Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Steam engine indicator diagram

Steam engine indicator diagram

Original - A steam engine indicator diagram, with labeled engine and diagram components. These diagrams were used to determine the efficiency of steam engines, such as those found aboard Western Rivers steamboats.

Reason

This image is of high technical standards, sufficient scalable resolution, is an excellent illustration of the related concepts, has a free license, supplements two separate articles, is accurate, has valuable captions, and demonstrates no image manipulation.

Articles in which this image appears

Indicator diagram, Cutoff (steam engine), Steam engine

Creator

Old Moonraker

• Support as nominator --Calliopeman316 (talk) 00:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
• Comment - Shouldn't this image be SVG? --Chrismiceli (talk) 06:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
  • One is linked to on the image page, but it doesn't seem to render. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:44, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose An indicator diagram would very rarely have the mechanism drawn. The piston position doesn't match any of the possible positions indicated by the diagram. Additionally, an indicator diagram is a plot of pressure vs volume (P-V) not pressure vs piston position. This distinction is important for calculating the work done in each cycle. While position and volume are linearly proportional the diagram is misleading and so has no place in Indicator diagram. File:Steam engine in action.gif is more useful for the steam engine, but is too fast and a bit small. I would be happier with something like this, perhaps with animation too. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Another flaw - the direction of the cycle is not indicated in the diagram. I'd also ditch the scales and units - it is no less educational and the percentages are clunky. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. As I've discussed with other images, combining charts and diagrams into a single image is a bad idea. It is inherently confusing and a poor way to present information. It may be acceptable for popular magazines and newspapers, etc., but Wikipedia should have a higher standard for presenting information in a professional manner. At the very least, I don't think it's appropriate as a featured picture. Kaldari (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. I took thermodynamics and I don't get this after a quick scan... upstateNYer 19:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)