Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Solar Flare

Solar Flare[edit]

Reason: Amazing image, which shows the flare , sunspot and Photosphere in great details. The image has a very high encyclopedic value. It illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more about flares and the sun in general.
Proposed caption: A solar flare (not to be mistaken with Solar Prominence) photographed by Hinode. The solar flare can be seen as two narrow, elongated, bright structures (ribbons) over the southern part of the sunspot.

Articles this image appears in: Solar Flare
Creator: Hinode

Strong Support as nominator Mbz1 18:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the caption needs to do a better job of explaining what we're seeing. It's not exactly ovious from the image or current caption. Adam Cuerden ^talk 22:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I did. Do you believe it is OK now? Thank you.--Mbz1 23:32, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
  - The main questions I have are "This looks like a false colour image, or, at least, one extremely dimmed. Which is right?" and "How big of a section of the sun are we looking at?" Adam Cuerden ^talk 01:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to question 1: yes, it is a false color image. Question 2: it would be possible to add some kind of scale. I should check before giving exact numbers, but the image is something from around 100 to 200 arcseconds wide.Gringo.ch 21:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- - - It is pretty much as the sun looks, when is viewed with H-Alpha filters. I'm not sure how big the flare was because I do not know when the picture was taken and what sunspot we are talking about, but here's my image, which shows sunspot taken at sunset and a flare taken the same day with a solar scope. (Please note the sun's not round shape in the image is due to a mirage.) It could give you an idea how big the nominated flare could have been. I also like to tank you for your questions because in my opinion the most important part of nominating an image is to make the viewers want to know more.
comment The bright strip doesn't strike me as typical of solar flares, unlike the other image on that page. Also, there are better images of sunspots. Debivort 02:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please note there are different classes of solar flares. Big flares are rare especially now in solar minimum. I believe the nominated flare could have been B or C class flare. They are much more common and the nominated image shows a very typical solar flare as seen through h-alpha filter. I've seen and photographed many of them myself and it is exactly how they look, when are viewed through h-alpha filters. Please also note that it matters, if a flare is close to the Sun's limb. These flares look much more spectacular, but again they are much rarer than flares, which are located farer from the Sun's limb. --Mbz1 02:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Comment - the copyright status of the image needs to be resolved. It was taken by Hinode, but is licensed under PD-self. Mgiganteus1 05:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This image is ineligible. JAXA images are for non-commercial use only. Tagged as {{db-noncom}}. MER-C 09:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The JAXA copyright notice holds for images found on the webpage, but I generated the image from satellite raw-data by myself, so I believe this is not covered by the copyright restriction stated in the above link.Gringo.ch 20:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I've removed the speedy tag for now. I know this may sound silly but do we have any way of verifying your claim Gringo.ch? Pascal.Tesson 17:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I wouldn't know how to give real evidence (after all digital stuff can be mainpulated ad infinitum), but the original reason for complaining by MER-C is that this image has been produced by JAXA, citing the restrictions from using material from the JAXA website. I claim this is not the case (addmittedly, the raw-data comes from Hinode, a JAXA mission, but it is the image itself we are discussing, not the data). Shouldn't user MER-C be the one to provide additional information as to where exactly on the web-page the picture was supposedly copied from? If nobody can provide a link on JAXAs website featuring this picture, the issue is moot. I think the accusation should be substantiated by some facts first.Gringo.ch 09:01, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expired nomination. Makeemlighter (talk) 00:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]