Weak support. Gets suport for being a welcome break from the insect macro monotony. --Dschwen 19:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose There are many other temple FPs of much better quality. I don't think it is FP material. PmlineditorTalk 09:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a "temple". It is one of the four tower built by Kempegowda in the 17th Century. Hindu worshippers just go there for some reason. --Muhammad(talk) 09:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The picture doesn't have a great impact on the articles where it is, or, isn't a significant part of the article. Sorry, I can't support. PmlineditorTalk 10:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The towers are very notable and the image's usage in Kempe Gowda I is in my opinion a vvery significant part of the article, being the only image there. Also, the towers is one of the most famous monuments in Lalbagh. No need to apologize however, you have the right to an opinion and I respect that. --Muhammad(talk) 12:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Illustrates the subject well. Mostlyharmless (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. Very nice composition, but the tower seems a bit out of focus towards the top, which is disappointing. I'm not entirely certain about this, because the picture is only 1067 pixels high and the tower occupies a small proportion of the image. Since the tower is the main subject of the picture, I'd like to see a bigger and sharper image so that it can be seen in detail. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 15:41, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted --upstateNYer 05:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
