Support. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 09:04, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
Support. Background a bit dark, but still featureable -- Chris 73Talk 09:25, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
Oppose. It's a nice picture, but I don't see how it really adds all that much to Mount Rushmore National Memorial or Air Force One - there must be better (or more concise) pictures of those, individually, than this. -- Oarih 15:22, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Oppose. Good picture. I thought of nominating it once myself but decided I just didn't like it. --ScottyBoy900Q∞ 00:20, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Full support. It really does add to the Air Force One article. Thanks, Solitude! [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 14:31, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
Support - exceptional photo JoJan 19:58, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Support. Great photo. Really good. --Fir0002 12:10, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Support. I like how the dark background makes the subject stand out more clearly where appropriate, but is still detailed in the areas around the monument. PMcM 21:35, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Oppose. "Air Force One" and "Mount Rushmore" may have mystical patriotic significance to some, but to me they mean bugger all and that just leaves a very ordianry picture. Oska 23:58, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
Support. Hard to get moment. Great timing. Roscoe x 07:47, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If it is not a "photoshopped" composite. Do we have a pointer to the original? - [[User:Bevo|Bevo]] 19:09, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
It's a guberment photo from their website, I don't believe that they are allowed to release composites unless they are labeled. PPGMD
Which website? - [[User:Bevo|Bevo]] 21:04, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
