Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 160

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Tokyogirl79 in topic Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iDreamCareer
Archive 155←Archive 158Archive 159Archive 160Archive 161Archive 162→Archive 165

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Sports Quotient

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 74.71.36.136, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 74.71.36.136 (talk) 02:09, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jesus Church (Australia)

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -WolverD (talk) 13:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I was out of the Nation on a Crussade and had no access to the Internet when this expired and was deleted. I would like to finish updating and upload. WolverD (talk • contribs) 13:33, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

@WolverD:   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) 18:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mark L. Donald

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Deopressoliber, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.

Am uncertain how to proceed. Info was forwarded stating that the image was the personal property of the subject, and that the subject consented to its use and has moved it into the public domain.Deopressoliber (talk) 20:10, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

@.Deopressoliber:   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 the image you mean is File:MarkLDonald.jpg, that has been accepted as public-domain in Wikimedia Commons, which holds images for all the Wikimedia projects - you can see it in the draft article. JohnCD (talk) 20:55, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:130.132.173.92

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 130.132.173.196, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 130.132.173.196 (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

  Please repair your request - we cannot process malformed requests. Please use the code {{subst:refund|pageName|reasoning}} (replacing pagename with the name of the page you wish to have restored and reasoning with the reason for your request). See below. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:39, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:130.132.173.92

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Because it was rejected for not having national-recognition, which is certainly evident. I was supposed to edit part of it but my laptop was stolen so I could not log back in with my IP address. I want to resubmit it for review. -130.132.173.196 (talk) 21:22, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

It looks as if this request and the previous one are confused. I guess that intention was to refer to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Abrar Omeish. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:27, 5 November 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) 21:39, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

PPD Baling Sik

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

My leader want i write again after he know about Wikipedia -Irmancore (talk) 06:52, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  • I'm very concerned about your English skills, as it is very clear that it is not your native language. I don't have a problem restoring it, but I would prefer that we not restore it until we can find an editor that speaks your native language, which I am assuming is Malay. It looks like the Malaysia WikiProject is semi-inactive, so it will take me a while to find an editor that is fluent. I think that the language barrier here will negatively affect sourcing, descriptions, and so on, so I'm very concerned that restoring it will only lead to deletion if we don't have someone here to help translate. I'd like to avoid that if possible. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:15, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Riccardo Silva

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I am confused as to the deletion of Riccardo Silva's page. I believe it met all the criteria required to be part of Wikipedia. At this time, his article has been rerouted to one of his businesses' page MP & Silva. As a prominent business man, it is crucial for us to maintain his page as we use it an importnat tool when people request information on Riccardo Silva.

Pleae let me know what we need to do in order to have the page restored as soon as possible. Thank you.

(Copy and paste of article removed. We know how to view it. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:10, 5 November 2014 (UTC))

Levy Public Relations (talk • contribs) 17:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

"It is crucial for us to maintain his page." No, it isn't. Wikipedia is not a publicity medium, and Wikipedia is not your free web hosting service. If you want to control a page about him, host it on your own web site.
  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/Riccardo Silva, 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 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.
@Levy Public Relations: Furthermore, your username is a violation of Wikipedia:Username policy and will likely lead to your account being blocked. Go to WP:CHU/Simple as soon as possible to request a name that represents only you as an individual, not an organization or role. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:10, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
  Comment: Levy Public Relations has successfully CHUd to Maru1977says (talk). JohnCD (talk) 11:07, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Protesting the speedy deletion of Bfpage/sandbox/Vane-Wright

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This content was contained in my sandbox. How is it possible to speedily delete the drafting of an article in a user sandbox? I marking this sandbox to be entirely deleted because now the contents are gone. Thank you for reminding me that the best way to work on an article is off-line in a wordprocessing document. The policy of speedily deleting sandbox pages should be re-examined. I would like to discuss this practice on the appropriate noticeboard. This practice would be extremely discouraging to a new editor who is told that article creation should be done in the sandbox. If the editor who proposed this page for speedy deletion had actually read the page, then it would have been apparent to the editor that this page was not in fact a draft of an article. I was using this sandbox page to gather references to insert into approximately 15 other articles that are lacking significant citations. If I had walked away to get a cup of coffee for too long, I would have been completely frustrated by the deletion of non-article content that I was creating. I am assuming that the proposed deletion was done in good faith, but I certainly question the practice and the person who tagged it for speedy deletion. Best regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  13:53, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
It wasn't a user sandbox; you created it in article space. I've moved it to User:Bfpage/sandbox/Vane-Wright, which is actually in your userspace. Yunshui 雲水 14:01, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

MachPanel

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

MachPanel was an official page of MachSol Inc. maintained by the company itself. We had recently updated page with more suitable content and useful information for the users to know. I do not find any reason to have our page deleted. We also have read the reason mentioned for deletion i.e. "Searching for MachPanel in Google news only finds press releases" - that's simply not true. Searching for MachPanel results in all appropriate information about it, media coverage, company pages and other website references on the Internet too. However, still consideration the reason we may review the content and update it accordingly but kindly restore the page. -Machsolus (talk) 11:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done I'm sorry, but the page was written in a fairly promotional manner to the point where you'd have to completely and totally re-write it in order to make it not sound like a press page for the company. One of the first sentences is a great example of what I mean by promotional: "MachPanel lets you offer and support several types of hosting services including advanced revenue generating SaaS/Cloud based hosting services with complete control on your business by means of feature rich self-service control panels for providers, resellers, customers and end-users." When writing an article you don't write "you" as if you are talking to a customer. Further sentences use various other promotional WP:PUFFERY and other elements, like the version update information is considered to be completely irrelevant for Wikipedia's purposes because it is considered to be WP:INDISCRIMINATE information. I did perform a search and unfortunately I can't find where the company has really received enough in-depth coverage to merit an article on Wikipedia in general. The majority of what I found were websites that would at best be considered forums, WP:SPS, or routine database listings of the company. As far as the information being useful (WP:ITSUSEFUL), being useful is not in and of itself a reason to keep an article. I also kind of have to warn you about editing with a conflict of interest (WP:COI) because in this instance the page was so unambiguously promotional that I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did. It looks like the company's edits to the page is what brought additional notice to the page, but by all accounts it looks like this article should have been nominated for deletion a long time ago. If you can provide coverage that would counter the argument that the company fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines then you may be able to re-create the page without fear of it being otherwise deleted. The problem here is that I fear that even if someone were to re-create the page, it would inevitably be deleted via AfD for not passing WP:CORP. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
    The editor 'Machsolus' has been indef blocked as a spamusername. That should have been done even before the article was deleted. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:12, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

S15 (Private Investigators)

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The group has ben trying to get recognized as the first computer network of private investigators. They have served a purpose which is well ingrained in the history of the private investigation business. Many of the members are willing to make contributions to the page providing with more information. We just need the page to stay un instead of being deleted every time we try to get it published. -Medschoolprof (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  Not done The page has not been deleted yet. However, given that there do not appear to be any secondary sources written about the subject, it's pretty clear that it will (and should) get deleted under CSD A7. —C.Fred (talk) 23:31, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation (disambiguation)

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Page was deleted at AFD in 2005, but a replacement was created four years later, and its existence was solidly kept at a second AFD. We might as well undelete the history that got deleted in the 2005 AFD. -65.210.65.16 (talk) 18:34, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  Done. There wasn't much there to be restored though. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Holy redundancy batman! §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Misoon Ghim

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Ajbaptiste, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Ajbaptiste (talk) 22:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

@Ajbaptiste:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:48, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Owais Bhat (Artist)

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

2 Sir, I m Working On This Article From Last One Day & I Didn't Took Much Time In Doing Work on it. So please Give Me some more time to make it fully clear as per Wikipedia rules. Mostly i will give its importance also & its liable sources No reasoning given. -Owaisbhat (talk) 04:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done We don't restore articles that have been deleted via WP:A7 on requests for undeletion, but most importantly the article was written in an extremely promotional manner. This is likely because it appears that you are trying to write your own autobiography, which is highly, highly discouraged on Wikipedia. Please understand that this is not Linkedin or any other professional resume-type site and that existing as a performer (WP:ITEXISTS) does not automatically mean that you warrant a page. I'm also concerned about notability, as it looks like you haven't actually received any coverage in independent and reliable sources. (WP:RS) I see on your userpage where you've listed WP:PRIMARY sources (your bandcamp and facebook pages), but none of these can show notability because they were written by yourself or someone that you are involved with either professionally or otherwise. Also, an association with notable persons, shows, or events does not automatically give notability in every scenario as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. I'm sorry, but I just don't see where you're ultimately notable enough to merit an article on Wikipedia unless there is more coverage in another language. Even then, I would highly recommend that you ask someone on WP:INDIA to create the article for you as opposed to creating it yourself as the promotional prose of the article you created brings up pretty steep concerns of conflict of interest. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Australian Women's Health Network

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please replace my subpage with the content of this deleted page or email it to me as I intend to re-create the article without the copyright violations that got it deleted, and I recall there were valid sources in the article which would save me time in re-creating it. Thank you. -Freikorp (talk) 04:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Done Normally we don't, but I do see where you've removed the copyvio. I've restored the page history for your userpage and unfortunately it means that your entire userpage history has been restored, so you may just want to do a cut/paste for this when you're done as opposed to moving it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sue Mantle DiCicco

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

SandianeCarter (talk) 14:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

@SandianeCarter:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Infonotizia.it

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 217.133.254.203, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 217.133.254.203 (talk) 17:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

  Declined. It was four sentences of advertising, not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Please start over, after you have read and understood the guidance at Wikipedia:Golden rule. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:21, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

SDMS (Staff Development Management Software)

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

We would like to update the references sections which the article was previously rejected for and resubmit the article -62.249.233.146 (talk) 17:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

  Not done, for now. It was restored by request in January, and it languished until being deleted again. Wikipedia is not an indefinite hosting space for draft articles that will never be accepted. How can we trust that you truly wish to improve it now, after failing to do so after we restored it before? ~Amatulić (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Thomas Mar Athanasius

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Psthomas (talk) 19:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The mentioned person was a prominent christian leader/Bishop in India and held an important role in history of Mar Thoma Syrian Church.

@Psthomas:   Not done: there is nothing to do here, this page is for requesting restoration of deleted articles, but Thomas Mar Athanasius has not been deleted. If there are disagreements about its content, see WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle for how to handle them, by discussion on the talk page. Also, please read the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy, summarised as "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source". The article has no references at present, and unsourced material may be challenged and removed. JohnCD (talk) 19:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

undeletion of the article barakoti.

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -122.173.255.62 (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC) please do not delete,edit or change it as its a true information given out there about "barakoti".

  •   Not done The page is currently up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barakoti, which is where you should make your arguments. The thing about notability is that nobody is really doubting that there is someone out there with this surname. Mostly they're questioning the notability and whether or not this was something done just for fun. Your only real chance to make it pass notability guidelines is to see if we have articles about people with this surname and list them on the entry, turning it into a disambiguation page. But as a page just for a specific family? No, that's likely not going to save it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Pierre Tillman

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The Player is been playing in the top division of the men football football and has now joined the top flight of football in Indian Super league along with players such as Alessandro Del Piero, Marco Materazzi, David Trezeguet, Mikael Silvester and many more football legends. The Player has played key role in promoting his Club to the top division of Swedish Men league football.This player is also fighting a legal battle at the moment and the global news is covering him as he is the 1st international player to suffer in this manner and the powers of the Indian Super league are trying to have his profile removed. There are many profiles which deserve no Wiki profile such as: 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiven_Mendoza 2)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Pelissari 3)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhwinder_Singh_(footballer_born_1983) 4)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shilton_Paul 5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulga_(footballer) 6)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Spitzner 7)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sushanth_Mathew 8)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramandeep_Singh_(footballer) 9)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphaël_Romey 10)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Gusmao these are just 10 of the 60 profiles for the Indian Super League examples and there are many more. Tillman is a far superior profile than these 10 examples of profiles and definitely deserves the wikipedia article and he has far more media demand and reach in Scandinavian countries as well as India. Plus the profile must be unbiasedly deleted not to cover up something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annaprash (talk • contribs) 12:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC) -

  • @Annaprash: I'm sorry, but you will have to ask either User:Black Kite or User:FreeRangeFrog if the page had enough sources to overturn AfD. If one or both admins decline to restore the article or move it to your draftspace, you will have to bring it up at deletion review. As far as bringing up other articles, the issue is that the existence of other articles doesn't mean that this page should be re-created. (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) It could be that the other players meet notability guidelines in ways that Tillman did/does not or it could be that they fail notability guidelines and just haven't been deleted yet. Either way, mentioning them does not really do anything to strengthen your argument. You must show notability by way of coverage in independent and reliable sources. I also have to mention that from what I can see at the AfD, it looks like a wide variety of editors took part in the discussion. I'd probably recommend against making further requests about the ethnicity or race of what admin responds to your request, though. That can sound insensitive, to be honest. Plus I do have to argue that since this player performs in an Indian football league, that an administrator located in India may be more able to find sources in other languages- especially since many editors and admins use Google or other English language search links that will not bring up every English language India source. While it doesn't always mean that there are sources out there, it has been enough of a significant problem that WP:INDIA has had to make mention of this in more than a few instances. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Basically what I'm saying here is that re-creation isn't impossible, just that you have to go through the proper channels, provide sources to show that notability guidelines are now met, and try to be open minded about who may respond to your request. Making comments that imply that there is a bias and that it can only be resolved by barring a certain percentage of administrators from replying will put people on the defensive. This may not have been what you intended by your comment, but this is how it came across to me and I can guarantee that others will perceive it in the same manner. Please be careful about how you phrase things! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:47, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

@ Tokyogirl79 Thanks a lot for the great help. I understand your reasons behind the statements and fully appreciate the same. I will try and use either of your suggested options and I am by no means trying to target a race, Its just that the profile was baisly removed targeting the player as he had filed a lawsuit. His profile had more than 12 references from the global newspapers and media too and still I felt it was to cover up someone else. The player has a profile on swedish wiki as well and its doing fine. I will try and work with other administrators to have to this re-created or speak to the admins who deleted it and try and explain them the history behind it with relevant facts and wiki approved data. Once again many thanks!! (｡◕‿◕｡)

Connie Garner

Latest comment: 10 years ago10 comments5 people in discussion

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Roundtheroundabout (talk) 23:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Please realist, updated sources provided.

<proposed article text removed--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)>
  Not done @Roundtheroundabout: Hi Roundtheroundabout. The sources in the proposed text you posted do not evidence anything. Real Talk Real Women links to Amazon selling that book. It tells us nothing about this subject's appearance in it. The second reference is also somewhere selling a book, and is as far from a reliable source as can be. The "publisher" is is a vanity press (an apparent imprint of VDM Publishing), and actually is one of those disgusting scam companies that sells amalgamations of Wikipedia articles to people at high prices. In other words, that is not even a vanity published book which would be no good, but rather a listing to sell us a book that would have the content of this deleted article and some other random Wikipedia content as it's text if you fell for the scam. In any event, this page is only for requesting undeletion of article that were deleted uncontroversially (see the notes and details at the top of the page). Since this was deleted through a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Connie Garner, this is the wrong forum. Please don't attempt to post the article's text here again. It does not belong here at all, and we can see it by looking at the history of this page and your reposts of the article after the AfD.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

The book is only one source, if you look at the competition videos and history they have results and evidence. I have copies of newspaper articles to provide as well as news footage and a number of magazines that can be verified. Please advise how to escalate this for review. -Roundtheroundabout (talk) 00:33, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

We don't debate content here; the criteria for what is elegible for restoration on this page is quite clearly stated at the top. The article was deleted as the result of a deletion discussion, and because it appeared unambiguously promotional. Therefore it is ineligible for restoration by request.
Your course of action is to request that the deleting administrator, FreeRangeFrog, reconsider the deletion decision in light of the sources you present. If you are not satisfied with his response (and he may elect to restore the article to your user space for submission to WP:AFC), you may take your case to Wikipedia:Deletion review to determine not if the article deserves restoration on its merits, but whether FreeRangeFrog's deletion decision was proper. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:56, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
@Roundtheroundabout: While the deletion was procedural and the latest re-creation was highly promotional (Connie’s favorite saying is: If you have a dream, a goal, a want, then GO FOR IT. Nothing is impossible, NOTHING. Don’t let the small stuff get in your way. Obstacles on the way to achieving your goals are only there to determine your true desire for your goal. If you really want it, you’ll succeed.), I have no problem restoring it. But please show us one single piece of media generated by a reliable source (major newspaper, magazine, TV show, etc) that is about Connie Garner or her work and I'll restore the article to draft so you can work on it. Just one. That will help assert at least minimal notability, which would prevent it from being deleted outright. I may have missed one, because when I search for "NABBA Miss Fitness Australia" the only thing I get are Garner's website, a bunch of old YouTube videos and the Wikipedia article. The website for "Miss Fitness World" is obviously operated by Garner, and the books you cited are probably written by Garner or otherwise associated with her. All we need is a minimal assertion of importance by a secondary independent source - otherwise you'd be just wasting the reviewers' time. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 05:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

thank you so much for your assistance FreeRangeFrog

I don't know how to insert the articles in here for you to view? they have been uploaded for viewing at:

http://www.missworldfitness.com/testgallery.html

hope this helps.

much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roundtheroundabout (talk • contribs) 09:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

thank you so much for your assistance FreeRangeFrog

I don't know how to insert the articles in here for you to view? they have been uploaded for viewing at:

http://www.missworldfitness.com/testgallery.html

hope this helps. I have others as well if you can tell me where to send them? Also there is a youtube video of a morning television show in Australia with an interview.

much appreciated. -Roundtheroundabout (talk) 09:28, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

@Roundtheroundabout: Fair enough. Based solely on this and this. The article has been restored to Draft:Connie Garner, where you can work on it without interference and submit it when it is ready. I remind you that two newspaper articles don't necessarily make notability, and you must "tone it down" to make it less promotional and more factual. When you're done, you can use the green button at the top to submit your work for review. Good luck. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Polandball

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please undelete all deleted versions of this page, and merge discussions to current page. -GZWDer (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

  Done, history restored. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:21, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International Systems Engineering Day

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This Day is now getting official recognition, and we would like to create an article to reflect this fact. and then click the "Save page" button below -Xnicholasf (talk) 21:10, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

@Xnicholasf:   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 21:26, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zibby Allen

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I, Mallen22, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mallen22 (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 

-Mallen22 (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
  •   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:55, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Tracing the Past

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Was deleted as unimportant or insignificant, but this organization has published online a Holocaust database which offer search possibilities never previously available, and as such is important, significant, and does not qualify for speedy deletion. I would also like to improve it immediately so as to emphasize its importance and significance. -Rpm bln (talk) 11:42, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@Rpm bln: The assertion of significance pertains to the database, not the organization. Remember, Notability is not inherited. The speedy deletion appears technically correct. Because it was deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#A7, it is ineligible for restoration by request on this page.
You need to discuss this with the deleting administrator, RHaworth, who may be willing to restore the article (perhaps to your user space) for the purpose of refactoring the subject to be about the database rather than the organization. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:41, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Javed Chaudhry

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This page was made for informative purpose and then click the "Save page" button below -Fammazkhan (talk) 08:55, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

  Not done. It is a recreation of a previously deleted copyright violation. Due to the disruptive recreations, the page is now protected from being created again. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

IPBS

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

the will be restructuring the page with the right link and all the necessary and available information about the 11 partner schools. -141.70.12.79 (talk) 16:54, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

IPBS is just a redirect to a deleted article, and as such there is no point in restoring it. As for the deleted article itself,   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/International Partnership of Business Schools, 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 Philg88 (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) 17:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Atul Kumar

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Karenntime (talk) 15:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

It is good page with positive contributions I think It should remain at wiki that is why i have created hope for fair judgment

It already had its fair judgment. Therefore,   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/Atul Kumar (2nd nomination), it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Spartaz (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:44, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
@Karenntime: note that your re-created article was not deleted, but moved to the Draft space at Draft:Atul Kumar where you can work on it. You are more likely to get permission to restore it to the main encyclopedia if you improve the draft to show how he meets the notability requirement, see WP:Notability (people) and WP:Notability (academics). JohnCD (talk) 18:02, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Temple_Mount

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The Christianity part of the Temple Mount was making reference to a New Testament verse by Jesus. However in the prophetic book of Daniel the language is clear in the Old Testament points to a temple temple that is coming that is made without hands. If my writing is the issue then please inform me and will gladly do a better job to repair. However the content of my editing is very important in the interpretation of both Christianity "Save page" button below -Michaelidarecis (talk) 18:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@Michaelidarecis:   Not done. This page is only for requesting restoration of articles which have been deleted. Temple Mount has not. Your contribution to it has been reverted: see WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle for how to proceed - discuss the issue on the article talk page and try to establish a WP:Consensus. You should also read WP:No original research. JohnCD (talk) 19:02, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Shazir Mucklai

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I truly believe this person is notable, because he has displayed a keen notability in today's financial world. -Moneyballer303 (talk) 00:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

What you believe about his notability is irrelevant to Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion. Also, you are one of several single-purpose accounts who suddenly appeared to re-create the article or remove speedy deletion templates. You may participate in your sockpuppet case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ms349846. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Digital mall in Bangladesh. Online shopping in BD

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

“Digital Mall” – a Bangladeshi IT based E-Commerce site has successfully commenced its online operations. This sister concern of Smart Technologies started its journey in the Bangladeshi market with the tag line “shopping at any time”, and is ready to spread its wings beyond the traditional and mortar concept. SO i just share this information to others. I can give more reference about this. -Reyad hasan (talk) 08:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

  Not done. You call it "sharing the information", I call it a blatant advertisement, the company puffing itself in the first person: "Now we have large quantities of product and happy customers" etc. Wikipedia does not do advertising or promotion: anything like that is deleted at sight. If you are connected with the company, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. JohnCD (talk) 10:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

matte Projects

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Unfairly deleted, did not fit criteria for deletion -OliverZD (talk) 19:39, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Holladay Sisters

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I, Mollygilbert35, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mollygilbert35 (talk) 21:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Enter your working on gathering 3rd party links that can be verified since most of their story is first-hand experience because back up singers are not always credited here and then click the "Save page" button below -Mollygilbert35 (talk) 21:09, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

  Note: This page has been deleted multiple times as an abandoned draft article. As Articles for creation, the Draft space, and user subpages are not to be used to indefinitely host material inappropriate for the encyclopedia, what exactly would you do to help make the draft get accepted as an article? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Full Moon (MATTE event)

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Unfairly deleted, does not contain content required for deletion -24.90.239.233 (talk) 21:54, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

User:BarbieHarris21/sandbox

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  Not done The content had some serious problems, such that is was very promotional and entirely unsourced in an article on a living person, but the insurmountable problem is that it was a blatant copyright violation of Allmusic, and the balance of the article also contains copyright violations from other places such as here.

For future reference, people own the copyright to the words they write, so long as some creative expression is involved. Relatively short quotations can be used under fair use, indicated to be quotes by the use of quote marks. (We also require inline citations to the source of the quotation for each quote.) Outside of that limited use, you can't use other people's writing. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Orthopsychiatric Association

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I, 96.234.142.19, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 96.234.142.19 (talk) 01:10, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done This was written in a fairly promotional manner, so much so that you'd almost have to WP:TNT just about everything to really write a neutral article. I can see where you (or someone else) did try to tone down the spam in later edits, but was still unsuccessful. I can't help but think that if this was restored, that you would likely still try to keep the bulk of what was written because it'd be easier to do that than to re-write everything that was promotional- which again, is most of the AfC article. I think that in this case it'd just be better to start from scratch in this instance, as again- I do see where you tried to edit to fix issues but you still kept the promotional material for the most part. I can provide the sources listed in the article, if you want but I think that the article content as a whole would make it unlikely that you'd make a neutral entry. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:27, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Brainnetome Project

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Yongliu brainnetome, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Yongliu brainnetome (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done The page contained copyrighted material from the official website for the project and also contained a large amount of promotional-ish prose. It actually kind of makes me worry that the promotional-ish content isn't copyvio from another source in that it's either directly taken from the website or is so closely paraphrased that it'd still be considered a copyvio. If your organization wants to file a ticket giving permissions at WP:ORTS that would help take care of the copyright issues but you'd still be faced with the issue of the page being written in a fairly non-NPOV tone. This is why we so discourage using copyrighted text- most times even if the content is given up as fair use or a ticket is filed, it's still somewhat or blatantly promotional to the point where we can't use it. However the biggie here is that this seems to be partially or entirely a copyright violation. I'd suggest filing a ticket on ORTS and then making another request on here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Girish Jhunjhnuwala

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Mopzig, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mopzig (talk • contribs) 04:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Christel Bankewitz

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The page had two refereneces. Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -2605:A000:BEC3:6200:494A:69CA:8CD:F4D3 (talk) 09:06, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Mpack_(Unix)

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article was apparently deleted due to "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". I apologize if the article comes across as such, but it was never intended to be so. I have had no personal involvement in the development of the program, and have no financial incentive to promote it. The article was patterned after the first few paragraphs of similar articles pertaining to e-mail clients, such as Pine (email client), Pico (text editor), and Elm (email client). Also, it seemed like there was a need for the article, as Mpack links to it. Please let me know if there are any other issues regarding the article that I should address. Thanks in advance. -dying (talk) 16:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Dying:   Done, article restored. It is a reasonable stub. I don't see how an article on a venerable and common Unix utility could be considered promotional. Maybe it was the external links? But those are to a university software repository and a Sourceforge development area. If it was promotional, it certainly wasn't unambiguous, and therefore didn't qualify for WP:CSD#G11 deletion. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Creating Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Culture in Decline (Web series)

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Fixuture.member (talk) 17:57, 11 November 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.

TechDependent

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please do not delete this page as it is still developing and will be updated multiple times in the future. Please give me a chance as this is my very first article and i am working on it with all my effort. The page is regarding an organisation which is valid and i have evidence to prove this. The page has been deleted many times in the past and i am upset as it takes me a long time to restart the page over and over again and add all information. Please give me a chance because i promise that i will work on the article and make it as accurate as possible so others can make use of it. Thanks in advance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynag98 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Then work on it in your user space.
  Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Mynag98/TechDependent. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:01, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Spark (novel by John Twelve Hawks)

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

(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.) Writershouseusa (talk) 20:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Gypsy Warrior

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I would like to access the page to see the content, so that I could rewrite it, and also for future use. -47.22.4.138 (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brandi Institute for Light and Design

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 80.171.101.84, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 80.171.101.84 (talk) 22:48, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

  Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. This draft has never been submitted for review; please update it and submit it as soon as convenient. "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Read WP:Your first article for advice, and note the need for references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish Wikipedia:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 22:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

sodhpuch

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Never requested for deletion and no any promotional content included -182.93.83.6 (talk) 08:55, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Carefreek (talk) 08:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done This page was deleted for WP:A7 (overall notability) and WP:G11 (unambiguous promotion). I don't know that the promotional overtones were necessarily intentional, but I can see why this was a concern. It's not the most promotional thing I've seen, which is why I think that it was mostly unintentional. What I'm more concerned about are issues of notability, as there weren't really any big assertions to notability made in the article other than the company existing. In any case, we typically do not restore A7 articles here- you will need to ask User:Peridon if he will restore the page for you and if not, then you will need to go to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iDreamCareer

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 14.98.113.146, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 14.98.113.146 (talk) 00:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done It's pretty closely paraphrased from official sources by the school and I'm also somewhat worried about the article's tone, as it is borderline promotional in areas. The close paraphrasing is the main reason why I'm declining this since the promotional tone isn't so bad that I'd totally decline on that basis. That said, I have no problem with you creating a new version of the article. The deleted version was pretty short, so there wasn't much lost here. Here are the only two sources in the article: [1], [2]. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_160&oldid=1197330073"