Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 80

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 75←Archive 78Archive 79Archive 80Archive 81Archive 82→Archive 85

JayData

The article was deleted because of missing citations. The review process and my holidays haven't been aligned. Now I have the fixed article on my PC, which conforms the requirements, I will be able to finish it after you help me to undelete. Thank you -Bonayr (talk) 10:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

LOFTER

In Chinese Wikipedia, LOFTER is a existing page and no administrator thought that the article is an advertisement and deleted it. So, deleting LOFTER as a reason of advertising may be overusing the guidelines? I think, If a person want to delete this article, he had better to announce that too little people have interest in what it talks about, or WP:NPOV. Also, I don't think delete an article which translated from Chinese Wikipedia is a good idea. -AppleJoyNeop (talk) 12:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

 Not done zh-wiki has different inclusion requirements, so the presence of an article there does not mean that it is necessarily acceptable on en-wiki. The article read like a press release, announcing that Lofter is "opened to sign up" and quoting their promotional literature. In addition, the only mention in an independent source is a passing note of the website's existtence in a general article on blogging in China: even if the page were not a candidate for deletion under G11, it would still fall under WP:A7 and be deleted for lack of notability. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Criticism of Bell Canada

reasoning -208.69.10.34 (talk) 14:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Bell Canada, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user MBisanz (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. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Democratic Republic of Ebernesia

was deleted by author and I would like it be undeleted for the page is quite relevant in today's society -173.46.208.190 (talk) 18:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Blocked What Primehunter said. --Tikiwont (talk) 21:10, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

User:Nid20

This page was deleted with the given reason: (G2: Test page: Appears to be a description of a company's computer system - not appropriate for WP). This was not the description of a company's computer system. It was a description of a school project for extra credit in a course at the University of Pittsburgh. Please undelete as soon as possible because this assignment is due next week. Thank you. (Redacted) -Nid20 (talk) 19:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is a project to build an encyclopedia. It is not a webhost for other activities like school projects. I will email you a copy of the text. JohnCD (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

David Horsager

reasoning -Dmfelt (talk) 19:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Horsager, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. This is the fourth - and hopefully final - time it has been deleted (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:09, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Justin Bieber Death Hoax

I received a speedy notify of this, and this article was deleted per CSD G3. To my recollection, I never created the article. I'm looking, then, to request a user sub page for this article so that I may review the history. To note, I have changed my password on this and my main account. I would like this undeleted and userfied to me, then, so that I may review the history and see just what was put in. Once I look at this, I will go ahead and perform a user-requested speedy. -Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I really don't understand why this was deleted as a hoax, since it presents the incident by saying that it was a hoax; it wasn't an attempt to deceive anyone. See my comment on Dennis' talk page, where I've asked him if my comment be all he needs, or if he still prefer that I restore the page. Please don't restore it and please don't decline this request until we hear back from him. Nyttend (talk) 03:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Nyttend. The explanation you gave on my other talk page does help me sort this out, but I'd like the userfy nevertheless because I am now curious as to what spurred this to be submitted for A3 and CSD'd G3. If I'd created a redirect, I'd think that there would be better means that fit better, but still.... --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 10:25, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Well you worked on it on 10 March 2010 with this edit summary: "I'm going to work on good faith that Mr. Bieber may or may not have been subject to some death hoax. Seems a potential search term." Nowyouseeme blanked your redirect in 2012 with this edit summary "(Shouldn't exist; target page has no mention of this)" then tagged with A1, reverted, and then A3, but was actually deleted with G3 as reason. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:44, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
guess that's all I need to know then. You think it's worthy of recreation? --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Not based on what was there. If it is not important enough for a mention in the main article, then we don't need a redirect. There are likely to be all sorts of hoaxes to do with Justin Bieber, and I haven't even looked to see if we have articles on them already. Hoax concerts, hoax girlfriends, hoax -uality will not need any article unless there is notability shown. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
OK, then I think this is done. I'll rm the article soonly. Feel free to close this discussion. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 04:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

delta sigma iota

It the wikipedia page of our national fraternity. We believe a rival fraternity requested it to be deleted. -66.208.234.58 (talk) 21:54, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user GrapedApe (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a discussin lasting seven days to which you would be welcome to contribute. If the article is to be kept, it needs references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 11:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Rokform

It was a borderline case, but I thought it was notable (CNET, CNN Money, Mashable, WIRED, etc.) as did Noun who accepted it in AfC. I guess if it's not notable I would just like it restored to my userspace for when more sources come through. Maybe it should go through AfD at least. I have a disclosed COI. Corporate 14:12, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done - userfied to User:Corporate Minion/Rokform. Talk to the deleting admin, Spartaz (talk), to see what he thinks it needs and whether he's willing to let you restore it, perhaps for AfD. JohnCD (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Ilan Sadeh

Hello

My value- Ilan Sadeh - was uploaded by Dr Zhupa. I did not know about that. It was a surprise. It was deleted immediately.

Please let me do it professionally. -79.141.124.140 (talk) 16:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is not a place for promotion or for posting CVs, and writing about oneself is strongly discouraged for reasons explained at Wikipedia:Autobiography. Article subjects need to have notability: the standard for academics is explained at WP:Notability (academics). JohnCD (talk) 16:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

List of Foxtel channels

Why was this and the Austar list of channels deleted? It is a valued resource as someone who studies global cable and satelite television. -96.229.11.150 (talk) 21:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

By the way, if you want to challenge the outcome of a deletion discussion, posting an angry rant full of accusations on the closing admins' talk page is not the best way to go about it. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

R&D Magazine

R&D 100 Awards is probably a merge candidate for R&D Magazine, but we can't really do that while it's deleted. While I could just create a new stub and then merge (either discussed, or just boldly) that would necessitate me familiarising myself with the subject matter somewhat. I'm therefore requesting undeletion instead, subject to the content (I see it was A3). Are the awards really more notable than the magazine itself? -- Trevj (talk) 21:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC) --- Trevj (talk) 21:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 Not done. The entire text was "R&D Magazine is a well know trade journal" - not much help in making your stub! JohnCD (talk) 22:05, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I'll proceed (at some point) without it then. Do our attribution requirements mean that I now can't include those words (although I'd naturally remove the typo)? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 22:25, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
No, don't worry - de minimis non curat lex, as my chemistry teacher used to say when demonstrating the distillation of alcohol. JohnCD (talk) 11:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I suspect my chemistry teachers knew Latin too, but as it wasn't taught at my school, probably didn't bother trying to use it in lessons... not sure how that would apply to chemistry anyway and I don't really recall the distillation of alcohol but guess we must've done it! Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 12:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Ragho

Sorry Sir, I forget to give references for my article. -124.253.252.25 (talk) 07:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

List of Foxtel Channels and List of Austar Channels

No copyrighted works. No slander. But a valuable resource, both updated regularly and well maintained. These two articles where deleted along with a group of other pay TV channel listing articles in one swoop without being debated on the individual articles pages. Instead, some user decided to go on a power trip, collect all the articles that listed channel numbers for various services (Foxtel and Austar where more than just lists, but provided valuable information as well as a history of changes, aspect ratios future announcements, and change in functionality) and deleted them all in one swoop. About 20 articles in all.

Ridiculous! Articles like this may seem worthless to some people but not to those of us who are pay tv/cable tv enthusiasts who relied on Wikipedia as a valuable reference in regards to this industry. Articles like this are helpful to those of us who compare and research how different pay tv services offer different content in different countries and how this content has been rolled out over time.

I am not the most articulate person but this is the first time I've ever been annoyed by Wikipedia and felt a need to express my frustration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.229.11.150 (talk) 08:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Remember that Wikipedia is not a directory or a how to guide, and any article that requires that many updates to keep current is probably violating WP:NOTNEWS...and see the entry 3 sections up from this for more information (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Manuel-diaz-saldana-comptroller-of-puerto-rico.jpeg

Released under public domain per the source's legal notice available in Spanish at: [1] -—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 14:31, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Yesmin-m-valdivieso-comptroller-of-puerto-rico.jpg

Released under public domain per the source's legal notice available in Spanish at: [2] -—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 14:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

EXXXOTICA

Not sure why this was deleted. It was a factual page about the EXXXOTICA Expo. It's been up and added to for years, not sure why it was deleted. -68.80.252.127 (talk) 16:14, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Done was deleted due to no claim of importance. I think this is in error, so I have restored it. You could have asked the deleting admin about this too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:30, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

JSoft Solutions Ltd

I understand that the page was deleted because it was deemed as a promotional page. The intention of creating that page was not promotion of the company, but to provide details about the organization in a relevant manner. More and more work had to go into the page like adding of logo, linking to the already existing group company wikipedia page. The organization might be looking for promotion in several ways, but the intention of the author was not to promote the organization. It is not violating any copyrights also. -Midhuabraham (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject.. "JSoft is able to meet even the most complex of needs by leveraging on their core strengths, skilled workforce, best practices, domain knowledge and industry leadership" is pure unsourced puffery, promotional PR-speak. Anything like that is deleted from Wikipedia at sight. JohnCD (talk) 10:46, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Spirit Pub Company plc

Wow, why so harsh or even any opportunity to explain why I feel this significant. This company employs 17,000 people, have won numerous awards for best companies, own some of the most well known UK pub brands, including some of the biggest, most well known businesses in their field. I have numerous 3rd party references and Wikipedia is littered with inaccuracies in regarding pub chains & brands - I am trying to make it up to date following book research - so I dont understand why it is not noteable, whereas this significantly smaller business is? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonegate_Pub_Company -creativecog (talk) 11:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Done please include your book references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

List of Foxtel Channels

Live outside Australia, was a valuable resource for those of us interested in subscription television. Was frequently updated and had a lot of information. No copyrighted material. Material is almost impossible to get on other websites without being in Australia and using the service yourself. -96.229.11.150 (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. You have already been advised this same thing above - and also advised where to find the information now. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

List of Austar Channels

Live outside Australia, was a valuable resource for those of us interested in subscription television. Was frequently updated and had a lot of information. No copyrighted material. Material is almost impossible to get on other websites without being in Australia and using the service yourself. -96.229.11.150 (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. You have already been advised this same thing above - and also advised where to find the information now. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

All pages dealing with channel numbering on subscription television services

They where all deleted in one big swoop without any thought or consideration to those who have this as a hobby (yes unusual hobby but still a hobby) Useful for writers and virtual tourists. Students of pop culture. Technology. Who are interested in how subscription television is released in various countries for various reasons. List of Foxtel Channels and List of Austar Channels where included in the mass deletion. All articles that where maintained and kept up to date (List of Verizon Fios Channels was also well sourced and updated) should be restored.

Often the websites of these companies do not talk about channel numbering, interactive services on various channel numbers, aspect ratios, (wide screen, HD etc) the date they where included in the package lineup, etc etc.

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. You have already been advised this same thing above - and also advised where to find the information now. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Meade

The article titled "Stephen Meade" was speedily deleted because it "unambiguously promoted" a person or entity. We request that this page be undeleted and moved to the user space, so that we can make the proper edits and add our third-party sources to fit Wikipedia's standards. We have a rich list of sources and articles on Big Bamboo's website <spamlinks redacted>. We fully believe that "Stephen Meade", as an encyclopedic topic, is completely notable, and valuable for scholars in business or technology. Stephen Meade has founded a number of successful technology-based companies that impact our everyday actions, including My WetRock (an environmental focused company that creates water-efficient products for consumers), Cenoplex (a wireless audio advertising platform and insertion engine), MonetaPro (a web-based software application for global trading), RONAStar (an enterprise solution which empowers large corporation to save money), VirtualSellers (a precursor to PayPal developed by Stephen in 1996), and many others. Thank you! StephenMeade33 (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Please do not write or add to an article about yourself, as you apparently did at Stephen Meade. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 Not done. This was excessively and unacceptably promotional in tone, even touting for business: "If you are interested in having Mr. Meade speak at your next conference please contact... " That is not what an encyclopedia is for. Also, it was a copyright violation from http://businessrockstars.com/br/rockstars/stephen-meade/, so it will not be restored even to user space. JohnCD (talk) 11:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Noobermedia

I believe the article has been unfairly deleted due to lack of universal awareness. However, Noobermedia has universal exposure in several avenues and are likely to partner with Apple and Twitter in the coming months. Much more information will be submitted about Noobermedia over the next half year, including background information on the founder - who was in the 1999 NFL Draft - and the other co-founders, partners. Noobermedia may have tens of millions of unique users at the end of 2013. Best to get a start on their page, now. Besides, what does having their initial page hurt? They are a very relevant website. In terms of financial potential, Noobermedia has more upside than "4chan" - it has a Wikipedia article, "Fucked Company" - started by Phillip Kaplan and they have a Wikipedia article, "Northern Light Group" search engine - they have a Wikipedia article, "Excite" - they have a Wikipedia article... and thousands more. How is Noobermedia any less relevant than these companies? At least Noobermedia has way more traffic, appeal, and upside/potential to it. Please undelete Noobemedia. -Twiz5000 (talk) 14:25, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done Please read this essay on your up-and-coming next big thing. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Jenniffer-gonzalez-28th-house-of-representatives-portrait.jpg

Wikipedia has permission to use it under {{PD-PRGov-OfficialPortraits}} -—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Done If you upload any more of these photos in the future, please use that template, since the PD-because that you used on this image looks much more like an attempt to justify a copyvio; that's probably why Future Perfect at Sunrise deleted it. Nyttend (talk) 02:49, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Action Force (Teletoon)

WP:CON has been established at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:List of Carl Squared episodes in an identical situation. -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 17:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Done --Tikiwont (talk) 20:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Secrets (post-hardcore band)

The band was not responsible for any issues with the page and are more than willing to help to fix any issues they are unsure what the reason is it was deleted and hope to resolve the issue -67.242.108.32 (talk) 20:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

The reason for the page deletion was because it was considered "advertising" because there weren't enough sitations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.97.126 (talk) 21:01, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

 Already done —Theopolisme 17:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

bbm pending request

reasoning -93.186.16.158 (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

BBM can refer to a number of things and it isn't clear here what you want to have restored and why. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Al Walser

Deleted because he was not notable as a musician, but he got nominated for a Grammy! http://www.grammy.com/nominees?genre=49 -2602:306:C4B1:55F0:A175:61AC:23F3:71DE (talk) 01:30, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Done Nyttend (talk) 05:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Youth Brigade (Washington, D.C. band) Reunion

reasoning -108.56.7.136 (talk) 05:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

 Question: I'm not sure what you mean here. There has never been an article with that exact title. There was Youth Brigade (Washington, D.C. band) about a short-lived band from 1981. That was deleted by proposed deletion, so it can be restored on request, though it is likely that it would be sent to WP:Articles for deletion and deleted again, as it does not seem that they were notable to the standard of WP:BAND. Also, there is a "Reunion" section about a different Youth Brigade at Youth Brigade (band)#Reunion (1991–present). Please give the exact title of the article you mean, or some indication of who deleted it and when, to help us locate it. JohnCD (talk) 10:53, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Proxmox Virtual Environment

Proxmox VE is a widely used virtualization software and well-known by system administrators, some links:

  1. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/proxmox-the-high-performance-virtualization-server-for-the-rest-of-us/9181
  2. http://www.montanalinux.org/proxmox-ve-review.html
  3. https://lwn.net/Articles/375930/

-Giner (talk) 19:45, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proxmox Virtual Environment, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Spinningspark (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) 17:52, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cami bra

Deleted as a copyvio; OTRS ticket:2012120610014616 now gives permission for use of the content -Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done. I have restored this to the AfC queue and copied your OTRS note to it. JohnCD (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Randy Stufflebeam

This was supposedly deleted as a vanity page. Randy Stufflebeam is a talk show host(show: Constitutionally Correct) and officer as well as former candidate of the Constitution party. He did run for office and receive more write in votes than any other candidate in IL long political a history. The Constitution party is often considered the 3rd largest party in the U.S., Randy Stufflebeam;s contributions to the party are significant -75.57.162.44 (talk) 04:17, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Orangemike (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. The grounds for deletion were not that it was a vanity page, but that it showed no notability apart from being an unelected candidate for political office, and per WP:POLITICIAN that is not enough. JohnCD (talk) 18:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

List Of DirecTV Channels (United States)

reasoning -Chase287 (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I strongly believe that the article should not have been deleted. It's very helpful to DirecTV Subscribers like me and I would like you to consider bringing it back. It should not have been deleted.--Chase287 (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

What was the name of the article you want undeleted? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:40, 11 December 2012 #UTC#

List of DirecTV channels #United States# --Chase287 (talk) 17:58, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DirecTV channels (2nd nomination), which has already gone through a deletion review. (Also: please read: WP:ITSUSEFUL. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:06, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
In response to those deletions, a specialised Channel Listings Wiki is being set up at http://channel-listings.wikia.com/wiki/Channel_Listings_Wiki. JohnCD (talk) 18:10, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

crown the empire

Band has reached the threshold of WP:Music. They are now notable and I request the page to recreate the article or to edit it to include the ref to the billboard chart where they peaked at Number 1 on Heatseekers along with other billboard charts. http://www.billboard.com/charts/heatseekers-albums#/charts/heatseekers-albums?chartDate=2012-12-08 requested undeletion from Admin who deleted the page and was told "that ship had sailed" and subsequently deleted my comment -Mariolennox (talk) 21:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

 Not done you were given very specific instructions on the DRV you opened. Go read them and follow them to the letter. --(✉→BWilkins←✎) 01:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Dolores Creel Miranda (Lola Creel)

reasoning -98.210.144.193 (talk) 20:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

NOTE: For conciseness, I have removed what you wrote below here, which was effectively a duplicate of the deleted article, now restored. JohnCD (talk) 21:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user The Blade of the Northern Lights (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. If the article is to be kept, a list of what she has done is not enough: there need to be references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish notability. In particular, the article may be deleted again if after ten days there has not been added at least one reference to a reliable source to confirm what it says. JohnCD (talk) 21:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Chess Tiger

It says on the placeholder page that the article was deleted (PROD is it?) because it is non-notable. But chess tiger is a chess engine which has been through a great many versions (I believe that versions went up to at least 15) and it competed in chess tournaments against humans, sometimes achieving impressive results (I think it managed a 2788 ELO rating once, which isn't too shabby). The program was bundled with other programs and is therefore a program which a lot of chess players will have 'sparred with' at some point, even if it was never their main analysis engine. It says there were also no sources, but there are quite a few promising looking hits on the web with a simple search for 'chess tiger' so it shouldn't be too hard to find a few good starting points, especially as it looks like you can still buy it for multiple platforms. I've not done one of these requests before; if I've made it inappropriately then I do apologize. -Chessbloke (talk) 21:04, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify users 90 (talk) and Bubba73 (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. If the article is to be kept, just asserting the strength of the program is not enough: the article needs references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" which is the Wikipedia definition of notability. JohnCD (talk) 21:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Youth Brigade (Washington, D.C. band)

One of the first five bands on Dischord Records and on the Year in Seven Inches and Flex Your Head compilations -20.137.2.50 (talk) 00:09, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Sabrebd (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. Please add references to show how they meet the notability standard of WP:BAND. JohnCD (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Yellowism

With the jailing of one of its co-founders [3] [4] this movement has received a lot of attention in recent months and at the very least deserves another chance. It has not been discussed for more than two years. Here are some more sources and examples of continuous coverage to put on the page (if it has none) to deter a speedy. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.99.24 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 14 December 2012‎

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yellowism, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Courcelles (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.
The title has been salted because of repeated re-creation. Your best course would be to prepare a userspace draft - see Help:Userspace draft for how to do that - giving references to "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish WP:Notability, and then contact Courcelles or WP:DRV. JohnCD (talk) 10:16, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Out of the Blue (Yale University)

The group has traveled to Singapore, Brazil, and Canada in the past year and, most notably, went to the finals of the International Championship of Collegiate A Cappella, beating out nearly 180 groups. The group was also nominated for a number of awards throughout that process. It has performed for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Human Rights Activist Aung San Suu Kui and the U.S. Ambassador to Singapore. The page was originally deleted because the group was not "notable" enough, but the group has since advanced to the finals of a major international competition, traveled more extensively, and has performed for a number of dignitaries. Our YouTube channel is flourishing and the group has significantly increased its presence and fan base on social media platforms. Other groups with similar profiles currently have a page, and we hope restore our's. Additionally, our original moderator has left Wikipedia so we were unable to contact them directly. Thank you. -128.36.155.12 (talk) 01:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Out of the Blue (Yale University), it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Shereth (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) 10:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

User:Yobronzino/Brando Palomino Bronzino

reasoning -76.102.201.240 (talk) 05:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

userfy as of encyclopedic edit to rectify reason for deletion - including vandal post notification thx 76.102.201.240 (talk) 05:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

  •  Not done The history of this page contains numerous libelous/defamatory statements, many going back years, by both you and other editors. It had also been in userspace, completely unsourced, for years. I'm afraid neither of these is acceptable when you're asking us to restore a page about a living person. If you wish to contest the status of the article, I suggest you contact WP:AUSC privately. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 17:10, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

User:Patchy1/Templates/Self Destruct

User request to restore pages in own userspace --- Patchy1 06:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done. JohnCD (talk) 09:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

List of articles recently deleted by Bwilkins

A number of articles (found here) were recently deleted by Bwilkins. Per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Behavior regarding User:Bwilkins and User talk:Bwilkins#FINA swimming article deletions can someone re-open them and either take them to AFD or allow them to be taken to AfD? Ryan Vesey 22:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Er, I guess the admin can choose to restore them, or discuss them with Philipmj24 first per User talk:Philipmj24#Rights restored. Ryan Vesey 22:26, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 Done I've restored all but one.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 01:50, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Manduca quinquemaculata detail.JPG

I am the author of the picture -PoloniaSF (talk) 21:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Rodney M Bennett

reasoning -PhillipTaylorMBE 22:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Olajumoke Olufunmilola Adenowo

Could you please undelete the biography "Olajumoke Olufunmilola Adenowo". So i could go ahead and update it as requested with a reliable source. -Allenolayiwola (talk) 07:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Bump J

I would like to have this article temporarily undeleted as the rapper meets Wikipedia notability. Formerly signed to a major label and he has collaborated with notable musicians. If undeleted, I shalltake the content to my sandbox. Any deleted version works. -Mewtwowimmer (talk) 22:45, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Photos at Cerritos Veterans Memorial

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the photo, will fix copyright template once image is restored -The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

 Not done The problem isn't with the image copyright per se, it's a problem with the sculpture that the images focus upon: in the United States images of such works infringe on the artist's copyright as derivative works, and can't be hosted on Wikipedia without explicit permission from the artist or sculptor. Acroterion (talk) 18:40, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Can you reference a policy that says that it is a copyright violation to take an image of a publicly exhibited sculpture? This is an argument that is coming out of nowhere, as that was NOT the argument made for deleting the images. Regardless, many of the images are not of the work of art as a whole, but of the area where the work of art is located, or are zoom in on specific features that are not work of art in and of themselves (such as the pond or dedication plaques). Specifically the following photos do not show the sculpture:
The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 18:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
If the primary subject of an image is a copyrighted object such as a sculpture or a portion of such a work, the only way the image can be hosted on Wikipedia is through a fair use rationale. See Wikipedia:Freedom of panorama: buildings are exempt in the US, and sculpture may be included if it is incidental to the larger composition or de minimis. Since fair use is not allowed on Commons, images of copyrighted sculptures uploaded there tend to be deleted immediately as an obvious problem: on Wikipedia it's a bit more lenient, but the images may be here only if they are directly germane to an article on that work and supported by a fair use rationale. More detailed information on the issue is at Commons:Freedom of panorama#United States. The only difference between the Commons policy and Wikipedia policy in this matter is the ability to claim fair use on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 19:40, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
In all of the images you note above (apart from maybe the lapel pin, though that differs only in scale), sculptures or sculptural components (i.e., plaques, the fountain, etc.) are central features of the images. Wikipedia has received DCMA takedown notices on images of other sculptural works from the copyright holders before now, and there's little that can be done if fair use can't be claimed, within Wikipedia's narrow policies on the subject. See also commons:Commons:Public_art_and_copyrights_in_the_US: this is a common issue across all Wikimedia projects. You will see that the date of "publication" is central. Acroterion (talk) 19:44, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
By the way, artist's copyright was the central issue in the deletion discussion: the sculpture was installed in 2006, and the artist was James T. Russell. Acroterion (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Does this mean we can repost the images with a Fair use rationale? And what exactly is the rationale for the lapel pin? The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Sure, assuming there's an article specifically about the sculpture, or perhaps the sculptor, that uses images sparingly. I think the lapel pin is a copyrighted artistic work (or a derivative work of the main sculpture, which amounts to the same thing), and wouldn't be central to an article on the sculpture. We use fair use images for album covers, book covers, etc. See Marine Corps War Memorial for how articles on sculptures handle images. Acroterion (talk) 20:06, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Lapel pin: made by the city, not the artist, artist has no copyright to it.
  • Fair use rationale: this is an article about the sculpture, easily passes the Fair Use rationale.
The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
I assume the article is Cerritos Veterans Memorial? All you need to do is to write a reasonable fair use rationale and to license the images appropriately. Remember that fair use policy requires minimal use of images, so only one or two images would be appropriate, and the pin, as a derivative of the copyrighted work, would probably be considered a step too far. If you can write a fair use rationale (you'll need to look around at other articles on sculptures for examples), then a couple of the most comprehensive images could be restored and the rationale attached. Acroterion (talk) 20:23, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The pond, the five emblems, and the plaques (including the recognition for the Merchant Marines) are not works of the artist, and should be restored. The lapel pin contains a silhouette of the sculpture and therefore does not contain enough detail to be considered a "derivative of the copyrighted work" and should also be restored.
I'll look for a good Fair Use rationale and post it here once I find it. The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 21:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Please restore File:Cerritos Veterans Memorial Zoom Out View.JPG and File:Cerritos Veterans Memorial East View.JPG. I will use theTemplate:Non-free 3D art along with a rationale similar to the one in File:OtternessSculpture.JPG. The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 21:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
As a procedural matter, since there was a deletion discussion, I'll talk to Explicit first to make sure that he agrees. Acroterion (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
After reviewing the images and discussion, this is the conclusion I came to.
Thoughts? — ξxplicit 01:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Seems reasonable to me. Acroterion (talk) 01:24, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
  1. When will the photos that are fair use be restored?
  2. I am not quite clear why the two plaque photos are "not justifiable". Fair use would not apply because they are not copyright violations as they are not depictions of works of art by the artist.

The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 13:37, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

  1. Well, you still have to choose which image you want restored. Do you want File:Cerritos Veterans Memorial Zoom Out View.JPG, which includes a view of the plaques, or do you File:Cerritos Veterans Memorial East View.JPG, which doesn't include a view of the plaques?
  2. The engraved (?) text on the plaques are copyrighted as well. — ξxplicit 01:32, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Lets restore File:Cerritos Veterans Memorial East View.JPG to allow restoration of File:CVM Recognition of Merchant Marines and Others.JPG. What's holding up the restoration of the pond photo? The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

The two files you've requested have been restored. Please remember that we're all volunteers, and that I, for instance, had a full agenda of work-related and social obligations yesterday. Acroterion (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Can we now please restore the pond photo? Can I also receive a better explanation as to why the two plaque photos are copyrighted? The plaques are not works of art, and I don't remember what the text says, but isn't there any way we can use Fair use for the text on the plaques? The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 18:06, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I have restored the pond photo and have initiated a discussion at WP:MCQ#Is this de minimis? regarding its copyright status. As for the plaques, as I stated above, has copyrighted text on it. Just like we can't upload a page from a copyrighted book under a free license, the same applies to the text on these plaques. I don't see how those two pictures can be justified under fair use. — ξxplicit 02:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
The plaques say something to the effect that the memorial was dedicated on Nov 11, 2006, and was dedicated to the Residents of Cerritos who are veterans. Not exactly copywritable text. The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 01:09, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
As cliché as it is, it is entirely copyrightable. The text being accompanied by a copyright statement only emphasizes that point, really. — ξxplicit 02:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Do you know that a copyright was taken for this? The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 05:32, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
It's from after the revision of the copyright laws; there is no requirement to register or otherwise "take" a copyright any more. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:42, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Plaque photos

Requesting the undeletion of the following photos:

The text in those photos is not eligible for copyright. See Template:PD-text and commons:Template:PD-text. The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 16:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:CVM Dedication Plaque 1.JPG

I have asked for a deletion review of File:CVM Dedication Plaque 1.JPG because this discussion fell on deaf ears. The Hills of Cerritos (talk) 17:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_80&oldid=1138664719"