For. Very clever. I don't understand how it can be considered nasty. --15Mickey20(talk to Mickey) 13:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
For. Quite good, but does need cleaning up a bit. Some bits aren't funny (like about the elements), but generally I like. --Gazco --- hurray for me!!! 18:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC) 19:45 29 June 2007 (GMT)
For Good images--SirManforman 13:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Featured. Feature! +17 <<>> This article has passed VFH and was featured on 23:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC). This page is now archived; do not edit it, it will have no effect.
Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article. Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.