Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 128
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
| Archive 125 | Archive 126 | Archive 127 | Archive 128 | Archive 129 | Archive 130 | → | Archive 135 |
Article is about a Chicago Architect and his family. Everything is backed up by news paper articles. Person who deleted it claimed William M Cooley was not a real architect when there are hundered of newspaper articles about him. Everything in the article can be backed up not only by newspaper references and Law Enforcement. I believe the article was deleted in order to cover up the case, and there was nothing "conspiracy" about either the article or the architect and the churches he built. Article has been up for years. Thank you. and then click the "Save page" button below -50.0.172.159 (talk) 04:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- The sandbox was abandoned in 2010, and it contained wild allegations of government conspiracy, mind control, LSD slipped to victims—all supposedly part of the biography of an architect. The argument I raised for its deletion can be seen at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Blue Shakti/Sandbox. The account User:Blue Shakti worked on nothing but this sandbox, but none of it was useful to Wikipedia.
- I have cautioned IP 50.0.172.159 against making legal threats. This IP is threatening to get a lawyer and sue for slander.
- I recommend no action. The sandbox work will never yield a notable biography for Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 05:21, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Not done. As announced at the top of this page, this process page does not address the undeletion of pages that were deleted after discussion at deletion debates (which is what deletion review is for).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
File:BCET Institute Logo.jpg
Was deleted as F5, but it was only removed from Bengal College of Engineering & Technology because of an error on the page. The error has now been corrected and the image is needed there again. -Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
File:CQUPT organization LOGO.jpg
Was deleted as F5, but it was only removed from Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications because of an error on the page. The error has now been corrected and the image is needed there again. -Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:28, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
File:Indian Institute of Management Raipur logo.jpg
Was deleted as F5, but it was only removed from Indian Institute of Management Raipur because of an error on the page. The error has now been corrected and the image is needed there again. -Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:29, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Eaan Shaikh
A future Singer -Eaans (talk) 16:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. 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 musicians or music groups 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. Please also remember that you AGREED to not write about yourself DP 16:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
FlexRAID
RAID-F and Transparent RAID are valid and ingenious RAID implementations. Deletion was done without allowing for proper discussion. -Spectwiki (talk) 20:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done. Being "valid and ingenious" is not enough: the Wikipedia:Notability standard requires evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." There was a full deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FlexRAID, so the article will not be restored here. If you think the discussion was wrongly decided, or you have more information, you should first approach the administrator who closed it, user Lankiveil (talk); then, if your concerns are not addressed, you may apply at WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 20:47, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Prakhar Bindal
The page was deleted while the person meets the notability criterias of Wikipedia. There are many reference in local newspapers of West Bengal which can be used to expand the article but now it is deleted. Please, help. -117.194.197.211 (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Voceditenore (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. Read WP:Notability and WP:Notability (people) for advice. JohnCD (talk) 20:54, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Berendo Street and Avenue
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Berendo Street and Avenue · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, 75.62.129.56, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 75.62.129.56 (talk) 20:10, 13 April 2014 (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. Check out the General Notability Guideline. JohnCD (talk) 21:06, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Deneeraj
This article is falling light on a famous personality in the state of maharashtra,india and the author didnot use any images used to expose that person and then click the "Save page" button below -Deneeraj (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done. The article was unambiguously promotional and would require a complete rewrite to be acceptable for an encyclopedia entry. I suggest you start over using WP:AFC instead of submitting to main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:45, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Articles for creation/ALGOL Extended for Design
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ALGOL Extended for Design · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Lrreiche, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Lrreiche 03:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I started this article, got distracted, and forgot about it. Truly, it was abandoned, but not intentionally. If you can restore it, I can see how far I got and decide whether to finish it or abandon it intentionally.
If I do elect to abandon it, should I simply allow it to lapse, or is there a proactive way to flush it?
Lance ==)------------
- 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.
- If you want to abandon the article, simply put the tag {{db-g7}} at the top, and an administrator will come along and delete it. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
The page was created by the association for information use with normal data -41.249.136.18 (talk) 22:30, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done. You see, that's the problem: "The page was created by the association". And it's obvious that the page was created by the association, because it reads like an organizational brochure, existing purely for promotional or publicity purposes. The page was definitely not a Wikipedia article, and would normally have been deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#G11, as well as WP:CSD#A7 due to failing to assert notability. Because the association has a conflict of interest regarding itself (see WP:COI for guidance), the best approach would be to submit an article via WP:AFC. ~Amatulić (talk) 08:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Holladay Sisters
I, 50.156.210.193, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 50.156.210.193 (talk) 08:00, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Had trouble with first-person sourcing. Holladay Sisters are my mother and aunt and I interviewed them for the information. I have their personal log of studio recordings and tons of photos. Much of their story is not digitized so I had trouble citing. I went to a help page, but the help I received was described technically and it was over my head. But don't want to give up on it -50.156.210.193 (talk) 08:07, 14 April 2014 (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..
- Unfortunately, first-person reminiscences and personal papers are not acceptable sources. The Wikipedia:Verifiability policy is that "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source". The point of published is that, in principle, the interested reader should be able to check on the source. The sources do not have to be on-line: references to print sources like newspapers or books are quite acceptable. As you are related to the subject, you should read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. JohnCD (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Anindita Dasgupta
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Anindita Dasgupta (talk) 14:37, 14 April 2014 (UTC) The page is NOT created fpor any propaganda or advertisement purpose, instead it has been created to provide detailed information of Ms. Anindita Dasgupta who is a film director in Bengali language and is from the city of Kolkata West Bengal in India, if required for verification purpose her film's certification copy from censor board can be shared with Wikipedia admin team.
- Not done. Wikipedia is not a place like LinkedIn or Facebook for people to write about themselves. It is a quite different sort of site, a project to build an encyclopedia, so it is selective about subjects for articles, and writing about oneself or one's own affairs is strongly discouraged, for reasons explained at Wikipedia:Autobiography and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.
- Wikipedia user pages are not like those at social-networking sites. Their use is explained at WP:NOTWEBHOST:
"Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they should be used primarily to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. Limited biographical information is allowed, but user pages should not function as personal webpages or be repositories for large amounts of material that is irrelevant to collaborating on Wikipedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your résumé, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account."
dream up festival
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Kingcakes (talk) 15:28, 14 April 2014 (UTC) Hi
I'm new to wikipedia. I posted info an a reall cool theater festival here in New York and it gets put up to be deleted. I'm not a journalist just a regular person so I didn't realize this would be such a process. Long story short my entry gets put in a sandbox to edit. I edit it but have no idea out to try once again to post this info. I was just trying to help wikipedia because it had no info about this event. Please advise.
My post was about Dream Up Festival.
- You're in the wrong place to ask for help; this page is solely for recovering content deleted uncontroversially. I would ask at Wikipedia:Help desk instead, but, IMHO, your article's got some relatively strong sourcing there. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Done sort of. The article has been moved to your user space User:Kingcakes/Dream Up Festival.
All you really need to do is tag your sandbox article with {{userspace draft}}. I have done that for you. That will cause a big "Submit it" button to appear, which you can click on when you are satisfied with your article. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
(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.) 109.158.137.46 (talk) 10:11, 15 April 2014 (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) 11:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
C.K M.O.R.G.A.N (FlyBoy)
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Honeyboo2 (talk) 10:02, 15 April 2014 (UTC) Hi there could this be undeleted so i can work on it more to make it a more realiable story ,because i have found someone who could help me to make the wikipedia better so please if you could bring it back so i can work into it thank you
- Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. 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 musicians or music groups 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. Your options could be to ask to convert this to a userspace draft or sandbox. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:22, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Shindaiwa
Shindaiwa is an important part of Japan's technological and engineering heritage and has helped revolutionise the forestry industry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoopjammer (talk • contribs) 07:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Johnny Bacon
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Johnny Bacon · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Bundlemedia, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Bundlemedia (talk) 02:47, 15 April 2014 (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) 11:27, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Kioritz
Kioritz is one of Japan's oldest manufacturing companies and has been manufacturing machinery for agriculture and forestry since 1947. This is not a company that is only a few years old, this is an important part of Japan's technological and engineering heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoopjammer (talk • contribs) 07:28, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Already done userfied to User:Hoopjammer/Kioritz Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:23, 15 April 2014 (UTC)- (edit conflict)
Userfied - I have restored the page to User:Hoopjammer/Kioritz where you can work on it. You need to explain in the article why the company is important or significant, and show references to "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish Wikipedia:Notability. Read WP:Your first article for advice. Please check with the deleting administrator, user FreeRangeFrog (talk), before restoring this article to the main encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 11:28, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/A Big Yes and a Small No
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/A Big Yes and a Small No · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Bunnyhugger, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Bunnyhugger (talk) 23:26, 14 April 2014 (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) 11:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Anniston Eastern Bypass
contesting the prod -NE2 15:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
tony dovale
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Tony Dovale (talk) 17:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for the feedback. Please could you help guide me on the next steps to fit into the guidelnes
Thanks for your time...
Tony Dovale Developer of Emotionetics and the Success Ensurance System
- Not done The article was deleted because it was an advertisement for yourself, and your userpage was just also blanked because of that. Wikipedia is not the place to promote yourself or write your autobiography, because you have a conflict of interest. If you believe you meet the notability guidelines for inclusion, please use the Articles for Creation service instead. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sara Jay
I caused the deletion to occur. It was an accident. I in no way wished to delete this page. I was attempting to click on a user name. As I clicked, I apparently jerked my hand a bit and my cursor moved to the "delete" button, which was quite close. I am hoping someone will restore this page.ElPasoWalt (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done Seriously, you never even edited that page using this account - but then again, you have multiple accounts, don't you. On top of that, you have zero access to a "delete" button - so, um, no. Finally, that article was subject to WP:MFD because of sockpuppets and recreation multiple times. DP 16:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- I can't believe you don't believe this perfectly plausible story about accidentally hitting the delete button. Shameful.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- All things considered, you actually have to push two buttons in order to delete a page, so there is that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
- I can't believe you don't believe this perfectly plausible story about accidentally hitting the delete button. Shameful.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Mid-Atlantic_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition
The article was originally deleted citing 'A7: Article about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject'. The article is inline with the other CCDC (Collegiate Cyber Defense Competitions) articles: National_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition & Southeastern_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition. Significance (multiple industry sponsors, including US Government funding) are provided within the articles. I am requesting the article be undeleted; and, if necessary I'd be more than happy to provide other indications of 'significance' or any other edits required. Thanks. -Justin M. Wray (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2014 (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, user RHaworth (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of The AmpHour Episodes
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of The AmpHour Episodes · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, 110.143.247.222, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 110.143.247.222 (talk) 07:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
The backup of this page was lost, so this is my only copy I didn't know existed. S please undelete so I can capture and reedit as required. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.247.222 (talk) 07:41, 16 April 2014 (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. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Kent Pavelka
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Kentpavelka (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
- You need to provide a source or else it will not be undeleted, per WP:BLPPROD. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
- Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Kentpavelka/Kent Pavelka. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Centro de Justicia
I, Centrodejusticia, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. cogito ergo sum 20:12, 16 April 2014 (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) 21:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The View from The Shard
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The View from The Shard · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Andrewswilson87, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Andrewswilson87 (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2014 (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. GB fan 10:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
aadarsh mishra
Enter your This page contains information about thin films here and then click the "Save page" button below -Aadarshscholar (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done The article has not yet been deleted. GB fan 10:54, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- I have since the above notice deleted the page as it was a copyright violation as well as an advertisement. GB fan 11:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Bell Gardens (band)
Bell Gardens is a current band with members of Stars Of The Lid . Other Stars Of The Lid related bands have pages such as Winged Victory For The Sullen ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Winged_Victory_for_the_Sullen ). Bell Gardens is no more or less relevant. Bell Gardens has released albums on well known labels such as Southern Records. The page was not finished when it was deleted. -Ambient.Trivia (talk) 01:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Casliber. GB fan 11:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Kenneth james Gibson
Looks like by adding information about the band Bell Gardens (Brian McBride of Stars Of The Lid & kenneth james Gibson) i got a page that has been up for years deleted. I am new to Wikipedia and i guess i did something wrong - because i got the Kenneth James Gibson page and the Bell gardens page i started deleted. Kenneth james Gibson is a musician of 20+ years with 100's of releases under a ton of alias and styles, only some of which were explained on his page that was deleted... Not only that but he has been running a record label which is part of the legendary techno / house conglomerate Kompakt, i think for at least 10 years or more. I think this is all very notable. I tried to add reference links, but I'm apparently doing something wrong...but One google search would bring millions of hits. Can you please restore this page? I'd like to help and make it a better more in depth page as well if it restored. If there is anything else I can do please let me know. Thank You. -Ambient.Trivia (talk) 05:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC) Ambient.Trivia (talk) 05:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Ambient.Trivia
- Done by Casliber. GB fan 11:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Gamut_Infosystems
Gamut Infosystems is leading ERP company in India , but in this online world only few people known about this company, We are not promoting any thing through wikipidia . We juts try connect with peoples if they want to know about Gamut they will get some information . And Wikipedia is the best way. So it's humble request please do not delete this page -Farvisionerp (talk) 06:12, 17 April 2014 (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, user Peridon (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. GB fan 11:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- I've already contacted them to explain the deletion. Peridon (talk) 11:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
the american public high school . please dont delete this page its my lovely school page... i want to give information about my school. thanks!
its my school page i just want to change this name to concept school system . and then click the "Save page" button below -Sheezarathore (talk) 11:46, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Sheezarathore: The speedy deletion nomination was declined here, less than one hour after it was added, and about 21 hours before you posted here asking for it not to be speedy deleted.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- I fixed the spelling of the article name in the above request. EdJohnston (talk) 12:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
List of Wineries in Florida
Deleted as an expired Prod. I would like to work on the article. Thank you. -Candleabracadabra (talk) 12:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. GB fan 14:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Mason Bendewald
This article should be reinstated because Mason Bendewald is a notable filmmaker who has had his documentaries screened at film festivals all over the country. The official reason his article was deleted was because it was deemed "advertising" but I don't believe that's true because I've read it, and I think it was only trying to highlight the achievements of a filmmaker. Please reconsider undeleting this page. -172.251.63.24 (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- 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/Mason Bendewald, 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 Mr. Stradivarius (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. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Royal Farros
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Royal Farros · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Rube3000, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rube3000 (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2014 (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. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Goiswintha
I, Daryl Kohlhoff, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Daryl Kohlhoff (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Done - @Daryl Kohlhoff: 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!" --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Revolt of Hermenegild
I, Daryl Kohlhoff, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Daryl Kohlhoff (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2014 (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 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I Am Vengeance
I, Mseely60, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mseely60 (talk) 21:20, 17 April 2014 (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 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences
- University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
Was working on this page when it was deleted, originally it was flagged for having a very broad title "Biological & Environmental Sciences". Which absolutely was titled incorrectly. It was changed to Biological & Environmental Sciences (UTC) both of which still need to be deleted.
This was changed to "University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences" and flagged as a part of Wikiproject universities and I was in the process of adding more information to the article in an attempt to do something similar to Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences which is linked from Cornell University in order to provide more information regarding the department referenced.
The Link would go into a group of links at University of Tennessee at Chattanooga to give further information regarding the departments and colleges at the university and hopefully turned into a sidebar similar to the Cornell University example above.
Please reconsider the deletion of this info I was rather upset when I went to add a box with department statistics to the wiki and it had been deleted.
The deleted article was at University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences.
Please forgive me for being slow at learning how to do this as it is the first wiki page I have attempted to contribute towards.
Edit: Here is the original comment regarding why this was flagged:
"A tag has been placed on Biological & Environmental Sciences requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable."
"Just so you're aware, you also shouldn't make an article about a university department that uses such a generalized title. There are probably other university departments in the world with the exact same name - Wikipedia is not Tennessee-centric. ProtossPylon 21:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)"
From Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion Section A7: "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.[5]"
Faugaun (talk) 00:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
P.S. I posted this on the board of the user who deleted I was unsure the correct was to contest this then I found this. Sorry for the double submission -Faugaun (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
P.P.S. After reviewing the notability section I have found some sources
recognition of a professor from the department
Another department professor discovering a new species
the department hosting a national non-profit symposium
recent peer-reviewed publications
recent books and literature from the dept
Awards received by students within the dept
notable acceptances to further education from graduates of the department
I'm not sure what else is required to show that the department is notable and worthy of it's own page within the university. There is plenty of content and information and if given an opportunity to expand I am sure it would find no difficulty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faugaun (talk • contribs) 03:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Part of the problem I see with some of the sources you've listed is that several of them are primary sources, meaning that they're something that has been released by the college or department. (WP:PRIMARY) I'm also concerned about the awards, since they seem to be given out by the department/school itself. That's sort of WP:NOTINHERITED mixed with primary sources, as notability for one person's achievements doesn't entirely link to notability for the department. Also, as far as publications go, it's expected for any given college department to publish materials in different formats and make presentations, so just making publications isn't really enough. You'd have to first show that these are presented by the department themselves (as opposed to them listing things published by someone who is connected with the department in various ways) and that they've been the focus of independent and reliable sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- I'm willing to userfy the content for the time being, though. I just don't think that these sources really show where it passes notability guidelines to where it could be in the mainspace. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:40, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- here's a7 "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.[5] This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works. This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s). The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.
, – for people, – for bands, – for clubs, societies and groups, – for companies, corporations and organizations, – for websites, – for individual animals, - for events It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion."
- even if I have not substantiated entirely the notability in your eyes it still has enough claim to not be an A7, first it has to do with a school (and if a highschool is immune then surely a research department at a university is immune), second I have submitted info that would suggest potential notability, some of it was rejected due to the information not being an external source but the very first link I provided is an external source citing the students of the department therefore even if rejection of notability is the case it still doesn't fall to the level of A7 deletion and deserves the opportunity to grow and see if it is able to meet the criteria for notability upon it's own merits.
- This link to the discussion of the school exception it says "For schools at both primary and secondary levels that can be shown to have a real existence, actual deletion for lack of notability is never the appropriate option. Not that they should all have articles--but they can at least always be merged to the school district, or other body, or, failing that, to the locality. I have never seen a single actual primary or secondary school so non-notable that listing in such an article with a redirect at least would not be appropriate." and "Since deletion for lack of notability is almost never the solution, speedy for lack of notability is all the more never the solution." and "Other people convinced me that we would make fewer mistakes if we just took them all. Our purpose is to build an encyclopedia, not have endless disputes over minor articles at AfD." and "so the fact that there are people that object to school articles being on Wikipedia, or to the apparent notability of schools, is no reason to delete" and "Encyclopedic school articles, whether we're considering a world famous, award winning academy, or a run-of-the-mill elementary school with at least 200 students, are unique, are of interest to some people, are topics that people would search for in Google, usually can be individually indentified and be researched, usually can be the subject of at least a considerable Wikipedia stub, and when all else fails, can be merged somewhere rather than deleted via speedy deletion. Also, such articles are useful to some people, do not hurt Wikipedia's reputation, give younger readers a reason to get interested in editing, help Wikipedia reach its goals, and can be verified." and "A7, in my opinion, should only be for articles that make Wikipedia look silly because they are obviously non-notable." in any case I think it is a safe bet that in under 2 hours of being a page (sorry I do not know the exact length) that someone can for sure make a claim that there is obviously no notability to this article.
- Here is a claim of notability "Students from the department of biological and environmental sciences at the university of Tennessee at Chattanooga helped to revamp the prairie dog exhibit at the Chattanooga zoo" Independent objective source here. "The department cohosted with ARCS national GIS day in 2007" third party independent source here. "Tennessee has nine other universities that offer environmental science degrees and the University of Tennessee at Chattannoga department of biological and environmental sciences graduates the most (44% of the states total graduates in 2010)." source here for notable claim.
-
- The problem is that the school rule tends to go for colleges/schools as a whole and isn't generally considered to be applicable for the specific sections of an overall section of a college. It's part of the University of Tennessee and does not operate as a separate facility. It's possible for departments to get notice specifically, but it's not a rule that every department automatically gets a separate article. Now as far as speedy deletion criteria goes, there's still the overall issue with notability as a whole. We could restore this to the mainspace, but I'll be honest that this has a very high likelihood of getting deleted at AfD. I honestly don't think it would survive based on the sources you've posted here. The issue with the sources is that it's not actually about the department. They're mentioned in relation to another event and aren't the actual focus of the article. In general, any college worth their salt will have their students participate in local events for college credit. It was a requirement for my degree that I get involved with the community and I know it was for other degree fields as well. The Chattanoogan could be very easily argued to be little more than a notification of an upcoming event, which would mean that it wouldn't hold up at AfD to show notability. It looks to be pretty heavily taken from a press release issued from the college itself, which doesn't help matters either. As far as ranking the highest in a poll... that doesn't mean automatic notability for the department. It may make it more likely that it'd gain notability but it's not a guarantee, especially since a lot of college rankings system will rank the college as a whole and not really focus on the individual departments much. Offhand I'd say that quite a few of the individual school departments that do have articles probably fail notability guidelines and could be deleted or redirected. That's why we usually see so many of them up for various forms of deletion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response, I think that I have stated my case as best I am able to at this time so I will rest at this time and let you and the other powers that be make whatever determination you decide in regards to this. It is my firm opinion that when the united states is the major country involved in environmental fields worldwide and when a department is at the forefront for an entire state then it is definitely notable. However, if you say otherwise I will accept your determination as final and let this rest. Cheers, Faugaun (talk) 22:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi-Tech ITO
i am writing more about Hi-Tech ITO it's not even written 10% about an agency yet so please allow me time for 1 or 2 days to write more about Hi-Tech ITO. -Dhawalhitechito (talk) 10:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves: "We have branches in India, USA... " etc. Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and the WP:FAQ/Organizations; then, if you want to proceed, use WP:Articles for creation so that what you write can be reviewed by an uninvolved editor. Bear in mind that Wikipedia is not for promotion of any kind: if what you write is in PR-speak or seems to try to "sell" the company, it will not be accepted. JohnCD (talk) 10:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Mehgan James
This page was deleted based upon some one's opinion that it was not worthy of a wiki article. This is not fair this page was interesting and had sources -50.15.202.106 (talk) 04:32, 18 April 2014 (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. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- 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/Mehgan James, 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 FreeRangeFrog (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) 10:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zedbazi (2)
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zedbazi (2) · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I, Sinatt, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sinatt (talk) 05:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
The article was not accepted for publication due to having inadequate citations, and due to time concerns, I was not able to improve the article, and it was deleted after 6 months. I would like to improve the article now if that is possible. -Sinatt (talk) 05:21, 18 April 2014 (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. JohnCD (talk) 11:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Dixon
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Dixon · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Everettdix (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC) I was unable to complete the article. Sean Dixon has since gained fame.
- 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!" §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
University of Pennsylvania Student Federal Credit Union
- University of Pennsylvania Student Federal Credit Union · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]
This article should not have been deleted due to the credit union's alleged lack of notability. Although the SFCU is small and has one-branch, it is should be recognized that it is the only student-run credit union in the Ivy League, and only one of two student-run credit unions in the nation. Georgetown University Alumni and Student Federal Credit Union is the only other student-run credit union in the US and this credit union has its own Wikipedia page. The SFCU has 100 University of Pennsylvania students who volunteer their time to work at the credit union, and over 1200 members from the University of Pennsylvania community. The SFCU is also part of the AllPoint ATM network, which is one of the largest surcharge-free ATM networks in the nation. It was founded in 1987 by three Wharton MBA students, and has been in business for 27 years now. One of the founders is Kenneth Beck, who is the CEO of CEO Connection, the President of The Wharton Club of New York, and a Board Member of the Wharton Alumni Association. He is on the SFCU's Board of Advisors. There have been many articles written about the SFCU as well. -2607:F470:6:3:E48D:33A:BDCF:1283 (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- 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/University of Pennsylvania Student Federal Credit Union, 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 Malcolmxl5 (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. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Committee of Elites
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Yeowwwai (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion A7. 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. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about groups or organizations or 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 groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. JohnCD (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
James Cusack
Page was deleted January 5, without reason, source of information on radio presenter -94.118.101.195 (talk) 22:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. The reason was the lack of any references. I am having trouble finding any independent references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David E. Flynn
I, 96.18.165.234, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 96.18.165.234 (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2014 (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) 00:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)