Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/HighlyEnrichedUranium

Highly Enriched Uranium

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2011 at 08:09:12 (UTC)

Reason

Good quality picture showing highly enriched uranium.

Articles in which this image appears

Enrichment_of_uranium

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Sciences/Materials_science

Creator

work of the United States Federal Government

• Support as nominator --Ahirwav (talk) 08:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Rotate 90 degrees counter clockwise? Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Originally oriented image (used in more articles), and associated FPC nom. Jujutacular ^talk 13:07, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose as it is, support the rotated alt. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 17:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt (which I've added).
  Nergaal (talk) 18:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support alt; although I must say: how would an ignorant wikipedian know it's uranium (is it explained as such on the page it is featured on)? Ρόμπστερ 1983 ^{☞Life's short, talk fast ☜} 22:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Erm... yes... the clue's in its caption "A billet of highly enriched uranium metal". :P Aaadddaaammm (talk) 09:08, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose -- Correct picture, nice quality and good EV. But nothing here justifies the status of FP. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt -- Correct picture, nice quality and good EV justifies the status of FP, in my opinion.
  talk) 23:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support alt; Good EV and valuable addition to the article, given the fact of restricted access. --TheMandarin (talk) 08:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Ugly orange gloves and a metal disk with marker writing on it. The aesthetic qualities of this photo are way below standard for FP metals. I also question the EV. This photo shows that enriched uranium can be formed into a disk, but what else does it show? If not for the caption there would be no way to tell this is even uranium. A more feature worthy picture might include a radiation warning sign, a Geiger counter reading, and dramatic lighting.Shroomydan (talk) 02:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not sure you understand the point and the EV of the gloves. They need to stop both alpha and gamma radiations, and the bright color is probably necessary to notice staining (nobody wants some uranium oxide sticking on their hand without knowing). And yes, knowing that it can be formed into a disk is noteworthy, since for example a similar picture of the very related metal plutonium, would be glowing (possibly close to the critical mass) and completely unsafe to hold it in your hands. Among other things, this picture shows that uranium metal IS SAFE to handle with some relatively-small amount of protective gear. I am sure that possessing this much amount is strictly regulated, therefore the ID number put down with a marker (more EV). As for differentiating it, I don't know how much chemical experience you have, but essentially ALL metals look very similar in an inert atmosphere once the oxide layer is removed. Technically it is almost impossible to differentiate among most metals under rigorous conditions. Just take a look
    Nergaal (talk) 20:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • The gloves would probably be sufficient to stop alpha and much beta radiation. They would probably only attenuate the amount of gamma radiation slightly. The real point of radiation suits is to protect against contamination with radioactive particles. Most alpha and beta decay sources are much more dangerous if you ingest them. The worker holding this would be kept safe by limiting his overall radiation exposure more than magic gloves. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Alves and Shroomydan. Jujutacular ^talk 19:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thought about it, and I could actually see this as somewhat compelling, perhaps satisfying criterion 3. Thank you for the comments above Nergaal. I am withdrawing my oppose, but I'm not convinced enough to support. Jujutacular ^talk 02:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Question for opposers: which of the 8
  Nergaal (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Criterion #3. Thank you for the explanation of the gloves Nergaal. I agree the photo demonstrates that you can hold enriched uranium provided that you wear protective gloves - Good EV. The image is still underwhelming. There is nothing about the photo that would entice me to click on it. Shroomydan (talk) 23:23, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support JJ Harrison (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:HEUraniumC.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]