Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Langjökull moulin

Langjökull moulin

moulin is a deep crevasse in a glacier where water flows into the glacier from the surface. They can be hundreds of metres deep and can form glacier caves. At the time of photographing, this moulin was perhaps one metre wide, three or four metres long, and 30 to 40 metres deep. It is situated in Langjökull

, the second-largest glacier in Iceland. Langjökull is up to 580 metres deep and has a surface area of 925 km².

Reason: Look into the abyss, but don't fall in, :) Although we have a couple of other images of moulins, I don't think they convey "depth" as well as this one does. You can see water entering near the top of the photograph, but it's not enough to obstruct views of the walls of ice either side. As far as crevasses go, this is a super cool one. The quality and resolution are also decent.
Articles in which this image appears: moulin (geology)
if the article is expanded a little.
Creator

Support as nominator —
talk 08:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment: I'm not really getting any sense of scale here- I'm not particularly certain what I'm looking at. Also, there are some dab links in the caption. J Milburn (talk) 13:30, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the links, thanks. Can't really help with the scale, except to perhaps point out the dimensions given in the file description. I've added the measurements to the caption.
talk 16:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose. Completely unclear what is shown at what orientation and what scale. Is it illegal to vote oppose now on FPC?! --Dschwen 01:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sorry I don't get the depth. I think the other image in the moulin gives a better sense of what's going on --Muhammad(talk) 12:57, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurred... I know the subject matter will be tricky to get a perfect picture of, but the level of detail in this is akin to a snapshot picture, and there is very little clarity even in the lighter parts... Gazhiley (talk) 12:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, the quality could have been better, but what a subject!--Mbz1 (talk) 08:46, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Broccoli (talk) 22:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I do get a good feeling of depth, but the lack of scale cues detracts too much from its EV for me. -- Avenue (talk) 06:51, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]