Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 77.246.51.220 (talk) at 11:13, 27 April 2013 (→romio ndalama: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Welcome. Please note that 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 or files that were uncontroversially deleted via proposed deletion, under certain speedy deletion criteria (such as maintenance deletions or rejected Articles for creation drafts), 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 deletion 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 or files 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 discuss but 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
Please enter the page's title to request its undeletion:

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

Poecilotheria rajaei

Article was deleted because "it was created by a sock or a blocked user", however the article should stand on its own merit, not how it was created. This article is about a new species of tarantula that is notable in itself and had reliable references, and multiple editors. -Martin451 (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has now created this as a redirect to the generic page for Poecilotheria, however I still request the undeletion. The speedy criteria template:db-g5 should not apply as the article had enough subtantial edits.Martin451 (talk) 08:11, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:24, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Ospina

Review, in order to add sources for Verifiability of subject and content -Iospin (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

cycen fjodr

Undeletion would be optimal so that Cycen Fjodr page could be updated to reflect the importance of the organization. Administrator(s) for the article stated there there was no proof of significance of the organization due to a lack of web searchable sources. Physical Sources in the SMU library which reflect the significance of the organization have since been found confirming importance of the organization.. -Goodoleboy1920 (talk) 19:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Goodoleboy1920 (talk) 19:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)goodoleboy1920[reply]

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Goodoleboy1920/Cycen Fjodr. You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact Peridon (talk · contribs), the administrator who deleted the page, before moving it back to the article space. Please see the criteria for speedy deletion and the relevant notability guidelines - articles that are not in compliance will be deleted. Student organizations cannot often show independent notability, which requires references showing coverage from outside the University environment, and are usually better covered by a mention in the University article. Read Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines, especially the section Student life. JohnCD (talk) 20:32, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Gurdjieff Journal

Originally this article was deleted because of the two following automated reasonings: 1. It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. 2. It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. The Gurdjieff Journal is published trianually and has been in continuous publication since it's establishment in 1992. It is the first journal devoted to G.I. Gurdjieff and The Fourth Way. Included in every issue are timely feature articles, essays, interviews and book and film reviews expounding and applying the principles, perspectives and practices of the teaching to everyday living. It is a mature journal standing on it's own as do similar journals like Parabola (magazine), Christianity Today, etc, yet carries no advertising which tends to influence what is written to appease advertisers. Also, I have an expanded version to fill out the article notating all the issues, images of critical issues, etc. -Waterman12 (talk) 05:34, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article does read as spam. It needs to be written from a neutral point of view and requires referencing to independent third-party reliable sources to both show notability and verify the information content. That being said, the article has never been deleted and so there's nothing to ask for here. The article has only been redirected.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not done (procedural) Lectonar (talk) 11:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tribe of Frog

This is a notable organization in Bristol, I am sure that I can improve it's sourcing to become a reasonable article and was not given time to due to an accidental block. -TheGreenPhantom talk 13:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zombie kit

This is a very popular term now with several major manufacturers like Gerber producing Zombie kits. -TheGreenPhantom talk 13:32, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jewcake

Not an attack page. Just a pastry. Can improve sourcing. -TheGreenPhantom talk 13:36, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Filopateer Maged

This page should not be deleted because it discusses an important person in Egypt who is a young musician -Filo 17198 (talk) 14:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about people. 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 people 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. Also, Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves. JohnCD (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

reasoning -Georgeanton (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


This is a message from George Anton for the wikipedia editors:

Do you really believe this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/George_Anton some idiot

is more relevant than I?

Bullshit!

I'm #1 and the FIRST YouTube Movie Producer IN THE WORLD

Show me another one.

oh, you can't hahahaha

because there is none but me I SHAPE PUBLICS OPINION


George Anton Hollywood Film Director <email redacted>

www.YouTube.com/AntonPictures

Not done - Wikipedia is not a place for you to shape public opinion about yourself, see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. This article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about people. 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 people 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. JohnCD (talk) 20:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Reason is that it is about a person which has given me rights to copy paste details from his website & it is about that person who is Dj famous in Queens NY -m^-_eema**S 08:29, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done - this page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Favonian (talk) 09:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_D._Christenbury

personal records -IvanB85 (talk) 19:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


IvanB85 (talk) 19:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to be emailed the content of the deleted article? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:59, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Florida Georgia Line.png

Falsely tagged as unfree. Flickr linked showed that it was clearly licensed per Creative Commons, thus making it acceptable for use. -Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:22, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Randy Houser.png

Falsely tagged as unfree. Flickr linked showed that it was clearly licensed per Creative Commons, thus making it acceptable for use. -Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:22, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Gerencser

Creator is making a good faith attempt to secure sources. (I am the guy who called for the speedy delete; creator is User:kengilmour.) please userfy to him. -Nat Gertler (talk) 21:43, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Kengilmour/Bruce Gerencser. You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact RHaworth (talk · contribs), the administrator who deleted the page, before moving it back to the article space. Please see the criteria for speedy deletion and the relevant notability guidelines - articles that are not in compliance will be deleted; also, read carefuly the important policies WP:Biographies of living persons and WP:Neutral point of view. JohnCD (talk) 09:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. I see the deleting admin has emailed the text but declined to userfy, and re-reading the article I can see why. Will explain on Kengilmour's talk page. JohnCD (talk) 09:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trevor Coleman

deleted because subject was non-notable because subject is not the subject of source articles. The standard for notability, though, specifically states that that the subject need not be the main topic of the source material. Even so, sources included a profile of the subject in a major newspaper as well as interviews with the subject in high profile media - WIRED, CNN.com etc. -198.84.235.45 (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Doctorspectronic (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. JohnCD (talk) 09:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Frank

Curious as to why this page was deleted. I am not associated with Mr. Frank, but am an avid reader of his work and the site he edits, CounterPunch, which is also a monthly magazine. The site is one of the most popular left-wing political magazines in the United States. As such, this alone is notable as Frank's place in this spectrum is significant. Please visit's CounterPunch's page for verification of this assessment. Additionally, Frank has been awarded journalism awards and is often cited as a significant environmental journalist. I believe the references I used as well as the external articles I linked verify this. Please review. reasoning -Counterp (talk) 17:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at WP:Articles_for_deletion/Joshua_Frank_(4th_nomination), it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, 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. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

William J. McCormack (businessman)

This article is of an historical biography and contains original as well as properly sourced information. Any photographs assoicated with the article are either linked from existing wikipedia pages or is noninfringing fair use. -Smarticvs (talk) 18:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment:. This page is for requests about articles which have been deleted, and this one has not. The notices on your talk page about the unclear copyright status of two images give a link to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions and that is where you should explain why you believe these images are copyright-free or fulfil all the ten requirements of WP:NFCCP. JohnCD (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

🙈🙉🙊

Deleted under R3, which is for typos and misnomers, but this was an alternative spelling, not a typo or misnomer. That is, R3 is for titles that people use in error, not for accurate titles, however rare or unusual. (For those who can't see, this was a redirect to three wise monkeys. — The Great Redirector 19:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wilkinsons...The Opticians

I have no idea why it was banned I don't work for them and people should know about the brand it offers a little bit of history and some interesting facts. It is unfair to segregate smaller chains like that when you are working towards an infinite database of knowledge. -Dreppi (talk) 21:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilkinsons...the Opticians, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Bbb23 (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. JohnCD (talk) 22:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leaseurope

reasoning -Head of Communications (talk) 14:36, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. Written like an advertisement to boot, and your username leads me to provide this link to our policy regarding conflict of interest. Lectonar (talk) 14:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Greeting Time

This is a fairly widespread phenomenon on Internet Relay Chat (IRC) and some other forms of online chat. It was established as a way to prevent the the lines of text generated every time a user entered a chatroom with some form of day-time greeting, and every other user in a different time-zone pointed this out. -213.57.140.57 (talk) 18:25, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Lectonar (talk) 18:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Centaurus Racing Team

I believe that this article is about a group which many people want to know about. Furthermore, this group is publishing its scientific findings on automotive technology, so it is significant to exist as an article in wikipedia. Last but not least, this group has the same target as this: E-Team Squadra Corse which is not be deleted. Thank you for your attendance. -George.anadiotis (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. For your other question: see WP:Otherstuffexists, this is not an argument against the deletion of this article. Lectonar (talk) 09:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kurtis Mucha

Article was deleted via proposed deletion. Subject is now notable per NHOCKEY as he has been named the CIS Goaltender of the year and has also been named to the 2012-13 CIS All-Canadian First Team. -Dolovis (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Lectonar (talk) 07:31, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

William Karlsson

Please restore edit history for this recently re-created article. -Dolovis (talk) 01:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. JohnCD (talk) 11:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John Kurtz

Contested PROD -Dolovis (talk) 01:25, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Lectonar (talk) 07:36, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Olympics-hidy-howdy.jpg

file was speedy deleted and shortcircuited a deletion discussion at WP:PUF. The file on commons is up for deletion, and will be deleted, since it require a fair use rationale to use the copyrighted IP of the mascot image. It is unreasonable to delete every file on Wikipedia when the commons version is up for deletion and the Wikipedia file can be used as fairuse. -70.24.250.103 (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done image was restored -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 09:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Philscan

this is a company profile page -Dvaedc3 (talk) 05:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. Lectonar (talk) 07:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Drew Shore

Please restore the edit history for this recently re-created article. -Dolovis (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Day Pitney LLP is one of the largest law firms serving the U.S. Northeast region. The firm has been referenced in several wiki articles such as this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Caligiuri and should have a stand-alone page of its own in Wikipedia as well. The firm is one of oldest firms in New Jersey and Connecticut and numerous prominent legal professionals have worked or are still working at the firm during its more than 100 years of existence, including U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, U.S. District Judge Stefan R. Underhill for the District of Connecticut and, most recently, U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos, whose appointment to the Southern District of New York was confirmed by the Senate in December 2011. No one at the firm currently knows the reason behind the deletion of the firm's article on Wikipedia. We would be more than happy to answer any questions -Xkobylarz (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Day Pitney, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Cirt (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. Oh, and have a look at our policy regarding conflict of interest. Lectonar (talk) 17:52, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren_Weinstein_(technologist)

He is in fact quite notable in the technology world as an expert in many subjects regarding technology, with privacy at the top. He's being quoted regularly in the news/articles/magazines or interviewed on the radio. He's also (or was, not sure) a WIRED columnists. Last, but not least, he has 300K followers on Google+! -78.23.54.230 (talk) 20:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

reasoning -Jason.Frisvold (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren is a well known technologist, widely quoted through the industry. I question why this page was deleted in this manner.

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:10, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Weinstein (technologist)

Believe deletion to be an error. -Oshanruizofficial (talk) 21:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren_Weinstein_(technologist)

Believe deletion to be an error. -8.193.45.199 (talk) 21:37, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Villiers Quartet

reasoning -Stan bassford (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please send me the material for this page so I can improve it in readiness for submitting it again. I will add citations and reasons why the quartet deserves a wiki entry. Thanks!

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Stan bassford/Villiers Quartet. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CODE2B

This is an article about our company and we would like to try it create again, because we are new here and didn't read about your policy before. We will overwrite it and this article will be create without advertising or promotion. Thank you. -Livia.merenicova (talk) 08:44, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Therion (software)

Msluka (talk) 10:10, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The nick "Secret" is retired now.

There was an article about software tool for documentation of underground cavities (caves, mines, etc.) named Therion after ancient Greek word "therion" which means big wild dangerous animal living underground. Here is a link to page of Therion software tool: http://therion.speleo.sk.

The article on Wikipedia was deleted as you may see:

23:17, 1 March 2013 Secret (talk | contribs) deleted page Therion (software) (Expired PROD, concern was: No evidence of satisfying the notability guidelines. Several of the references don't mention Therion, and only one does more than briefly mention it.)

I'm absolutely sure no one word of the above sentence of Secret is true! So what was the reason he/she deleted the article about Therion (software)? Is he/she something as a god to delete any article he/she want because of headache or momental bad feeling???

The Therion software tool is widely used around the world. So my meaning is there is a place on Wikipedia for description of it to be published.

On this page is the link to Therion (software): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_survey#Surveying_software

May you check it again please and undelete the article if possible?

Thank you much

Martin Sluka (old caver - born 1954) - you may find me among wikipedian cavers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedian_cavers

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. No, Secret was not a god, he was an administrator carrying out the routine task of deleting articles which have been listed for seven days as proposed for deletion with no objection raised. Articles deleted by that process are automatically restored on request; but I will notify user JamesBWatson (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days to which you would be welcome to contribute. JohnCD (talk) 11:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler Brown

Please restore edit history for this recently re-created article. -Dolovis (talk) 14:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Verve!

this article was not for personal gain, I followed the exact guidelines that the monster energy drink page has and put information in from there. -Ash10bray (talk) 18:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


I believe that this page was taken down by someone who thought I was trying to network market the page for personal gain. I did this Wikipedia page as an English Class assignment because I was really interested in the product. Making the Wikipedia page gave me more information on the product and I really enjoyed it. I did not post any links to my website for the product, I only referenced websites that I recieved information from. Removing this page was wrong because basically copy and pasted the format of the Monster Energy page and then put the Verve! information into the places that the Monster Energy drink was removed.

Not done and will not be done No, this page was taken down because it was indeed, pure and simple advertising for the drink, even incorporating information about how retailers could make gains. This is not about you the question if you have any gain from having having it posted (what gave you that idea?). And it is so nice of you that you did not post a link to your website.....so please see conflict of interest. If this is an English class assignment, well, your teacher has much work to do. Oh, and for the rest, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Lectonar (talk) 18:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Space Station 13

Space Station 13 is a video game, which used to have an article on Wikipedia. The article was deleted in 2005, but the game has received some extra attention since then, possibly meeting wikipedia's notoriety requirement. I don't however know what the article contains, if the contents are bad, I'd request a go-ahead to rewrite it. Some examples of Space Station 13 in press: PCGamesN article, PC Gamer Magazine (April 2013, page 9). Regards, --Errorage (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done....because the article can essentially be found at User:Bluefist/Space Station 13 (the page is just blanked....) Lectonar (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, but it still was Afded before at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Space Station 13, but there was not much more into it. Better make a userspace-draft, and go to WP:DRV. Lectonar (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Angelaamato

reasoning -AngelaAmato 20:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not deleted (yet) ... it's Angela Amato. Please review WP:COI and WP:AUTOBIO before making further edits to that article (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Impact Sourcing

I want to improve the article and resubmit. Plz userfy to my sandbox, or send by email. -Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 05:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - userfied to User:Obiwankenobi/Impact Sourcing. Check with JamesBWatson (talk), the deleting admin, before you return it to the main space. The author Avasant news (talk · contribs) has an evident COI but may be able to help with sourcing. JohnCD (talk) 09:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Belkits

reasoning -Zoeloe (talk) 13:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hi,

can you undo this deletion?

My wiki page belkits has the same information like similar pages from similar companies like tamiya, revell, italeri etc... It is not intend to be commercial, but to inform people about belkits.

Kind regards

Nicolas

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. And please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:COI. Lectonar (talk) 14:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Aigner (Media entrepreneur)

below -The Seraph life from Germany (DISCU/EDITS/MAIL) 16:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As requested, I have located some more reliable sources to recreate the article:

The BLP does meet WP:ENT - He had significant roles in television shows during 12 years on air in germany and austria and by appearing in a total of 650

TV shows.
(Genres: Mainstream, News-oriented, Internet-related and Interpersonally) 1. 580 Shows "sale of the century" on Tele5 germany - reruns on channel tm3 - Proof for this engagement "Hopp oder Top" (sale of the century):
1) http://www.fernsehserien.de/hopp-oder-top
Source: This source is a factual database of all tv-series in germany. Independently organized, and containing facts from "The lexicon of television" written by Stefan Niggemeier, who is still known as one of the most important Media Experts in germany. Summary: It not only explains his work as ENT in 1991/92, but also the next steps of the BLP ||
2) http://chronik.tele5.de/stay_tuned/hopp_oder_top/hopp_oder_top.htm
Source: Online directory, initiated by the tv channel Tele5// Summary: it explains the importance of the show, since the successor of the channel Tele5 (tm3) reran the show because of it's success. ||
3) http://chronik.tele5.de/programm/gamesshow/tirolerin_hopp_oder_top.htm
Source: This source is a newsmagazine in Tyrol // Summary: The editor explains her commitment as contestant and work with the BLP || (The original article has been requested at the source:http://www.tirolerin.at
4) http://kress.de/suchergebnisse/suche/%22Thomas%20Aigner%22.html
Source: This source is one the most relevant media industry magazines (print & Online) in germany // Summary: The search leads to 12 articles, talking about his various tv engagements mentioned in the WP article ||
5) http://youtu.be/l96qYVu6DvA
Source: Video on YouTube - uploaded by individual // Summary: This Video is showing the ComputerGame C64 with BLPs name and graphic animation ||- only for this discussion, to show his status at that time - will not be used in article -
6) http://www.genios.de/dosearch?explicitSearch=true&q=%22hopp+oder+top%22+aigner#-
Source (secondary): Database for all german papers, they publish in print and online: Search for BLP found factual content in "Die Welt", "Berliner Zeitung", "Welt", "Stern" "TV-Media(guide)".
More facts can be delivered as I would have to dig deeper into thearchives of german television.
But hopefully, this will be sufficient. If so, I would go over the article as offered.

---The Seraph life from Germany (DISCU/EDITS/MAIL) 16:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keegen Walsh

reasoning -Drumstar9 (talk) 16:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Marks

Contested PROD -Dolovis (talk) 17:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Looks like it fails NHOCKEY so I have listed it at AFD Spartaz Humbug! 02:55, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Oller

notable actor -Dman41689 (talk) 22:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

he stared on the shows Gigantic and As the Bell Rings and appeared in the films The Purge and Beneath the Darkness and hes a singer in the group MKTO Dman41689 (talk) 22:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Not entirely clear he is sufficiently notable. You need to find some better sourcing or he will be at AFD very soon. Spartaz Humbug! 02:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Five Clove Media

reasoning -Anugupta06 (talk) 07:55, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

romio ndalama

reasoning -77.246.51.220 (talk) 11:13, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

he just discovered the auto dissociation of detegents which was troubling scientists for years

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=552403909"