvezda STS-106

The International Space Station as seen from Space Shuttle Atlantis on STS-106 following the arrival of the Russian Zvezda Service Module to the orbital complex. In view from top to bottom are the Unity Module, the Zarya FGB, the Zvezda SM and the docked Progress M1-3 spacecraft.

Reason: A magnificent view of the core modules of the ISS, showing beautifully the early structure of the station.
Articles this image appears in: International Space Station, Mir, STS-106, Zvezda (ISS),Shuttle-Mir Program
Creator: NASA (Crew of STS-106).

Support as nominator — Colds7ream 14:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Support--Mbz1 17:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
Weak oppose - I don't think this is the best available. These are larger, shaper and not as noisy: #1, #2, . After going to the NASA ISS image gallery, I was really impressed with this drawing. Cacophony 07:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, those are indeed nice images, but they don't show the same information as the proposed image, which demonstrates the core of the station, ie. the minimum number of modules that were required to host a permanent crew. The first image is a drawing, not a photo, and shows the station in the future, the second shows the station when it couldn't support a crew, with just the Zarya and Unity modules, and the third shows it after extra additions. Basically, the reason that this is important is that it demonstrates the minimal station. Colds7ream 10:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose - Agreed. The NASA images are better, surely others out there are superior to this one also.-DMCer 07:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Uh, it is a NASA image - taken from Space Shuttle Atlantis in orbit on STS-106. Colds7ream 10:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment - The source, here at NASA's website, seems to be a small image. I agree with the above about this image being very helpful from an encyclopedic viewpoint (as well as it being a view of the subject from a helpful perspesctive)--and for those reasons, I do not oppose the nomination, but the image isn't as sharp as I'd like. Is there a more hi-res source image available? Spikebrennan 17:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Weak Oppose - Would definetly support a higher res image, and the compression artifacts visible in the shadows at 100% are a bit irritating. Supaluminal 03:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Not promoted MER-C 08:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)