Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autopsy/Images


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. Mindmatrix 23:40, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Autopsy/Images
A blatant shocker article with no encyclopedic value. Agamemnon2 07:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and cremate without autopsy, and make sure to get the (copyvio) images as well. --Zetawoof 08:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm all for not censoring Wikipedia, but I'm sure we could have autopsy images with a little more taste incorporated in the article. Articles are NOT galleries, and these have no qualities apart from shocking the reader. -Mgm|(talk) 10:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for copyvio - All the images are just taken from Ogrish.com. Also, I'm not sure what Wikipedia is not, but I'm sure it shouldn't be a photo gallery.  --Cyde Weys talkcontribs 15:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete under WP:NOT and also for copyvio. 23skidoo 17:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per the above. Durova 19:31, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete No squeamishness about image, but far too small for any usable purpose and only a link. 03:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete It's just a link to a small image now because I edited it that way. Get the page and the images off of Wikipedia. There's already an autopsy article, and that's enough. Someone who needs more visual detail should go to a medical library or become a doctor. -Barry- 04:35, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Reading the full autopsy article, I notice it references those pictures, in that they were not presented in the full article because of their graphic nature. Personally, I don't think one needs them presented in that context, the textual representation of the autopsy process is sufficient for our use. --Agamemnon2 06:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.