Perfectly illustrates Pioneer plaque. Historically notable, humanity's message to the universe. Also used in Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11 and Template:User contact reasons. (Includes a naked woman. All FPs should include a naked woman.)

• Nominate and support. - Billpg 03:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support (Original). I personally prefer the line drawing version, as I feel the background distracts from the drawings. --Billpg 13:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• (Support original.) I'll support it, but isn't the original a bit more encyclopedic? –Outʀiggʀ 03:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• support Original; for historic and visual reasons. I just like it better with that metal grain texture. --Bridgecross 04:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original. I just hope that ETs are smarter than me :-) -Glaurung 05:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original. Mikeo 06:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original. That's what the plaque actually looks like. howcheng {chat} 06:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original. One of the few artifacts of mankind that have left our Solar system. NOTE: It seems it is not in any article at the moment - some other version, perhaps? Needs to be looked in to. --Janke | Talk 07:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the line drawing is in the articles. What do we do when most people here prefer the original? Substitute it in the article? Maybe not the best option, a line drawing fits better there... --Janke | Talk 13:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea. I'm new at this. I'll raise it on the talk page. --Billpg 13:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Support original. —freak(talk) 12:59, Sep. 12, 2006 (UTC)
• Support the white one- "Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article." The original is not used in articles, and therefore doesn't add significantly to the articles that it is not in. --Rory096 13:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• That can be changed. Nauticashades 17:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Support original (but not tilted version). It's all been said. Nauticashades 17:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support either, but I really wish the "original" had a better source than a Star Trek fan site. All I can find so far is a lower-res copy at Ames. --Davepape 20:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. The file has been re-uploaded from NASA. It lost ~600k worth of file size, which appears to be useless data, the result of someone sharpening and saving at too-high quality. –Outʀiggʀ 23:30, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Support top one. A photo of the actual metal plaque would be preferred though. —Pengo ^{talk · contribs} 22:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The bronze version, more like the one launched. PPGMD 23:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support original Excellent historical value. My understanding is the image is designed to be understood by aliens with no knowledge of our culture. So someone should be able to tell me what those lines with the ticks on the mean. hehe HighInBC 02:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just read the article. This is Wikipedia, you know... ;-) --Janke | Talk 07:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doh, should'v thought of that. HighInBC 15:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Support for the original coloring/texture, but it should be rotated a degree or so to make the lines truly horizontal/vertical. --S0uj1r0 04:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I still support the original, by rotating it, I was forced to crop it too tightly at the top. Perhaps someone should go get the original plaque and rescan it(joking). HighInBC 05:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the original. —Jared Hunt September 14, 2006, 08:35 (UTC)
• Support TomStar81 (Talk) 00:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the original and I hope it gets posted on an appropriate anniversary. Aye-Aye 21:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The original,it seems that it's decided.--Pixel ;-) 00:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support either, preference for 'original'. --jjron 12:36, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the original tilted version. --Ineffable3000 03:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment While I do not think the anatomical correctness or a lack of thus is therefore a major issue, it could be claimed that this image sent out to the rest of the universe on spacecraft depicts only "Caucasoidal" features as a representation of humanity. Yet it also historically significant to note and see that this image was chosen to be sent out into space at the particular time it was chosen to do so. Sudachi 08:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Pioneer10-plaque.jpg Clear support for the original version. -- Moondigger 03:24, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]