Support as nominator Emma44 (talk) 11:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Support Good quality and the background is good as well, but i think you should change the proposed caption.--Dr.Rema (talk) 12:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Weak Support I have looked into him and he does deserve it but, I am not too sure... BUT anyway you HAVE to change the caption thing.--Doodler45 (talk) 12:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe archetype would be better than symbol? -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Support--Winner33 (talk) 12:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment Too small and not present in any encyclopedic articles. Muhammad Mahdi Karim (talk) 13:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- He'll get bigger, I'm sure. -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  - I meant the image. :) Muhammad Mahdi Karim (talk) 15:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Good joke, but strong oppose - seriously though, it was funny XD. Ultimately oppose per Muhammad Madhi Karim. --Mad Tinman _T _C 14:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Neutral--Kushi13 (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Very Weak Support, just as a friend Emma44, or it would be Oppose.--Emperor13 (talk) 15:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Oppose Too young. :) -- Laitche (talk) 16:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment: Too young meaning?--Dr.Rema (talk) 16:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear god, why did I have to check this page before breakfast?! Apart from this nomination being the least bit funny, the quality of the image is actually quite good. Nonetheless of course this gets a You-gotta-be-freaking-kidding-me-oppose. P.S. no comment from the subject yet. Are you still clinging on to the fantasy of being featured? ;-) --Dschwen 16:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment I feel like I'm on the outside of a very exclusive inside joke. But seriously, how has this nom survived for so long? And where did all these supports--and, coincidentally, new voters--come from? ...sockpuppets? maybe? --Malachirality (talk) 18:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 18:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)