Commons:Deletion requests/File:Puppensex 2.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No use, we're not a porn depository Fry1989 (talk) 21:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:SCOPE, very low quality Aude (talk) 00:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Obscenity Walther16 (talk) 13:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep - It's in use. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:14, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Not a valid reason to delete and image is in scope. A new account and starts by searching nudity and sexuality related images because they are obscene? Either this is a sock of someone or a moral crusader that cant even understand the irony of someone that only sees one type of image and calls them obscene. Tm (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 18:23, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

explicit pornography 82.120.229.176 14:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per previous, no new reason offered. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:34, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]