| Revision as of 23:32, 27 July 2009 editOttava Rima (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,327 edits Creating deletion discussion page for National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts | Revision as of 23:37, 27 July 2009 edit undoRayAYang (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers17,188 edits →National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts: delNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| :{{la|National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> | :{{la|National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> | ||
| Non-notable nor could it be established as notable based on searches for confirmation. Only one source provided discusses it, and it has very little reliability and is unprofessional (see: "bitchslap" in title). Misplaced Pages is not news, nor is it a collection of random poorly sourced information that speculates on possible legal events, especially from non-experts to provide reliable sources for said speculation. ] (]) 23:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC) | Non-notable nor could it be established as notable based on searches for confirmation. Only one source provided discusses it, and it has very little reliability and is unprofessional (see: "bitchslap" in title). Misplaced Pages is not news, nor is it a collection of random poorly sourced information that speculates on possible legal events, especially from non-experts to provide reliable sources for said speculation. ] (]) 23:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' Misplaced Pages is not news, as the nominator said. Furthermore, the Wikinews is vastly more informative, this really has nothing to add. <strong>]</strong>] 23:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:37, 27 July 2009
National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts
- National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non-notable nor could it be established as notable based on searches for confirmation. Only one source provided discusses it, and it has very little reliability and is unprofessional (see: "bitchslap" in title). Misplaced Pages is not news, nor is it a collection of random poorly sourced information that speculates on possible legal events, especially from non-experts to provide reliable sources for said speculation. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Misplaced Pages is not news, as the nominator said. Furthermore, the Wikinews article is vastly more informative, this really has nothing to add. Ray 23:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)