Talk:Manchester Pride

File:Manchester Pride bus.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Manchester Pride bus.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Manchester Pride bus.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:15, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Street closure section

I have removed (again) a lengthy section about street closures. Aside from the obvious bias of the content (which is clearly written to support the claim that the closures are unlawful), it has no reliable sources to back up the contentious material. Most of the citations are to a non-RS advocacy website called "FactsMCR". Purported documents from government officials are files on this same website. The only citations not to FactsMCR are a YouTube video (also not RS) and a dead link to the Manchester Evening News website. This last one is retrievable from archive (see here) and provides the only RS in the entire section. Unfortunately, all it documents is the presumably uncontroversial fact that the roads were closed, not the claim that the closures are illegal. Such claims should not be restored unless reliable sources can be supplied to support them. --RL0919 (talk) 15:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Original research

It appears that the article contains a significant amount of original research. Please be cognizant of how reliable sources can be used to improve the page's veracity. --TheTsarOfLars (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Manchester Pride Festival.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Attempting to use images as source

User:Rathfelder Please can you explain your thinking in trying to use images as 'evidence to support the statement above' in this edit [Manchester Pride: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia]. As far as I am aware images should not be used as sources. It is dubious that content concerning a festival should be much used in an article about a charity. Even more dubious is the insertion of one's own snaps in quantity in an article rather than in commons.SovalValtos (talk) 12:01, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

I am not aware of any policy which says that images are not evidence. They certainly are evidence in law. All my pictures are in Commons - where there are lots of pictures of Manchester Pride. The procession is a very significant part of the organisation's impact on Manchester. I dont understand why anyone objects to pictures of it. Its a public event, and shows public support from a large number of different organisations. Rathfelder (talk) 12:08, 27 August 2025 (UTC)