Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Manhattan Project uranium reduction

Uranium reduction during the Manhattan Project[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2011 at 04:00:59 (UTC)

Uranium refining at Ames

Chainfall and metal flanged, closed cylinder being lowered into a hole

A pressure vessel ("bomb") containing uranium halide, being lowered into a furnace
Open flanged cylinder with stuff coating the sides and bottom

Remanant slag coats the interior of a bomb.
A rough-surfaced cylinder of metal with a paper in front of it, like a label

A uranium metal "biscuit" from the reduction reaction

Reason: EV and composition

This is how uranium was refined into metal during World War 2, with the Ames process breakthrough technology, still used today. The 3-step visual is a more pleasant way to show the non-chemist, history-oriented, reader what was going down. Rather than describing all the reactions in text. Image is being used in an article, written by a Ph.D. historian, now at Featured Article Candidacy. Even for the science-strong, seeing what "things really look like" is an added insight.

I show the images from left to right in gallery to show steps in a process, culminating with final product). I have an ongoing interest to explore ways of showing information schematically and graphically. More than articles with text and interspersed photographic portraits, but flow diagrams and maps and charts and the like. This is why I brought you all that top/bottom, all four species gallery of painted turtles a few months ago.

Articles in which this image appears: Manhattan Project, Ames process

FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II (or could be in science or engineering cat)

Creator: TCO, original uploads Tyklink, unknown photographer

~~Support as nominator~~ Withdraw. Will bring back if I can get high res versions.TCO (talk) 16:07, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Whoa, sorry but those images are way too small. Track down some higher resolution scans then we can talk :) Aaadddaaammm (talk) 08:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. Forgot that part.TCO (talk) 08:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Course that one time, I got a museum curator to donate a very high res image...and it was so realistic you did not know the animal ws stuffed, not live. But you still dinged me. :) TCO (talk) 08:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure what you're talking about, but I'm probably sorry. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 16:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As above, not at this size! I think the EV and historical value are very strong though, I would be tempted to support higher res versions :) - Zephyris _Talk 11:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --J Milburn (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]