Nominate
--Shizhao 18:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Shizhao 18:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral --Willtron 18:25, 5 September 2005 (UTC) Nice, but low resolution[reply]- Support Andre (talk) 19:19, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral Would support if a larger version was available. Jon Harald Søby\no na 19:33, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
- Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 20:31, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. James F. (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral I love but the low resolution Luc Viatour 10:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral resolution petrus 13:47, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad resolution and jpeg artefacts. And I don't like the lens spots. --SehLax 18:00, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]- Oppose low res -- Gorgo 18:15, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose too much compressed, uninteresting object (visual) norro 21:40, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I have updated the picture with a higher resolution. startaq 22:06, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
- Support -- YolanC 00:28, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support LoopZilla 07:40:07, 2005-09-08 (UTC)
- Oppose – Rex 00:44, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Good, but trying to be both art and factual, it fails in both. -CSamulili 14:11, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6 Support, 5 oppose, 5 neutral => Not Featured --Shizhao 02:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
