No I don't think the image is of necessary quality, and, personally, I don't like the idea of Wales' picture being featured, for several obvious reasons relating to eponymousity in Wikipedia's featured content. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - It's too cult-of-personality-ish to have an FP of him, in my opinion. It would be like the default Apple desktop background being a big portrait of Steve Jobs (not that that's outside the realm of possibility). --Sean 18:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Exactly which criteria do you believe that doesn't fit? It doesn't matter who it is, just as long as it meets the criteria. --The Placebo Effect (talk) 21:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. Good technical quality (except for that black dot on his beard) but he looks very weird in this shot. Like he's silently locked in the middle of a psychic mind battle with someone across the table, who's staring back with an equally threatening grimace --ffroth 19:53, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
How does that pose compare to this featured picture. --The Placebo Effect (talk) 21:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Well that guy looks foreign; Jimbo looks deranged --ffroth 03:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. Not an engaging picture especially in terms of facial expression. In the picture pointed out by the nom the subject has a more engaging facial expression and cultural context. This picture doesn't make me want to read the article because it looks like he could be made of wax.D-rew (talk) 22:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. Black dot on beard. Pstuart84Talk 23:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose black dot makes it unnecessary to think of how I'd otherwise vote... grenグレン 12:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose as above, unappealing composition. Plus the pirate spot. -- Chris.B | talk 15:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Support All hail dear leader! --Elfer (talk) 03:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose No, not theBlack Spot. So, that's where it is. (Ultimately, per Chris B. above.) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)