Oppose. I know it is historical, but I don't know how historically significant this image is. Nowhere, apart from in this nomination, nowhere does it seem to mention that they were discussing plans for the BoB.. The photo itself is a bit snapshot'ish, full of dust/scratches (which could and should be removed where possible) and Goering's face is obscured. Just not quite what I'd consider FP material for a portrait. Diliff | (Talk)(Contribs) 17:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As said before, no major historical significance, and Goering, one of the people who is supposed to be exhibited here, is partially obscured. --Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 17:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, ack Diliff and it neither illustrates Hitler nor Goering particularly well. --Dschwen 17:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, neither subject is displayed well. J Milburn (talk) 19:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this picture needs to be sourced... I know there is a lot of shenannigans with U.S. government claiming copyright for Nazi images, etc... and this may be perfectly acceptable... but we still need a source and a government claim of that. 128.175.87.157 (talk) 00:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - its already been said. For a picture of Hitler and Goering, both Hitler and Goering are hard to see, obscured. ← κεηηε∂γ(shout at me) 08:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Completely non-notable image concerning two huge historical figures. Spinach Dip 01:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't show subject well and low, if any notability. --SpencerT♦C 19:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted --jjron (talk) 08:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
