The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Tim Song ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Tim Song ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: delete. On top of the below discussion it is now explicitly shown not to be the official cover ( http://www.eminem.com/recovery/default.html), no matter where it originated from. Closing this despite having opined below, it can't get much more uncontroversial. Amalthea 16:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC) reply
Disputed validity of cover, image found at this source but nowhere does it state that it is the official cover. Delete. Taylor Karras ( talk | contribs | Rcool35) 05:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2010 May 29. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result of the discussion was: No Consensus. - FASTILY (TALK) 03:30, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment Can the people claiming a free image exist even link us to a non free eye gouge that has caused viable damage to the eye or eye area ? As I can't even find this Gnevin ( talk) 09:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Tim Song ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Tim Song ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: delete. On top of the below discussion it is now explicitly shown not to be the official cover ( http://www.eminem.com/recovery/default.html), no matter where it originated from. Closing this despite having opined below, it can't get much more uncontroversial. Amalthea 16:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC) reply
Disputed validity of cover, image found at this source but nowhere does it state that it is the official cover. Delete. Taylor Karras ( talk | contribs | Rcool35) 05:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2010 May 29. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result of the discussion was: No Consensus. - FASTILY (TALK) 03:30, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment Can the people claiming a free image exist even link us to a non free eye gouge that has caused viable damage to the eye or eye area ? As I can't even find this Gnevin ( talk) 09:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC) reply