Support as nominator --Ceranthor 00:49, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I suggest keeping it as a VP. The image quality is just not good enough - it's noisy even on the preview page. Fletcher (talk) 02:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Speedy close It won't get promoted whatsoever. Quality just isn't there, as Ceranthor mentioned about the noise. ♣ZooFari♣ 02:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose, but not speedy. It meets the basic threshold for resolution, license, and encyclopedic value. Worth reviewing, and someone might possibly locate a better version. DurovaCharge! 04:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose its a shame though because if it weren't so grainy it would be a really good photo --Thanks, Hadseys 11:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - can't seem to find my glasses. Xavexgoem (talk) 13:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Hold on... the Redoubt picture was way grainier than this and wasn't that much compositionally better. Alas, oh well. Ceranthor 00:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Weak oppose Is it just grainy in the sky, ie from dust or is it just me? Shame, it's an exciting subject. Terri G (talk) 16:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)