Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
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. Copyright violations and attack pages will not be provided at all.
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 in 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.
- Instructions for special cases
- G13. Abandoned Articles for creation submissions - see Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13 for instructions.
To contest deletions that have have already been discussed (in particular, at Articles for deletion), or that are likely to be controversial, please make a request at Wikipedia:Deletion review instead. |
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Angel Sessions
I would like to request for undeletion of Angel Sessions article. I have fixed the issue by completely removing the bio on the IMDB site that caused the deletion. After reviewing the issue I now understand why this happened. Thank you. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1594651/bio " button below -Demetrius Guidry (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2015 (UTC) Demetrius Guidry (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done I believe you would be talking about Draft:Angel Sessions. Copyright still applies even if the original copy is destroyed. You are welcome to write this in different words, or if it was you that wrote the IMDB content, then you can add a note on IMDB using the same id that created the writeup in the first place that the content is CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL licensed as well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello Graeme. Since the IMDB article has been deleted. I can reinstate it and then add at the end of the article that it is CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL licensed as well. Is just adding that statement enough to reinstate my original article that was deleted? Or, is there a form I need to fill out? Lastly, may I create the original article using the code I saved and go from there?. Thanks.
Demetrius Guidry (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- You can recreate Draft:Angel Sessions if you rewrite it in new original language. You don't have to label Wikipedia text as CC-BY-SA-3.0, because when you click save you have agreed to that license anyway. It is the IMDB text that would need to be licensed that way for you to copy it here. So far it is not clear if you are the author for the IMDB text or not. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Batch Premium Gin
It is a bonafide product with placement in Majestic Wine shops in and around Winchester, also in bars, pubs and also to debut in London next month. It is entered into two world class gin festivals / competitions and is demonstrative of the returning Cottage Industries of the gin industry. -Lucian Sma (talk) 02:32, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Lucian Sma: Not done The article has been nominated for deletion by consensus. You should be improving it to evidence that the subject meets the inclusion guidelines, and then make that point in the deletion discussion. This board is for restoration of material deleted by other means. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 02:47, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
File:Jon & Kate Plus Eight logo.svg
AFAIR this is a text-only logo (as can be seen on Google Images and comparable to the current File:Kate plus 8 logo.svg which is on Commons), so should have been PD, and not a fair-use image. I request that, if my recollection is correct, the image be restored, marked as Public Domain, and transferred to Commons, for use on the history of the show. -65.94.40.137 (talk) 07:18, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done, and I have reset the timer on the di-no-fair-use tag. Suggest you add it to the Jon & Kate Plus 8 article, where it would be at least as appropriate as the existing Kate-only logo; then it would be safe while you organize a transfer to Commons. JohnCD (talk) 20:44, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
(Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tube Bar (album))
I, Tyros1972, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tyros1972 Talk 09:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Tyros1972: Not done - 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 after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tube Bar (album), 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 Spartaz (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) 19:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't around when they deleted all of the Tube Bar albums I worked so hard to create. I believe they are all notable and would like a chance to explain why by adding more sources. Personally I have nothing to gain, the reasons for deletion were selling MP3 and such that is outright false (I am not the owner). I am having a hard time finding the deleted links so as pages are being restored I am requesting them back. They may not be notable, but I would like to try to save them. I was away during that time and busy w/ life so didn't have time to do it. Is there anyway to get this back? Thank you very much for your help. Tyros1972 Talk 07:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Tyros1972:, you could ask @Spartaz: and see if he would restore this and move it to your userspace for you. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:52, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much Tokyogirl79 I left him a message concerning that. Tyros1972 Talk 12:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Tube Bar Collector's Edition
I, Tyros1972, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tyros1972 Talk 09:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Tyros1972: Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user SpyMagician (talk), who proposed it, and it may be nominated at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. JohnCD (talk) 19:27, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hugh Vincent (poker player)
Please userfy page plus talk page -Valoem talk contrib 10:10, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Valoem: Not done - nothing to restore. The deleted article contained one byte, the single character "a", and the talk page was empty. JohnCD (talk) 19:01, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Warnock's dilemma
Hi. :) This page is deleted five days ago through PROD. If the issue is notability alone, we can merge it into WP:SILENCE for our own internal use. Best regards, -Codename Lisa (talk) 15:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Boleyn (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion. Suggest you talk to Boleyn about what to do with it. JohnCD (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Cumulative frequency analysis
Google search for this common tool of mathematics yields 2.9M results, the page was informative and instructive when I last reviewed and reason given was "Non Existing Subject" which I cannot understand -90.201.114.222 (talk) 17:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Nijdam (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) 19:14, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
File:St Gregory's School Main building SGHS.jpg
OTRS e-mail received from author, Ticket no: 2014121310004191 , thanks -Ibrahim.ID »» 02:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done, restored.
@Ibrahim.ID: Please reply to the uploader and clean up the image page with the proper templates. I just tagged it with the OTRS and licensing templates. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks @Amatulic:--Ibrahim.ID »» 05:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amanda Doskocil
(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Micsaintjohn (talk) 05:36, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 06:12, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:45, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Drunk, Dirty and Disgraceful
Was not here when the article was deleted, I believe it is notable -Tyros1972 Talk 07:03, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. @Tyros1972:, if you can't find coverage then a good alternative would be to redirect it to the group's page. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Tube Bar Red's Bootleg Tape (Remastered)
I, Tyros1972, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tyros1972 Talk 07:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Same thing applies here and the next one I'll restore: if you can't find the coverage then just redirect it. I figure there's no reason to re-delete this since it'd be a reasonable enough redirect. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:49, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Tube Bar Prank Calls 35th Anniversary Complete Collection
- Tube Bar Prank Calls 35th Anniversary Complete Collection · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Tyros1972, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tyros1972 Talk 07:29, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:49, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
File:Union Internationale des Guides et Scouts d'Europe.svg
- File:Union Internationale des Guides et Scouts d'Europe.svg · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
maybe should have been deleted from offspring articles, but should not have been deleted from parent article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Union_of_Guides_and_Scouts_of_Europe . And yes, I have seen the deletion discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review/Archive_58#File:Union_Internationale_des_Guides_et_Scouts_d.27Europe.svg . Limiting use to the parent article would have saved the image in the first place, instead of deleting it wholesale. -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Template:Tube Bar Albums
I, Tyros1972, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tyros1972 Talk 13:25, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done That is not an AFC submission, it's a template deleted at WP:TFD. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:02, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Real Time Action Technology
I have re-written my article based on feedback and requested that it be reactivated, but every time it's reinstated, it's deleted again before I have the opportunity to edit it. I would appreciate the article being reactivated for 48 hours so that I have an opportunity to replace the current text with what I have already prepared. -B2Btechguy (talk) 15:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done The correct process for this is to create a draft in your userspace (or the draft namespace) and then submit a deletion review here. As per the notice at the top of this page, AFDs are not restored here. AFD deletions are binding and require consensus before recreation. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:05, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
ShqiperiaCom Shpk
I find the speedy deletion of this article unfair. A lot of time and energy was spend in creating it and it provided some valuable information. I am willing to discuss and improve the article further and will welcome advice by older editors, but I find the speedy deletion arbitrary and far from Wikipedia and knowledge management values. Thank you for the evaluation of this request Al-punk (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC) -Al-punk (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion a7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion. If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Vienna In Love (band)
I, VIL12345678, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. VIL12345678 (talk) 23:12, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- @VIL12345678: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:42, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Leo Stolz
Hermann trophy winner, all winners have a wiki page the "Save page" button below -Elopez76 (talk) 04:37, 17 January 2015 (UTC) Hermann trophy winner
- Not done This isn't really the right page for this. It's up for a speedy deletion as a re-creation of an article deleted at AfD, so the best place to contest this would be on the article's talk page (which you have already done). If it is deleted then you'll have to bring it up with the admin that closed the AfD (User:Joe Decker) and if he declines to restore it then you will have to go through deletion review. Just on a glance it looks like the AfD determined that the Hermann Trophy wasn't a large enough award to really give absolute notability (meaning that they'd keep on that basis alone), so you will have to assert notability through more than just the trophy win. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Fat B Dat G
I, Eleyejah, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Eleyejah (talk) 13:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:48, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy
- Talk:WikiProject Astronomy · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
Avoiding scrutiny and consensus. -Arianewiki1 (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
User Tetra quark has placed an archievetop on section "Capitalize the "U" in "universe" or not?", to seemingly openly avoid scrutiny of his AWB changes in which there has been no agreed consensus. Furthermore, the User is falsely claiming "This is turning into personal attacks." to somehow justify the deletion. Any reverting the insertion of this item again would likely violate the 3 edit rule, which I want to avoid..
Note: There currently a further Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard on the possible misuse of AWB, which Tetra quark is aware, but this is not related to this archievetop issue.
(If I've done something wrong here, my sincere apologies, but I could seem to find the solution to solve this problem. Thank you. Arianewiki1 (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- There is nothing deleted here, you just have the wrong page, it is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy. Not only that, but the close is already reverted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:46, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry. I've clearly made a mistake. (I've never had to do this before.) However, regarding the reversion, the use of archievetop,was by Tetra quark to limit conversation on something that was presumably in discussion. Q. Should I have broken the three edit run, OR attempted some other action that I am unaware of? The Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard has stumbled to some kind of consensus, but this wasn't the case when this was posted. This is a clear violation here, as the Editor was deliberately justifying a false premise to take such provocative action. Surely, using archievetop this way is detrimental to basic editing and debate? Having "the close is already reverted", implies Tetra quark is likely at fault, and should be warned. It is hardly in the spirit of editing. Arianewiki1 (talk) 23:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Actually. Q. What should have been my course action in this instance? Arianewiki1 (talk) 23:37, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- It is best not to get into a revert war over this sort of thing. Instead you should have just opened up a new section on that same talk page to raise the issue. I would have reverted the discussion close myself if I came across it. This is because someone with a conflict of interest in a controversial discussion should not close it themselves. Keep calm and no need to raise the debate to higher more heated level. It is best if it can be sorted out all in one discussion board rather than raised in many places. This board is for requesting undelete of things that are deleted by an administrator. Not for general revert requests. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- I won't address your sentences before "actually", that can be for the dispute resolution board. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:53, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Douglas Campbell (Michigan politician)
- Douglas Campbell (Michigan politician) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]
The reason cited for the deletion was, "Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable political candidate." The article may have previously been given the noncontroversial delete prod, and had it removed. Since this is a one time process, the more recent prod would be improper. In the event that this deletion was proper, this user would like to view the edit history and article content since it may still be appropriate to merge some of the content into a larger article, such as the "Michigan gubernatorial election, 2006." -Libertyguy (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Libertyguy: Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I only show a single PROD deletion on the article. There is no restriction on the number of times an article may be deleted via PROD, the restriction is that a PROD may not be re-applied once it has been contested. However, deletion sorta resets the clock on that. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:09, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- @FreeRangeFrog: Thank You - Can you clarify what you mean by, "However, deletion sorta resets the clock on that."--Libertyguy (talk) 23:42, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- If an article is PRODed and de-PRODed then PROD cannot be applied again to it. That's spelled out in the policy. However, let's assume that the PROD is never contested, the article is deleted, then recreated or undeleted through here. There is no injunction against PRODing it again, since it's a "new" instance of the article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:52, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- @FreeRangeFrog:Thank you for your quick answer. I found a discussion from 2006 where the outcome of the discussion (Here: Talk:Michigan_gubernatorial_election,_2006#Douglas_Campbell) was Not to merge. Would that make the recent PROD out of order? If not, would this prevent a future merge?--Libertyguy (talk) 01:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Libertyguy: I wouldn't say the PROD was out of order, the merge discussion (either way) doesn't affect whether an article is appropriate or not. Realistically only an AFD does that. And I mean, it's been nine years... surely some stuff has changed since then? Maybe the guy merits a full article now. That's for you to decide. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @FreeRangeFrog:Thank you for your quick answer. I found a discussion from 2006 where the outcome of the discussion (Here: Talk:Michigan_gubernatorial_election,_2006#Douglas_Campbell) was Not to merge. Would that make the recent PROD out of order? If not, would this prevent a future merge?--Libertyguy (talk) 01:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- If an article is PRODed and de-PRODed then PROD cannot be applied again to it. That's spelled out in the policy. However, let's assume that the PROD is never contested, the article is deleted, then recreated or undeleted through here. There is no injunction against PRODing it again, since it's a "new" instance of the article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:52, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- @FreeRangeFrog: Thank You - Can you clarify what you mean by, "However, deletion sorta resets the clock on that."--Libertyguy (talk) 23:42, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Leo Stolz (2nd request)
hy is Leo Stolz deleted he won the national Hermann trophy and all Herman winners have a wiki page, please put back. No explanation as to why deleted, a lot of sources in article, please explain.• Elopez76 (talk) -Elopez76 (talk) 20:58, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done You received an explanation above. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Lordville-Equinunk Bridge
Was there anything substantial here? The deletion summary is unhelpful. -NE2 01:07, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- The most it ever had was a redirect to Equinunk, Pennsylvania. The reason the deletion nominator attempted to give was "no logical page to redirect empty page to". There is nothing worth restoring. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:09, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. --NE2 07:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tao Stein
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tao Stein · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Jessieljn, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jessieljn (talk) 03:41, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:09, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Jupiter Zeus
I, Fudnoms, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Fudnoms (talk) 06:09, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:13, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Claudio Encarnación Montero
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Claudio Encarnación Montero · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, 186.6.27.52, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 186.6.27.52 (talk) 10:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:03, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Ashley the Gorgeous
Who are you to decide who is "important" and unimportant? Everything I created under the page about Ashley is factual and the fact that I am creating a Wiki Page at one in the morning means she is important to me. Perhaps your terms of service need some maintenance and tweak it to reflect equality. I apologize that she isn't Joan of Arc or Aphrodite, she is Ashley. You shouldn't delete the page just because she hasn't accomplished anything significant on the Global scale, sometimes it is okay to focus on the smaller scales too. -MattyAbrahamsen (talk) 13:34, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @MattyAbrahamsen: Not done and will not be done. This is project to build a serious encyclopedia, and that means it is selective about subjects. It is not a social-networking site for people to write about themselves and their friends. Try Facebook. JohnCD (talk) 14:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- <snip> (e/c) Hi Matty, sorry but that was an utterly inappropriate page. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a compendium of knowledge. You mistake where you are for some social networking/anything goes forum where indiscriminate musings on random topics can stay. It was actually deleted as a test page under (section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion), rather than under the two bases it was nominated for deletion under: Failure to assert importance or significance (A7) and blatant promotion (G11), although I would have deleted it under both.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:54, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Phenom Placement Consultant
1.) No Promotional Material 2.) Client Name/ Turnover of Company not disclosed 3.) All facts are supported by reference links 4.)Purpose of creating page is to keep updated the categories such as 1.) Companies in India 2.) Employment agencies in India -Ashishca07 (talk) 14:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: I am involved so leave it for others. Some related discussion at my talk page here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- 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. JohnCD (talk) 16:59, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Walid Abdallah
I, 86.6.46.228, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 86.6.46.228 (talk) 15:42, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Check out WP:Your first article (note the need for references) and WP:ENTERTAINER. JohnCD (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Vasile Baghiu
I, Vasiba, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Vasiba (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Vasiba: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 18:26, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Thasnai Sethaseree
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Thasnai (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Thasnai: 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.
- Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves - please read WP:Autobiography. JohnCD (talk) 18:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:User:Scalhotrod/Danica Dillon
- Wikipedia talk:User:Scalhotrod/Danica Dillon · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Scalhotrod, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Scalhotrod: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Moved to Draft:Danica Dillon per AFC guidelines. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:16, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks! Just for reference, I'm basically waiting for this person to win a major award which would automatically qualify her Notability. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:23, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Scalhotrod: You're welcome. Would it be OK for me to delete the original location? It's totally in the wrong place. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:28, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Oghenetega B. Fadiniyi
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Capotega (talk) 18:27, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Capotega: Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion. If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:29, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Anna Thomson
Anna Thomson; This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 12:08, 22 October 2014 Euryalus deleted page Anna Thomson (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable minor performer; fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.222.177.134 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Wikipedical (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) 20:17, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Greater Hull
Before writing my article, i looked long and hard to see if there was anything on the Kingston upon Hull built up area, which there was nothing, not even on the Hull page, nor nothing on the proposed city boundry move. "Save page" button below -Joshuawhite750 (talk) 20:30, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done I have reversed the delete, since this could be a useful redirect, and contains material not present in Kingston upon Hull that could be merged. Please use the talk page there if you think a merge is not a good idea. Deleted page was at Greater hull. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
S. R. Chishti
it is pure information about the musician -23:18, 18 January 2015 (UTC)117.201.68.19 (talk)
- Not done, article is not deleted. "Information" isn't equivalent to notability. I have removed the speedy delete tag from it, but notability really needs to be more firmly established according to WP:MUSICBIO, else the article will not survive a deletion discussion. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alix Desulme
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alix Desulme · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Adesulme, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Adesulme (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC) ,
- Please read WP:Autobiography. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done, draft restored. Yes, do read WP:Autobiography as well as WP:Golden rule. Otherwise, Artices for Creation is the correct venue for an editor with a conflict of interest to write an article about himself. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
go via network
My page was deleted as it had duplicate information as the go via page. I'd like to request the content back so I can incorporate it into the go via page without having to recreate all the formatting. Thanks, Katie -KatieSusanT (talk) 05:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- @KatieSusanT: Done, I have restored the contribution history and converted the title to a redirect to Go via. You may recover your contributions from the redirect title here. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:20, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
naija Politica
The created page was done in same format as popular news media such as CNN and al jazera. I was re editing the page to make it look more like an encyclopedic page when i got the information that it was deleted for reason of ambiguous advertising. Naija politica as a company has been in existence for the pas three years and concerns herself with mainly nigeian political news. The page was created with necessary references. Please, kindly accept the plea to undelete the page while i complete the editing on it making it less of a promotional page as it was not intentional considering the fact that i am a new user and an avid lover of the platform so thought it nice creating a page for the company. thanks -Davidwillyetuk (talk) 10:18, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done. It was definitely unambiguously promotional, with unsubstantiated puffery such as "they strive to get you updated", "numerous advantages", "numerous constant viewers", "truly credible", "famous revealing articles" and so on, throughout the article. It would need a complete re-write from scratch to be acceptable. The article has been deleted four times in the space of a month, due to such problems. Please use Wikipedia:Articles for creation to submit your article for review instead of attempting to publish it in main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Inverse Infrastructures
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Inverse Infrastructures · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Luuk.Wee, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Luuk.Wee (talk) 11:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to continue to work on this page and make it ready/public soon.
- @Luuk.Wee: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Chris Quigley
I, 31.51.195.205, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 31.51.195.205 (talk) 15:12, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done, article was deleted per WP:CSD#G3 (blatant hoax).--Bbb23 (talk) 15:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- (e/c) Done. Hello. Please be careful entering the full title, which is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chris Quigley, and not Chris Quigley. That page was deleted as a hoax in 2010 and time was wasted confirming it was a hoax before checking whether you might have meant something more recent, and then tracking that down. The page has some apparent close paraphrasing problems with the content at this site. You need to fix that. I am restoring it but please understand that you need to edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Captain John Carnes of the Falcon (a slaver)
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Captain John Carnes of the Falcon (a slaver) · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Claudeaikenhead, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Claudeaikenhead (talk) 16:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.. @Claudeaikenhead:--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:10, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Eli Cohen-Kagan
Hi,
An article I wrote named "Eli Cohen-Kagan" was deleted several days back using a SPEEDY DELETION procedure, for a so-called "advertising" reason.
I oppose to the use of this supposed reason: The article is written according to all Wikipedia rules. I believe that it is important enough, deserves to be part of Wikipedia and serves it's purpose. In addition, I would like to emphasize that the article is cited and has links to other relevant articles and websites.
Kindly consider the undeletion of this article.
Best regards,
Elad -Liquidspice (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Declined. @Liquidspice: The article wasn't deleted due to being advertising. The article was fairly well written. It was deleted for notability reasons. The article did not make any credible assertion of significance as to why the subject merits an article in an encyclopedia. It seems only one local source gave the man any significant coverage. You might want to look at WP:Golden rule for a basic overview of what is expected.
- Articles deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#A7, as this one was, are ineligible for restoration by request on this page. You have to make your case to the deleting administrator User:Y. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Raven Oak
We're trying to figure out why the wiki page of one of our published authors was deleted. The page has existed for many years as Raven has several books and 1 CD released. We went to add information about upcoming titles to the page today and found it gone. As her publisher, we would ask for the page to be restored. Lesser known authors' pages exist still. -Gsp laurel (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Please read WP:Conflict of interest and our Terms of Use stipulation on edits made in the course of your job duties. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:26, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Gsp laurel: Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. However, it is likely to be nominated at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a discussion, lasting normally seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute.
- I have added a link to Amazon which meets the minimum requirement of one independent reference for an article about a living person, but otherwise the article is entirely sourced to her own websites or to something she wrote. That means the article consists of Ms Oak telling us about herself; that would be fine for a Faceboook page but not for an encyclopedia article, which is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, but should summarise what other people say about them.
- Wikipedia's inclusion criterion is called Wikipedia:Notability and looks for "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones like publishers, and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? For more detail, see Wikipedia:Golden Rule and the specific guidelines WP:AUTHOR and WP:MUSICBIO.
- I have to say that with only one, jointly-authored, book that has made it as far as Amazon or Google Books, and one album, it seems unlikely to me that she meets WP:AUTHOR or WP:MUSICBIO, but that will be for a community discussion to decide. Your conflict of interest means that you should not edit the article directly, but you make suggestions on the talk page, taking care to disclose your interest. The most valuable contribution would be links to independent reviews of her book or her album, or to any published article discussing her or her work in some depth. JohnCD (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DIY Film Festival
I, Richmartini, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Richmartini (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
We are now in our 13th year, listed in withoutabox.com, sponsored by Pinnacle and Kinonation, located via diyfilmfest.com and then click the "Save page" button below -Richmartini (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Richmartini: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Kiara Diane
The page was removed due to lack of information. The deletion log states that the page Kiara Diane fails the PORNBIO and the GNG. No nonscene awards, only nominations. No independent, reliable sourcing. No reliably sourced biographical content. However, if given some time I will gladly provide you with independent, and reliable sourcing -Kiaradianemgr (talk) 20:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review instead. The only thing I see in the deletion log is a link to the AfD discussion, which precludes any restoration here. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Kiaradianemgr: Not done - 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 after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiara Diane, 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 Ymblanter (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.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Also, COI editors should not request undeletion of pages they created.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- There is no policy or guideline saying so. COI editors are allowed to make such requests. Some COI editors can write good articles, and that is something to encourage. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Also, COI editors should not request undeletion of pages they created.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Kiaradianemgr: Not done - 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 after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiara Diane, 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 Ymblanter (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.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- I've left them a note about seeking undeletion through DRV and about basic editing and COI type issues. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:11, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonasoft
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonasoft · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Emailarchiving.enthusiast, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Request to 'undelete':
1) Sonasoft has become a public company on September 4, 2014 (trading symbol: (OTCPK: SSFT).
2) Sonasoft was embroiled with the IRS alleged scandal involving Louis Lerner's email.
Thank you for your consideration.
Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC) Emailarchiving.enthusiast Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" We will need references on this too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done I deleted this again as a copyright infringement. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Lawrence Kradin
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Lawrence Kradin · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Rbkradin, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rbkradin (talk) 03:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Rbkradin: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
(no page specified)
(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) 41.240.35.189 (talk) 09:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done. We can do nothing unless you tell us what page you mean. If you are not sure of the exact name, it would help to know the name of the account that created it. JohnCD (talk) 11:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Bertman
I, EditorsGuild, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. EditorsGuild (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Airborne Tactical Advantage Company
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Airborne Tactical Advantage Company · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Concept Jet, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Concept Jet (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Concept Jet: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Airborne Tactical Advantage Company. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NARCOMS (North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis)
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NARCOMS (North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis) · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, 138.26.188.125, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 138.26.188.125 (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done. The draft blatantly infringed on copyright, copying and pasting content seen here, here and here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:22, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Roy Oppenheim
I, Sociallyfein, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sociallyfein (talk) 20:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC) <deletia>
- I have removed the massive wall of text incorporated with this request, on the grounds that it's not germane, since Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. Please edit the draft page to include the sources, not here. (This page was restored three weeks ago; pages are only deleted for being abandoned if they've been more than six months fallow.) —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Anything Goes Tour
True Facts [1] -Rquidone0717 (talk) 22:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
References
- Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G11. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. A G11 deletion isn't an issue with the facts, it's an issue with the tone. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done Since this has not happened yet, it is just a mirror of the promotion. If it proves notable afterwards, someone independent will have written on the topic. Otherwise a single line mention in Florida Georgia Line should be enough. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Robert Peatling is known figure survivor of WW II and author of "no surrender at Arnhem" -Muijen (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Muijen: Hi Muijen. I have userfied the article to User:Muijen/Robert Peatling, so that you can work on it there. This looks like it might have potential but it's not ready for the article mainspace yet. This needs citations to reliable sources to show notability of the topic to verify the content, and to demonstrate it is not original research. What I suggest is that you try to address these issues and once done, place this code at the top of the page: {{subst:submit}} and hit save. This will submit the page for review through the articles for creation process. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Rigel Technology
Hello there, would like to contest speedy deletion of Rigel Technology please. I had previously indicated on the page that I would like to make edits to the page to improve on it and I had updated it with changes after it was flagged for speedy deletion. However, I did not manage to finish making all my changes at that time. I'm also not sure if the user had also noticed that I had made changes to the article before removing it. Is it possible to reinstate the article so that I continue improving on it please? Also, is it possible to advise why the article was flagged as G11, is it more so because of the language? Or is it more of a problem with the references? Would appreciate some friendly advice, thanks! -Heynubcake (talk) 01:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G11. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. A G11 is almost always an issue more with the article's tone and language as opposed to the references. Being G11 and being well-sourced are not necessarily mutually exclusive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:39, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Would you like this back as a draft to work on, or a user space draft? The reason for deletion would be the language, I can see that you cut back on the hype, but the whole thing still looked like a press release or a company's own web site, more than an encyclopedia entry. It was deleted three times so there are 4 different people involved in tagging or deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
File:EwanMcLennan.jpg
- File:EwanMcLennan.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- File:EwanMcLennan-RagsRobes-Artwork.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- File:EwanMcLennan-TheLastBirdToSing-Artwork.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- File:EwanMcLennan-StoriesStillUntold-Artwork.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
Permission recieved. VRTS ticket # 2014111710022228 –Fredddie™ 01:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- There are a total of four files under the same ticket, I added the rest here. –Fredddie™ 01:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Fredddie, are you an OTRS volunteer? What kind of permission is granted? What copyright license is included? The file page does not include any valid license. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes I'm a volunteer. This is the license granted:
{{self|CC-BY-SA-3.0|GFDL}}
. –Fredddie™ 01:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)- So is the self attribution meaning the uploader user, or is there some other name required for attribution? I will start restoring. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- The self was Mr. McLennan. –Fredddie™ 01:54, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Can you please update the file pages to give correct credit required? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:31, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- The self was Mr. McLennan. –Fredddie™ 01:54, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- So is the self attribution meaning the uploader user, or is there some other name required for attribution? I will start restoring. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes I'm a volunteer. This is the license granted:
- Fredddie, are you an OTRS volunteer? What kind of permission is granted? What copyright license is included? The file page does not include any valid license. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Association of Lisp Users
Please undelete this page. The Association of Lisp Users is an active association and recently held an International Lisp Meeting in Montreal.
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Dcooper8 (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion. If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. But if you have references and some claim of importance it can be recreated. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:59, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Gypsy Warrior
I don't understand why the company I wrote the Wiki for is considered unimportant. If the deletion won't be taken back, can I speak to someone who will let me know exactly what is wrong with the information? If not, can you send me the draft so it can be re-written for approval? Thank you. -Treasure Uhlik (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Treasure Uhlik/Gypsy Warrior. The problem is there is no claim of importance as to why this company is special enough to have a Wikipedia page. And also there is a promotional sentence there too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:04, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonasoft
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonasoft · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
Request for reinstatement. The offending text was a place holder text that Wikipedia cited from:
http://www.abc6.com/story/27780401/sonasoft-projects-an-increase-of-135-percent-in-its-q4-revenue
But, it originated from Sonasoft's very own press release where Sonasoft wrote:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/Sonasoft-financial/fourth-quarter/prweb12428064.htm
Upon receiving this notice, I rushed to change the text as to be in compliance. However, I see that the 'speedy' deletion nominations are very speedy indeed. I humbly request to have the article reinstated, and I promise IMMEDIATELY to change the offending text. I also will study the guidelines A-Z as I am a greenhorn to publishing articles in Wikipedia, and will gladly stay in compliance.
Many thanks for the chance to be reinstated.
Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:40, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Emailarchiving.enthusiast: Not done Hello Emailarchiving.enthusiast. We cannot undelete copyright violations. I have however, already emailed to you the article draft's skeleton – those portions that were not copyvios. You can re-create the page using that roadmap. However, please be aware of our guideline on editing with a conflict of interest; our requirements to demonstrate notablity, verifiability and lack of original research through citation to reliable, secondary sources that are entirely independent of the topic; and our requirement that article be written in a neutral manner. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Isomer (video game)
I, SuperHamster, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:40, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Additional Comment - I remember viewing (maybe reviewing) this draft, and it did look like it may eventually have potential - would like to have it on hand for potential improvements if more sources can be found. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- @SuperHamster: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scott Dudelson
I, StanleyJean05, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. StanleyJean05 (talk) 03:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- @StanleyJean05: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
You might want to heed the advice of the original reviewer and turn that into an article about the company. A redirect for the person could be created and some biographical information added to it in a dedicated section or something like that.Looks like the company already has an article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Mark Beam
wiki contains information about an artist who can easily be googled. your reasoning for deletion doesn't make sense. one of his works he is well known for is Frank Zappa's famous Yellow Shark album, featuring MBs work on the cover. please help & thank you. "Save page" button below -Beam1on12th (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done This page hasn't been deleted yet and the best place to contest it is on the article's talk page. That said, I don't see where the speedy deletion criteria actually applies in this case since WikiGrain is just a mirror for Wikipedia pages. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Although it will probably just need to be re-written anyway since some of the prose is fairly promotional in how it's written. Writing things like "hit show/film" do come across as opinion and could be more neutrally stated, as people usually use terms like "hit" as WP:PEACOCK terms to make someone seem more popular, notable, and "sellable". Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Beam1on12th, this still runs the issue of whether or not he would pass notability guidelines now, as he was previously deleted at WP:AfD back in 2009. The article is identical and the claims are still the same, so unless I can find sources that would merit this going back to AfD, I will probably just G4 this. If it does end up getting G4'd I'd recommend that you take this to deletion review. On a side note I do see that there were concerns on the AfD about you being Mark Beam and this being a way to promote yourself. There were also concerns that you created a secondary account to edit the page instead of using the same account, which can be seen as WP:SOCKPUPPETRY and is against Wikipedia policy. I would like to warn you about editing with a conflict of interest and if you are Beam, I'd like to warn you that writing an autobiography is extremely discouraged because it's so easy to make something promotional and to take deletions personally. Also if you are Beam, please say so up front. Having a COI and writing about yourself are discouraged, but it's more discouraged for people to claim to not be who they are. Offhand I have to say that the likelihood of this getting G4'd are very high since guidelines were far, far looser back in 2009 than they are nowadays and unless I find some spectacular sources, I don't really think that this would have a snowball's chance of surviving a second AfD. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- However if you are Beam, then that could be beneficial since you could help us locate records of your artwork in various museums. I'm having trouble locating the art that's currently housed at the LA museum. Your website gives off the impression that it's in the restaurant located within the museum? If you can provide links to the museums that show proof that your artwork is linked there (they must specifically state that your work is part of their permanent collections or that you were the main focus of a major exhibition), then that would help immensely. I would imagine that the artist himself (or a representative) would probably best know where these links are than a random person. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 09:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- @FreeRangeFrog: What do you think of this article? I'm kind of leaning towards recommending this go through AfD again. I've found and provided more sources than were previously on the article and the way it's written now kind of does infer some notability. The prior AfD did seem to focus on the cow creation as opposed to the overall stuff, so I think that this would probably benefit from a second AfD than a G4, although I don't know if DRV would be a better place for this since it was re-created. I'm kind of halfsies on this, to be honest, so I would definitely recommend against a speedy deletion in this circumstance since there are actual sources this time around- there doesn't really appear to have been that many at the prior AfD. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 09:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Eh, I just decided to take it to AfD and let it get hashed out there. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 09:37, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Tokyogirl79: I probably went offline just before you pinged me :) I agree this merits another AFD given the elapsed time. I looked around a bit and couldn't find much more than what is in the article, so it might be a tight fit through WP:CREATIVE and GNG. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:43, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Nitesh Estates Limited
This company is notable and public listed company so its page must be present on Wikipedia. Also its Chairman's Wikipedia page that is Nitesh Shetty is also existing and hence its required that the company's page should also be there. Before there was a problem of content as it was claimed to be promotional but later when improved content was being posted then also the page was deleted. I was unable to understand the actual reason of the deletion of this page. Before it was stated that the content is promotional and when it was modified then also the page was removed. We must have Nitesh Estates Limited Wikipedia page and hence its request from all the users to please get it done soon. Earlier page I also agree was promotional but what about the new one that was based on improved content. -Williamson56 (talk) 11:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done and will not be done Absolutely not, sockpuppet of Ramesh985. You're wasting your own time in this continued campaign.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/YSBL
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/YSBL · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Ysbl-scriptwriter (talk) 14:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Ysbl-scriptwriter: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jay Bell
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jay Bell · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Gemini Grammarian, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.
To revise article for re-submission.Gemini Grammarian (talk) 14:50, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Gemini Grammarian: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:39, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
(no page specified, again)
(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) 37.231.12.179 (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done. We can do nothing unless you tell us what page you mean. If you are not sure of the exact name, it would help to know the name of the account that created it. JohnCD (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Circus Maximos Fashion Brand
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Circus Maximos Fashion Brand · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, 201.229.61.174, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 201.229.61.174 (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/RedBall Project
I, Redballproject, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. All the content in the page was written by me or taken from redballproject website which was also written by me. There was no copyright violation. Redballproject (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- The page is at Draft:RedBall Project. If you really do want to release your text under a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license please update the http://perschkestudios.com/terms-and-conditions/ page at your web site to say that, rather than no permission to store etc. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:57, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Dee Dee M. Scott
I, Dansuccess, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Dansuccess (talk) 18:33, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Mitosis digital agency
This is a corporate company website information of digital advertising industry of malaysia -Ravindrakumar20102013 (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. We don't unilaterally restore G11 deletions here, either. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:37, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Sunshine shake
I think people need to know about it -Dude123321 (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G2. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. Wikipedia is also not a place to drum up name recognition. A subject already needs to have had some press first. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done See WP:NOTHOWTO. A blog or personal website is more appropriate for this type of thing. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 21:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Center for Undergraduate Research in Mathematics
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Center for Undergraduate Research in Mathematics · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Dmcoff, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Dmcoff (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Please undelete this article--I have new sources to use. Thank you. Dmcoff (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)