In today's world, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunset 2007-1.jpg is a topic that has gained great relevance in various areas. From the personal to the professional level, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunset 2007-1.jpg has captured the attention of many due to its multiple implications and consequences. Over time, it has become clear that Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunset 2007-1.jpg is a determining factor in people's lives, as it influences their decision-making, behavior and general well-being. This is why it is of great importance to thoroughly understand this phenomenon and analyze its different dimensions in order to adequately address it. In this article, we will further explore the impact of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunset 2007-1.jpg in different contexts and seek to offer strategies and recommendations to address it effectively.
Original - Red sunset at Porto Covo, west coast of Portugal. Sunsets are usually more brightly coloured than sunrises due to the presence of dust particles in the lower atmosphere, which cause the scattering of sunlight.
Reason
A risky nomination: all sunsets are pretty, etc. But I believe this one is better and has more EV than most, including the existing featured pictures. High resolution, very good quality and a vibrant depiction of the red-type of sunset at sea. The picture was recognized as a VI (Valuable Image) under the scope "Sunset at sea".
comment - the caption doesn't say why sunsets are brighter than sunrises. It would need to explain why there is more dust and turbulence in the evening than the morning. deBivort15:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't think they are brighter, just more colourfull. I think the main reason is the presence of larger quantities of dust particles, which scatter the light, due to the vertical turbulent motion of the lower layers of the atmosphere, caused by the heating of the surface. But maybe this kind of detailed explanation should be in the article, not the caption. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Oppose A good photo to be sure, but doesn't seem to have any EV. Also, I don't see it being referenced in any articles.(Giligone (talk) 23:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC))
Oppose The sun is setting, but this is technically not a sunset. This is why the image was removed from sunset. Perhaps you should try again when the image is better utilized. smooth0707 (talk) 02:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Tentative Support Sunset may have already occurred, with the sun remaining visible due to atmospheric refraction. For those who want to be technical, are you sure it is not a sunset even accounting for refraction? And if the sun has actually set in this photo, that simply increases its EV and should be noted in the caption. Addendum: I found this this supporting diagram at Hyperphysics which resembles the subject photo. Fletcher (talk) 14:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Comment - Removing this picture from the Sunset article just because the upper limb of the Sun is not touching the apparent horizon was a snobbish attitude. Doing it when the picture is being evaluated at FPC is ungraceful, to say the least. Yes, I also have a little knowledge of Astronomy and am aware of the astronomical meaning of the word. Still if we read the text with same care it soon becomes obvious, at the second paragraph, that the article is not restricted to the astronomical meaning. I really don’t think that this kind of attitude contributes positively to the project. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
