Image:BVI FSC 2.JPG (
delete |
talk |
history |
logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:Legis#Image:BVI FSC 2.JPG listed for deletion|
User:Legis]] ([{{fullurl:User_talk:
User:Legis|action=edit&preload=Template:idw_preload&editintro=Template:idw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | [[Special:Contributions/
User:Legis|contribs]]).
Same as for image below - for some reason when I uploaded the second image, it also got squished into a corner. Not sure why, but I subsequently uploaded correctly (on the third attempt) as
Image:BVI Financial Services Commission.JPG, so this one is now obselete as well --Legis (
talk -
contribs) 13:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Image:BVI FSC.JPG (
delete |
talk |
history |
logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:
User:Legis#Image:BVI FSC.JPG listed for deletion|
User:Legis]] ([{{fullurl:User_talk:
User:Legis|action=edit&preload=Template:idw_preload&editintro=Template:idw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | [[Special:Contributions/
User:Legis|contribs]]).
For some reason when I uploaded the image, it got squished into a corner. Not sure why, but I subsequently uploaded correctly as
Image:BVI Financial Services Commission.JPG, so this one is now obselete --Legis (
talk -
contribs) 12:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
orphaned image, no dating information to determine how up to date image is, talk page seems to indicate errors.
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was: - Keep - no longer orphaned so no remaining reason to delete -
Peripitus(Talk) 11:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
orpahned image, absent uploader, unencyclopedic group shot
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
orphaned image, absent uploader, questionable PD-self claim as image appears on
[1] this page and it also looks very staged
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
orpahned image, absent uploader, no information regarding subject making it extreamly difficult to determine an encyclopedic use
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Unused file. Please note the OTRS permission does not actually pertain to this file. It actually pertains to
Image:FLAH 02.JPG but got put on this image by mistake. So the licensing is a bit suspect, since this image came from the state government, not the federal. The other image is nicer anyway. -
Nard 04:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was: - Keep -
Peripitus(Talk) 11:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
orphaned image, I had tagged as speedy because I could not get the image to appear on the page, in thumbnail or clicking on the image but
User:Bjweeks removed the speedy indicating "looks fine to me" so it may just be my system that can't see it. Also, based solely on the name, PR image, I question the PD-self license tag as well.
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 17:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Orphan. Seems like it might also be a CSD but I can find no "Unused Photo of male genitalia" CSD criteria
Soundvisions1 (
talk) 19:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Would be worth keeping if I was sure it was really free, but the uploader's deleted contribs don't convince me of that. —
Ilmari Karonen (
talk) 16:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
readers don't need to see this letter to know it exists. pretty much NO en.wikipedians can read
Thaana so the image is pretty much useless
Calliopejen1 (
talk) 21:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Image:BVI FSC 2.JPG (
delete |
talk |
history |
logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:Legis#Image:BVI FSC 2.JPG listed for deletion|
User:Legis]] ([{{fullurl:User_talk:
User:Legis|action=edit&preload=Template:idw_preload&editintro=Template:idw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | [[Special:Contributions/
User:Legis|contribs]]).
Same as for image below - for some reason when I uploaded the second image, it also got squished into a corner. Not sure why, but I subsequently uploaded correctly (on the third attempt) as
Image:BVI Financial Services Commission.JPG, so this one is now obselete as well --Legis (
talk -
contribs) 13:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Image:BVI FSC.JPG (
delete |
talk |
history |
logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:
User:Legis#Image:BVI FSC.JPG listed for deletion|
User:Legis]] ([{{fullurl:User_talk:
User:Legis|action=edit&preload=Template:idw_preload&editintro=Template:idw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | [[Special:Contributions/
User:Legis|contribs]]).
For some reason when I uploaded the image, it got squished into a corner. Not sure why, but I subsequently uploaded correctly as
Image:BVI Financial Services Commission.JPG, so this one is now obselete --Legis (
talk -
contribs) 12:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
orphaned image, no dating information to determine how up to date image is, talk page seems to indicate errors.
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was: - Keep - no longer orphaned so no remaining reason to delete -
Peripitus(Talk) 11:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
orpahned image, absent uploader, unencyclopedic group shot
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
orphaned image, absent uploader, questionable PD-self claim as image appears on
[1] this page and it also looks very staged
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
orpahned image, absent uploader, no information regarding subject making it extreamly difficult to determine an encyclopedic use
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 01:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Unused file. Please note the OTRS permission does not actually pertain to this file. It actually pertains to
Image:FLAH 02.JPG but got put on this image by mistake. So the licensing is a bit suspect, since this image came from the state government, not the federal. The other image is nicer anyway. -
Nard 04:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was: - Keep -
Peripitus(Talk) 11:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
orphaned image, I had tagged as speedy because I could not get the image to appear on the page, in thumbnail or clicking on the image but
User:Bjweeks removed the speedy indicating "looks fine to me" so it may just be my system that can't see it. Also, based solely on the name, PR image, I question the PD-self license tag as well.
Jordan 1972 (
talk) 17:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Orphan. Seems like it might also be a CSD but I can find no "Unused Photo of male genitalia" CSD criteria
Soundvisions1 (
talk) 19:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Would be worth keeping if I was sure it was really free, but the uploader's deleted contribs don't convince me of that. —
Ilmari Karonen (
talk) 16:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
readers don't need to see this letter to know it exists. pretty much NO en.wikipedians can read
Thaana so the image is pretty much useless
Calliopejen1 (
talk) 21:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)reply