Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Beobjectiveplease (talk | contribs) at 21:26, 30 May 2011 (→Conduit (publisher network and platform)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Note: This page is NOT for challenging the outcome of deletion discussions nor to address the pending deletion of any page.
Shortcuts

Requests for undeletion is a process intended to assist users in restoring pages that were uncontroversially deleted via proposed deletion, under certain speedy deletion criteria (such as CSD G6), or in articles for deletion debates with little or no participation other than the nominator. This page is also intended to serve as a central location to request that deleted content be userfied or emailed to you so the content can be improved upon prior to re-insertion into the mainspace, or used elsewhere (you may also make a request directly to one of the administrators listed here). This means that content deleted after discussion—at articles for deletion, categories for discussion, or miscellany for deletion among other XfD processes—may in some cases be provided to you, but such controversial page deletions will not be overturned through this process.

This page is only for requesting undeletion of articles which have already been deleted. If the article you are concerned about is still visible, but has a warning message (template) at the top, please do not post here, but follow the instructions on the template or on your talk page.

Note that requests for undeletion is not a replacement for deletion review. If you feel an administrator has erred in closing a deletion discussion or in applying a speedy deletion criterion, please contact them directly. If you are unable to resolve the issue on their talk page, it should be raised at Wikipedia:Deletion review, rather than here.

float
float
float
float
Enter the page's title to request its undeletion:

Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

File:Hiroko Yakushimaru.jpg

this is not my image, needed for article, I will fix the licensing, thank you! -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not having seen the image, I can't yet hazard a guess. If it's a promo shot, it's out, if it's self-taken, I can do something with it.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 10:42, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Claims to be a cover from Tokyo Samurai Magazine. The picture was a very fuzzy image of a woman's face looking slightly to the right. Mouth slightly open with top teeth visible. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, never mind then, I bet we can find better.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eldar Gasanov.JPG

because i'am the one who took a picture of it and upload it on Facebook then make it a picture of the Subject -CKwarrior (talk) 05:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well face book says uploader was "E Lo Isurina Mariano" If this user can place a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license text aginst the iamge we can believe the claim. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Macula Risk

OTRS permission received for material in ticket 2011051810012889. -– Adrignola talk 17:31, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Restored and sent to AfD by deleting administrator. --Tikiwont (talk) 12:15, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Panama-Pacific_Half_Dollar

reasoning -Realberserker (talk) 20:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Each of these commemorative half dollars is individually notable, and as many of them sell for >$1,000, they have significant interest in the collecting community.

I replied on the talk page of the admin who originally deleted this. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Chris Sacedor

Because I am in the right place and the page that I created is true, confirmed, and a good resource of the certain subject of the page. -Bianca Anne Martins (talk) 07:41, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this page has not yet been deleted. You may want to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Paul Christopher Sacedor. --Tikiwont (talk) 12:06, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dodo Newman

i can ensure many public sources for this person -Zsoltszemerszky (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then please add them to User:Zsoltszemerszky/Dodo Newman which Cirt has already restored for you with suggestions how to go about it at your talk page. They are abbreviations but each of the blue links will bring you to a useful page. --Tikiwont (talk) 12:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Shipwrecks

This band was one of last to play in the old punk clubs of New York. They had a following that came from all 5 boroughs and are the authors of the song 'I Want to Join the Irish Mob,' which was covered by several NYC bands. Their album, Inchcape Rock, has a decade of radio, internet and public play and sells substantially on iTunes. -174.62.226.216 (talk) 16:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bash_%28band%29

reasoning -24.46.223.193 (talk) 21:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Page was unnecessarily deleted. Subject is a well-known artist who happened to just release a new piece of work a mere days ago. Notoriety and significance are very strong. Group is represented by one of the most well-known agencies in the world, runs a record label, and has had articles written by various credible online news outlets in recent months such as yahoo, tmz, and several others. They also hold claim as the only DJ/Live Band group in all of North America, and have been featured on television for years.

University of Santo Tomas seals and emblems

It got deleted because: it was defined as a glorified non-free image gallery and it failed to establish notability. I may have enough content to fill in the article. Please, let me try and edit the article.

I'm not sure if this is the place for the article. At the beginning of this page, it says it include articles that have been deleted through - articles for deletion debates with little or no participation other than the nominator, but on the next page, it says - If your article was deleted through the articles for deletion process, then it cannot be restored here. I apologize for not knowing what's obvious. Thanks -Pampi1010 (talk) 03:43, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done That's indeed not put well, but Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Santo Tomas seals and emblems has some reasonable participation and a clear result. In which case I can put it to User:Pampi1010/University of Santo Tomas seals and emblems where you can improve it. Just note that fair use rationales don't apply to user space. Since the deleting admin isn't active you can bring it to deletion review if you can add some good sources. In case of doubt drop me a note. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Erl

The page was deleted by an user (User:Wizardman) who is currently not active. The reason mentioned for deletion is self-promotion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Erl). However I want to reiterate the point that I have been studying SOA since few years and consider Thomas Erl as one of the pioneer in SOA field. Hence I wanted to have his page on Wikipedia. He has written maximum number of books on SOA and is world famous in SOA related areas. I would be glad to answer any questions related to this page. -Edited by Sanjay (talk) 03:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Erl, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Wizardman is not inactive as he has just undeleted the article and relisted the AFD. You have 7 days to make your argument for keeping this article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Erl.--Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeferson Douglas dos Santos Batista

This article was deleted as footballer had no confirmed appearances. Although some Brasilian website gives apperances starting from 2008 (however it may be an unreliable source), in 2011 this player moved to Ukrainian FC Metalurh Zaporizhya. Here are his appearances in Ukraine, here is a brief review of his career in Brazil -NickK (talk) 21:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Erl

Public Figure -24.67.36.23 (talk) 23:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kristinn Steindórsson

well known international footballer -Haddino (talk) 00:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Halldór Orri Björnsson

world famous salmon celebration -194.144.3.195 (talk) 01:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Either you're joking or you somehow got confused about which page you were requesting undeletion of. While the page was deleted through a prod, which would normally be granted here, since the page was about a footballer and not a "salmon celebration", you're going to need to clarify your request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images linked from Banknotes of the Indonesian rupiah

An edit war recently raged at Banknotes of the Indonesian rupiah over how many fair use images can be used in the article, resulting in the page being protected until May 25 on a version without the images. Alas, this rendered the vast majority of the images orphans, resulting in them being nuked on May 20. There is a host of discussions all over the place on the copyright status of the images, which may in fact all be PD or free (see eg. [1], [2], [3]), as well as an RFC on how many fair use banknotes are acceptable; but in the meantime, can we restore the images under their original fair use license, and ideally ensure that they're not nuked as orphans for at least a month of two? The lost images are linked in from this revision. Jpatokal (talk) 12:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for posting this-the edit warring by the problematic admin is getting old.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on a moment... wouldn't it be better to remember what version had them all linked, and then undelete them only when the RFC concludes? Undeleting them now is likely to lead to the edit war's resumption. Courcelles 12:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The topic of the edit war was whether the images should be linked into the article. This is distinct from the fact that the images exist, and keeping the images deleted means that they cannot be used anywhere else either, or retagged as free content if consensus so decides (and it's increasingly looking like that's the case). Jpatokal (talk) 04:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dan Ownby.jpg

OTRS permission confirmed, ticket ticket:2011052510000913. This file was deleted a day after I tagged it with {{OTRS received}}... -– Adrignola talk 14:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You noted therein "(OTRS received but no permission confirmed)" - as I don't have OTRS access I can't see the ticket - so is it confirmed or not? Skier Dude (talk) 05:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for posting this-as the uploader, I received a copy, but being new to this, I have no idea what I am looking at or what information is needed.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:51, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The OTRS wasn't confirmed at the time; I was waiting for a response. When I got the correct response, I went back to tag it as confirmed and it was deleted. Therefore I request the undeletion. – Adrignola talk 19:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done please confirm it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gray Plant Mooty

The article was deleted in 2008 by User:Lifebaka but the article was about a law firm that does exist - not sure why it was deleted. The firm's Web site is www.gpmlaw.com. Sent a request to the user to undelete the article but the request was unsuccessful. -207.67.87.22 (talk) 15:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ontario Pioneer Camp

Ontario Pioneer Camp is an established organization with a great reputation for providing an exceptional camping experience. I do not understand why it was deleted. -76.224.4.176 (talk) 02:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done No doubt that this is a positive experience, but it is neither notable, covered extensively in third party reliable sources, nor is it even referenced. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a directory of services, but is an encyclopedia. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gudda Gudda

This page was for an artist of one of the biggest rap groups in hip-hop today, Young money. It was deleted because some of the admins said he wasn't notable enough. As of now I don't believe thats true anymore for multible reasons. One being he's been in three music videos that were highly popular, Bed rock, Every girl and I don't like the look of it. And another being he's on multiple tracks for Young money, Lil wayne(Albums "Rebirth" and "I'm not a human being" as far as I know) and Birdman. He also has two mix-tapes with artists from young money like Lil wayne, short dawg, t-streets and nicki minaj. and other artists, one of which being waka flocka. he also has a collab album with artist lil flip and has been featured in a lot of other songs music videos. I also think its very unfair that he can't have his own wiki page but other artists from young money can that have the exact same popularity. Being a fan of him myself I would love to see for him to have his own page. thank you -Lightyagamixryuk (talk) 03:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gudda Gudda, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Tone (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review.

Oops, didn't see that. sorry, I'm new. Thank you ^_^

Oprahnization

article was deleted before I had the chance to contest it. Reasons may have been that it wasn't a complete article, but I did not have the proper material to complete it. But now after the Oprah show is canceled this will have a larger audience. This is not the same term or meaning as Oprahization, the later refers to Oprah's effect on the public, the former, mine, refers to the public's affect on Oprah. Would at least like to know why it was deleted. -BuzzWindrip (talk) 03:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the term is "yours" as in invented and used only by you, take a look at WP:OR. Jpatokal (talk) 11:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done See WP:NEO as well (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Slots

This is one of the rarest games for the NES (nintendo entertainment system), it regularly sells for $1000 or more. It has a rich history in video game history. It is a pornographic game, BUT the other two games usually associated with it DO have their own wiki pages, namely Bubble Bath Babes and Peek-A-Boo Poker. This was deleted 5 years ago and no reason for its deletion appears. Also the person who deleted it appears to be taking a political stance on their profile instead of an objective view of information (hard to tell because it is in a different language). -67.225.52.63 (talk) 17:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ordinarily I would just undelete this as a contested PROD but frankly the content isn't worth restoring. The text read "Hot Slots is a NES gambling game where the player gets to play slot machines with lovely girls like Frances. If the player wins a lot of money, then that player gets to see a girlie show with a special saying in English. If the player loses all of his money, he doesn't get a girly show and it's Game Over for him.". Feel free to go create some content instead. Spartaz Humbug! 17:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ing.E.Filipovic Co. & Holding LLC

The user was unaware of many of the rules for using Wikipedia. After being blocked, the author had some of the rules explained to him. We have discussed on his talk page, and he will be creating the article at User:ErwinFilipovic/Ing.E.Filipovic Co. & Holding LLC. He would like to have the content of the page that was deleted restored in his userspace draft. If you have any questions you can point them to me or the author. Thank you -Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, it seems like the page will be promotional, and I think he needs a new username, but I didn't think there would be any harm in having him work on it in a userspace draft. He stated that he worked for hours on the page, are you able to find more edits he made on deleted pages? Maybe he created it more than once. Ryan Vesey (talk) 18:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If he worked for hours on 3 lines of text, then he's not someone I would ever hire :-) He's now convinced you and I do do even more work than has even put into the article. Oh, and please note on my talkpage edit notice where it says not to use tb templates (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:46, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I used easy talkback with Twinkle. Ryan Vesey (talk) 19:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Top right Prime screengrab.png

OTRS permission confirmed; ticket 2011052510010813. -– Adrignola talk 23:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)  Done can you sort out the tagging and sources? Thanks. Spartaz Humbug! 06:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:László Nagy Bronze Wolf Carl XVI Gustaf.jpg

this is in fact a historic photograph, the deletionist did not notify any relevant parties that there was a deletion discussion. Contested deletion. -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:47, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Files for deletion#File:László Nagy Bronze Wolf Carl XVI Gustaf.jpg, no one argued to keep it, but if you can prove the argument there is wrong it would be best to have a word to the deleting admin. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I got it, as I said above, nobody bothered to tell me (the uploader) that there was a deletion discussion, so of course nobody argued to keep it. Have asked the deleting admin, waiting to hear back. Then what?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As always, if it goes through any form of xFD process, you take it to WP:DRV. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

University of California Anti-Chinese racism

My article was deleted early, so I don't have the latest version. -CallawayRox (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done There have been too many attempts using different article names to have this WP:NOTNEWS event as an encyclopedic page. Two unrelated incidents do not make an encylopedic topic, and POV-pushing cannot continue, even in userspace. This article was deleted via WP:AFD, and could not be undeleted here anyway. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:57, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Deletion review says to request here. "The article restored to your userspace so you can work on it to attempt to address the problems that led to deletion." CallawayRox (talk) 18:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and you have requested it. The request was, quite rightly, declined. There is no way of addressing the problems that led to deletion, because the subject is not suitable for an article, as has been explained at length in various places. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Religion, Inc. (film)

Expired PROD. Requesting this be restored to my userspace; I can move it back to mainspace once I've added the sources I've found. -28bytes (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apollonia_Vanova

Was deleted under PROD, claiming subject of page was only known for one minor role. A quick check on IMDB confirms the subject of the page has appeared in several TV series and at least 4 feature films. -71.191.73.10 (talk) 22:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

VelekaGrayIn1985.jpg

<i.The photo that was deleted was titled VelekaGrayIn1985.jpg I am asking for it to be undeleted and posted at Veleka Gray's page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veleka_Gray since there is no photo of her there, and I took that picture. You can contact Veleka Gray on Facebook and ask her. Her Facebook page is http://www.facebook.com/veleka -FairchildFilm (talk) 04:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is clearly a professional image so it needs to be registered with our online permission team. Please see Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials; Instructions releasing images and licenses and sources are there. I am sorry that you are finding this hard but as a free project wikipedia has to be very careful that none of the material we host infringes the rights/licenses of other people. Spartaz Humbug! 04:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

G4L - Disk Imaging

reasoning -Msetzerii (talk) 13:11, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I am the current maintainer of the g4l project that does disk imaging. It has been listed in a few locations on wikipedia, but the link to G4L goes to an artist that seems to be a link related to Gangster 4 Life from what I recall...

I was looking at adding some updated info, but if it is just going to be deleted, then I am just wasting my time to even start.

 Not done The article reason given for deletion was "Article that has no meaningful, substantive content", and indeed it had no significant content other than links to 2 download sites, so the reason given was perfectly valid. Wikipedia articles do not exist to promote projects or provide download links. You should also consider that you appear to have a conflict of interest and are therefore probably not the right person to write an article about it, and consider whether or not the article satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:34, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wisteria Event Campground

The Wisteria Event Campground article was deleted under speedy deletion for not specifying why it was notable. The text of the article, prior to deletion, specified that Wisteria Event Campground hosts the largest pagan festival in the eastern United States, the Starwood Festival every year, along with the X-Day festival. Both of those festivals are considered notable and have pages about them, so therefore the site at which both of them are held is also notable. Clearly the site of the largest pagan festival in the eastern United States, Wisteria Event Campground, is notable. The former site of both of these events, Brushwood Folklore Center, has an article about it and is considered notable, even though its biggest events have all now moved to Wisteria. Clearly the speedy deletion for not being notable was an incorrect decision. -Yetisyny (talk) 13:39, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • See WP:NOTINHERITED. Does this location meet the WP:GNG? Undeleting this just for eventual deletion as non-notable seems a waste of your and our contributors' time.... Spartaz Humbug! 13:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well like I said, it is the site of the largest pagan festival in the eastern United States, which is verifiable if you look at the website of the Starwood Festival: [4]. The Church of the SubGenius also has information about their upcoming X-Day festival there on several websites, such as subgenius.com and modemac.com, and there is a detailed description of Wisteria at modemac.com: [5]. Obviously Wisteria is more notable than Brushwood Folklore Center, given that Brushwood is just the former site of these 2 events which have been held for many years and draw thousands of people. All of the mentions that Starwood Festival has gotten for 2010 and 2011 and all of the mentions that X-Day has gotten for 2011 have obviously had to mention what location people need to go to, namely Wisteria. Anyway, it says right on the website of the eastern U.S.'s largest pagan festival that it is held at Wisteria every year. That is verifiable. It is fairly obvious to me that it meets the notability guidelines you linked to. Look at the article Brushwood Folklore Center for an example of a similar article about a place where pagan festivals are held, in fact the article about where Starwood and X-Day used to be held before they moved to Wisteria. I have not found as many sources for the Wisteria article yet, because I had just started it when it got deleted, and didn't have time to get that far. --Yetisyny (talk) 14:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK I am looking up more sources to document Wisteria Event Campground. The Athens News, a local newspaper in southeastern Ohio, has it listed here: [6]. Subgenius.com mentions it as the location for X-Day here: [7]. There is a page about it on the website of Witches' Voice Inc.: [8]. It has a page on PaganSpace, but apparently that is just a social networking site: [9]. The Susan B. Anthony Coven, a witches' coven, has a post about Wisteria here: [10]. Pagansearch.net has it on a page about pagan festivals: [11]. About.com has an article on them here: [12]. Americanneopaganism.com has a list of links with descriptions and Wisteria is one of them: [13]. Reberbnation.com has them listed as a site for musical events: [14]. Faeriefaith.net has a list of pagan festivals and mentions several at Wisteria: [15]. OK so I found all of those sources using Google. I think being mentioned on About.com is probably the most notable of those sources. Anyway, so far Starwood has been held at Wisteria once, and X-Day is at Wisteria for the first time this summer, and this summer is also the second time Starwood will be there. I can try and find more sources if you wish, but it is rather difficult to find good sources, as most people are not into paganism and paganism is kind of a subculture, so it is mostly just pagan websites that mention this sort of thing. There are probably sources in printed newspaper articles and such, but those would not be online so I have not found any yet. Still, it is the site of the largest pagan festival in the eastern United States. The reason the Starwood Festival is not described as the largest pagan festival in the United States on its Wikipedia page is that some people claim that the even bigger Burning Man festival out west is pagan, but Burning Man's status as being pagan is highly doubtful. Regardless, it is clear that among the pagan community, Wisteria is a very important and well-known location, even if the rest of society is not interested in pagan festivals. Pagan festivals are covered on Wikipedia, so it is natural to include the site of the largest one in the eastern U.S. If you disagree about the notability of Wisteria, then please tell me why there is a page about Brushwood Folklore Center and why it is considered notable. If you do not think Wisteria should have a page about it on Wikipedia, then by that logic, Brushwood Folklore Center should be deleted from Wikipedia too, or else your policies are inconsistent. --Yetisyny (talk) 15:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Note that the existence of other articles does not constitute a valid argument for the retention of this one. You can nominate the other article for deletion on the same grounds, and we will examine your nomination with no regard to this article's existence or non-existence. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List_of_prepaid_mobile_phone_brands

1) Deleted without any debate. 2) Misapplication of WP:NOT. “Wikipedia is not a sales catalog or directory.” This page does not meet any of the listed reasons for deletion at WP:NOTDIRECTORY. 3) This is an important navigation page that bridges to other WP pages. This deletion dead ends the Prepaid_mobile_phone page. Without this list I can no longer navigate to the companies the page is about. Deletion fails to recognize that different people navigate WP in different ways. I use such bridge pages frequently to navigate to other WP pages. -Tpiwowar (talk) 18:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Karis_Paige_Bryant

I think the article Karis_Paige_Bryant should be undeleted because she was in credits briefly in season 2 of charmed. Neptunekh2 (talk) 04:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Myopia (band)

article was thoroughly cited in several languages, group is still together and current. -69.183.180.209 (talk) 20:10, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conduit (publisher network and platform)

The article was deleted for no apparent reason other than one user's inaccurate and seemingly biased belief that the "software" outlined in the article was a virus. This is far from true, of course, and the entry I built was supported by a dossier of credible and legitimate references (none of which painted Conduit as a "virus"). The user in question then created a "Conduit (virus)" page, which he / she then used as a redirect source for the original "Conduit (network and publisher platform)" page. This made no sense and I said as much, removing the deletion template the user had placed on the entry. He later reverted my edit and the "Conduit (virus)" page was deleted (no problem, since Conduit is not a virus), along with the original, useful and accurate "Conduit (network and publisher page)". The "Conduit (network and publisher platform)" page was in accordance with Wiki guidelines and should not have been deleted (the admin who deleted also seemed to do so hastily and unnecessarily). Please help here! -Beobjectiveplease (talk) 21:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=431718554"