Talk:Bradford & Bingley/Archives/2013

Fair use rationale for Image:Bradford and Bingley logo.png

Image:Bradford and Bingley logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

are you sure the plc is a "was"? don't get ahead of story

just because the firm was nationalized and a major bloc sold off to santader....has company been liquidated? don't know british procedure but i doubt it.

additionally, can't have a "was" in the lede and then future tense in later part: "The mortgage book, personal loan book, headquarters, treasury assets and its wholesale liabilities will be taken into public ownership." sounds like a receivership structure and moment.

a corporate entity does not just go poof overnight. --68.173.2.68 (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Fixed (for the time being anyway) and expanded. --TubularWorld (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)