Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 172

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Tokyogirl79 in topic Top Law Schools of India Rankings
Archive 165←Archive 170Archive 171Archive 172Archive 173Archive 174Archive 175

Eli Cohen-Kagan

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi,

An article I wrote named "Eli Cohen-Kagan" was deleted several days back using a SPEEDY DELETION procedure, for a so-called "advertising" reason.

I oppose to the use of this supposed reason: The article is written according to all Wikipedia rules. I believe that it is important enough, deserves to be part of Wikipedia and serves it's purpose. In addition, I would like to emphasize that the article is cited and has links to other relevant articles and websites.

Kindly consider the undeletion of this article.


Best regards, Elad -Liquidspice (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

  Declined. @Liquidspice: The article wasn't deleted due to being advertising. The article was fairly well written. It was deleted for notability reasons. The article did not make any credible assertion of significance as to why the subject merits an article in an encyclopedia. It seems only one local source gave the man any significant coverage. You might want to look at WP:Golden rule for a basic overview of what is expected.
Articles deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#A7, as this one was, are ineligible for restoration by request on this page. You have to make your case to the deleting administrator User:Y. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Inverse Infrastructures

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Luuk.Wee, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Luuk.Wee (talk) 11:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to continue to work on this page and make it ready/public soon.

@Luuk.Wee:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

naija Politica

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The created page was done in same format as popular news media such as CNN and al jazera. I was re editing the page to make it look more like an encyclopedic page when i got the information that it was deleted for reason of ambiguous advertising. Naija politica as a company has been in existence for the pas three years and concerns herself with mainly nigeian political news. The page was created with necessary references. Please, kindly accept the plea to undelete the page while i complete the editing on it making it less of a promotional page as it was not intentional considering the fact that i am a new user and an avid lover of the platform so thought it nice creating a page for the company. thanks -Davidwillyetuk (talk) 10:18, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

  Not done. It was definitely unambiguously promotional, with unsubstantiated puffery such as "they strive to get you updated", "numerous advantages", "numerous constant viewers", "truly credible", "famous revealing articles" and so on, throughout the article. It would need a complete re-write from scratch to be acceptable. The article has been deleted four times in the space of a month, due to such problems. Please use Wikipedia:Articles for creation to submit your article for review instead of attempting to publish it in main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

go via network

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

My page was deleted as it had duplicate information as the go via page. I'd like to request the content back so I can incorporate it into the go via page without having to recreate all the formatting. Thanks, Katie -KatieSusanT (talk) 05:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

@KatieSusanT:   Done, I have restored the contribution history and converted the title to a redirect to Go via. You may recover your contributions from the redirect title here. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:20, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Raven Oak

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

We're trying to figure out why the wiki page of one of our published authors was deleted. The page has existed for many years as Raven has several books and 1 CD released. We went to add information about upcoming titles to the page today and found it gone. As her publisher, we would ask for the page to be restored. Lesser known authors' pages exist still. -Gsp laurel (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:Conflict of interest and our Terms of Use stipulation on edits made in the course of your job duties. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:26, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@Gsp laurel:   Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. However, it is likely to be nominated at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a discussion, lasting normally seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute.
I have added a link to Amazon which meets the minimum requirement of one independent reference for an article about a living person, but otherwise the article is entirely sourced to her own websites or to something she wrote. That means the article consists of Ms Oak telling us about herself; that would be fine for a Faceboook page but not for an encyclopedia article, which is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, but should summarise what other people say about them.
Wikipedia's inclusion criterion is called Wikipedia:Notability and looks for "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones like publishers, and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? For more detail, see Wikipedia:Golden Rule and the specific guidelines WP:AUTHOR and WP:MUSICBIO.
I have to say that with only one, jointly-authored, book that has made it as far as Amazon or Google Books, and one album, it seems unlikely to me that she meets WP:AUTHOR or WP:MUSICBIO, but that will be for a community discussion to decide. Your conflict of interest means that you should not edit the article directly, but you make suggestions on the talk page, taking care to disclose your interest. The most valuable contribution would be links to independent reviews of her book or her album, or to any published article discussing her or her work in some depth. JohnCD (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DIY Film Festival

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I, Richmartini, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Richmartini (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

We are now in our 13th year, listed in withoutabox.com, sponsored by Pinnacle and Kinonation, located via diyfilmfest.com and then click the "Save page" button below -Richmartini (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

@Richmartini:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Angel Sessions

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I would like to request for undeletion of Angel Sessions article. I have fixed the issue by completely removing the bio on the IMDB site that caused the deletion. After reviewing the issue I now understand why this happened. Thank you. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1594651/bio " button below -Demetrius Guidry (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2015 (UTC) Demetrius Guidry (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

  •   Not done I believe you would be talking about Draft:Angel Sessions. Copyright still applies even if the original copy is destroyed. You are welcome to write this in different words, or if it was you that wrote the IMDB content, then you can add a note on IMDB using the same id that created the writeup in the first place that the content is CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL licensed as well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


Hello Graeme. Since the IMDB article has been deleted. I can reinstate it and then add at the end of the article that it is CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL licensed as well. Is just adding that statement enough to reinstate my original article that was deleted? Or, is there a form I need to fill out? Lastly, may I create the original article using the code I saved and go from there?. Thanks. Demetrius Guidry (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

You can recreate Draft:Angel Sessions if you rewrite it in new original language. You don't have to label Wikipedia text as CC-BY-SA-3.0, because when you click save you have agreed to that license anyway. It is the IMDB text that would need to be licensed that way for you to copy it here. So far it is not clear if you are the author for the IMDB text or not. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alix Desulme

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I, Adesulme, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Adesulme (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC) ,

Please read WP:Autobiography. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  Done, draft restored. Yes, do read WP:Autobiography as well as WP:Golden rule. Otherwise, Artices for Creation is the correct venue for an editor with a conflict of interest to write an article about himself. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Lawrence Kradin

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Rbkradin, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rbkradin (talk) 03:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

@Rbkradin:  Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Kiara Diane

Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

The page was removed due to lack of information. The deletion log states that the page Kiara Diane fails the PORNBIO and the GNG. No nonscene awards, only nominations. No independent, reliable sourcing. No reliably sourced biographical content. However, if given some time I will gladly provide you with independent, and reliable sourcing -Kiaradianemgr (talk) 20:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review instead. The only thing I see in the deletion log is a link to the AfD discussion, which precludes any restoration here. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@Kiaradianemgr:  Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiara Diane, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Ymblanter (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Also, COI editors should not request undeletion of pages they created.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
There is no policy or guideline saying so. COI editors are allowed to make such requests. Some COI editors can write good articles, and that is something to encourage. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

(no page specified)

Latest comment: 9 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.) 41.240.35.189 (talk) 09:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

  Not done. We can do nothing unless you tell us what page you mean. If you are not sure of the exact name, it would help to know the name of the account that created it. JohnCD (talk) 11:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Bertman

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, EditorsGuild, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. EditorsGuild (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Airborne Tactical Advantage Company

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Concept Jet, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Concept Jet (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

@Concept Jet:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Airborne Tactical Advantage Company. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Roy Oppenheim

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Sociallyfein, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sociallyfein (talk) 20:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC) <deletia>

I have removed the massive wall of text incorporated with this request, on the grounds that it's not germane, since   Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. Please edit the draft page to include the sources, not here. (This page was restored three weeks ago; pages are only deleted for being abandoned if they've been more than six months fallow.) —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NARCOMS (North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis)

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 138.26.188.125, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 138.26.188.125 (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

  Not done. The draft blatantly infringed on copyright, copying and pasting content seen here, here and here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:22, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Peatling&action=edit&redlink=1

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Robert Peatling is known figure survivor of WW II and author of "no surrender at Arnhem" -Muijen (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

  @Muijen: Hi Muijen. I have userfied the article to User:Muijen/Robert Peatling, so that you can work on it there. This looks like it might have potential but it's not ready for the article mainspace yet. This needs citations to reliable sources to show notability of the topic to verify the content, and to demonstrate it is not original research. What I suggest is that you try to address these issues and once done, place this code at the top of the page: {{subst:submit}} and hit save. This will submit the page for review through the articles for creation process. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Rigel Technology

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello there, would like to contest speedy deletion of Rigel Technology please. I had previously indicated on the page that I would like to make edits to the page to improve on it and I had updated it with changes after it was flagged for speedy deletion. However, I did not manage to finish making all my changes at that time. I'm also not sure if the user had also noticed that I had made changes to the article before removing it. Is it possible to reinstate the article so that I continue improving on it please? Also, is it possible to advise why the article was flagged as G11, is it more so because of the language? Or is it more of a problem with the references? Would appreciate some friendly advice, thanks! -Heynubcake (talk) 01:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G11. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. A G11 is almost always an issue more with the article's tone and language as opposed to the references. Being G11 and being well-sourced are not necessarily mutually exclusive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:39, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Would you like this back as a draft to work on, or a user space draft? The reason for deletion would be the language, I can see that you cut back on the hype, but the whole thing still looked like a press release or a company's own web site, more than an encyclopedia entry. It was deleted three times so there are 4 different people involved in tagging or deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Association of Lisp Users

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please undelete this page. The Association of Lisp Users is an active association and recently held an International Lisp Meeting in Montreal.

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Dcooper8 (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Gypsy Warrior

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I don't understand why the company I wrote the Wiki for is considered unimportant. If the deletion won't be taken back, can I speak to someone who will let me know exactly what is wrong with the information? If not, can you send me the draft so it can be re-written for approval? Thank you. -Treasure Uhlik (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonasoft

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I, Emailarchiving.enthusiast, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)



Request to 'undelete':

1) Sonasoft has become a public company on September 4, 2014 (trading symbol: (OTCPK: SSFT).

2) Sonasoft was embroiled with the IRS alleged scandal involving Louis Lerner's email.

Thank you for your consideration.

Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC) Emailarchiving.enthusiast Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

  •   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" We will need references on this too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Anything Goes Tour

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

True Facts [1] -Rquidone0717 (talk) 22:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://floridageorgialine.com/tour-dates/
  Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G11. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. A G11 deletion isn't an issue with the facts, it's an issue with the tone. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonasoft

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Request for reinstatement. The offending text was a place holder text that Wikipedia cited from:

http://www.abc6.com/story/27780401/sonasoft-projects-an-increase-of-135-percent-in-its-q4-revenue

But, it originated from Sonasoft's very own press release where Sonasoft wrote:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/Sonasoft-financial/fourth-quarter/prweb12428064.htm

Upon receiving this notice, I rushed to change the text as to be in compliance. However, I see that the 'speedy' deletion nominations are very speedy indeed. I humbly request to have the article reinstated, and I promise IMMEDIATELY to change the offending text. I also will study the guidelines A-Z as I am a greenhorn to publishing articles in Wikipedia, and will gladly stay in compliance.

Many thanks for the chance to be reinstated.

Emailarchiving.enthusiast (talk) 22:40, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

@Emailarchiving.enthusiast:   Not done Hello Emailarchiving.enthusiast. We cannot undelete copyright violations. I have however, already emailed to you the article draft's skeleton – those portions that were not copyvios. You can re-create the page using that roadmap. However, please be aware of our guideline on editing with a conflict of interest; our requirements to demonstrate notablity, verifiability and lack of original research through citation to reliable, secondary sources that are entirely independent of the topic; and our requirement that article be written in a neutral manner. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Isomer (video game)

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I, SuperHamster, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:40, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Additional Comment - I remember viewing (maybe reviewing) this draft, and it did look like it may eventually have potential - would like to have it on hand for potential improvements if more sources can be found. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
@SuperHamster:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scott Dudelson

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, StanleyJean05, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. StanleyJean05 (talk) 03:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

@StanleyJean05:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. You might want to heed the advice of the original reviewer and turn that into an article about the company. A redirect for the person could be created and some biographical information added to it in a dedicated section or something like that. Looks like the company already has an article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

File:EwanMcLennan.jpg

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Permission recieved. VRTS ticket # 2014111710022228 –Fredddie™ 01:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

There are a total of four files under the same ticket, I added the rest here. –Fredddie™ 01:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Fredddie, are you an OTRS volunteer? What kind of permission is granted? What copyright license is included? The file page does not include any valid license. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes I'm a volunteer. This is the license granted: {{self|CC-BY-SA-3.0|GFDL}}. –Fredddie™ 01:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
So is the self attribution meaning the uploader user, or is there some other name required for attribution? I will start restoring. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
The self was Mr. McLennan. –Fredddie™ 01:54, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Can you please update the file pages to give correct credit required? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:31, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Nitesh Estates Limited

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This company is notable and public listed company so its page must be present on Wikipedia. Also its Chairman's Wikipedia page that is Nitesh Shetty is also existing and hence its required that the company's page should also be there. Before there was a problem of content as it was claimed to be promotional but later when improved content was being posted then also the page was deleted. I was unable to understand the actual reason of the deletion of this page. Before it was stated that the content is promotional and when it was modified then also the page was removed. We must have Nitesh Estates Limited Wikipedia page and hence its request from all the users to please get it done soon. Earlier page I also agree was promotional but what about the new one that was based on improved content. -Williamson56 (talk) 11:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  Not done and will not be done Absolutely not, sockpuppet of Ramesh985. You're wasting your own time in this continued campaign.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/YSBL

Latest comment: 9 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.) Ysbl-scriptwriter (talk) 14:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

@Ysbl-scriptwriter:  Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jay Bell

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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

To revise article for re-submission.Gemini Grammarian (talk) 14:50, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

@Gemini Grammarian:  Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:39, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Mark Beam

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

wiki contains information about an artist who can easily be googled. your reasoning for deletion doesn't make sense. one of his works he is well known for is Frank Zappa's famous Yellow Shark album, featuring MBs work on the cover. please help & thank you. "Save page" button below -Beam1on12th (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  •   Not done This page hasn't been deleted yet and the best place to contest it is on the article's talk page. That said, I don't see where the speedy deletion criteria actually applies in this case since WikiGrain is just a mirror for Wikipedia pages. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Although it will probably just need to be re-written anyway since some of the prose is fairly promotional in how it's written. Writing things like "hit show/film" do come across as opinion and could be more neutrally stated, as people usually use terms like "hit" as WP:PEACOCK terms to make someone seem more popular, notable, and "sellable". Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Beam1on12th, this still runs the issue of whether or not he would pass notability guidelines now, as he was previously deleted at WP:AfD back in 2009. The article is identical and the claims are still the same, so unless I can find sources that would merit this going back to AfD, I will probably just G4 this. If it does end up getting G4'd I'd recommend that you take this to deletion review. On a side note I do see that there were concerns on the AfD about you being Mark Beam and this being a way to promote yourself. There were also concerns that you created a secondary account to edit the page instead of using the same account, which can be seen as WP:SOCKPUPPETRY and is against Wikipedia policy. I would like to warn you about editing with a conflict of interest and if you are Beam, I'd like to warn you that writing an autobiography is extremely discouraged because it's so easy to make something promotional and to take deletions personally. Also if you are Beam, please say so up front. Having a COI and writing about yourself are discouraged, but it's more discouraged for people to claim to not be who they are. Offhand I have to say that the likelihood of this getting G4'd are very high since guidelines were far, far looser back in 2009 than they are nowadays and unless I find some spectacular sources, I don't really think that this would have a snowball's chance of surviving a second AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • However if you are Beam, then that could be beneficial since you could help us locate records of your artwork in various museums. I'm having trouble locating the art that's currently housed at the LA museum. Your website gives off the impression that it's in the restaurant located within the museum? If you can provide links to the museums that show proof that your artwork is linked there (they must specifically state that your work is part of their permanent collections or that you were the main focus of a major exhibition), then that would help immensely. I would imagine that the artist himself (or a representative) would probably best know where these links are than a random person. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • @FreeRangeFrog: What do you think of this article? I'm kind of leaning towards recommending this go through AfD again. I've found and provided more sources than were previously on the article and the way it's written now kind of does infer some notability. The prior AfD did seem to focus on the cow creation as opposed to the overall stuff, so I think that this would probably benefit from a second AfD than a G4, although I don't know if DRV would be a better place for this since it was re-created. I'm kind of halfsies on this, to be honest, so I would definitely recommend against a speedy deletion in this circumstance since there are actual sources this time around- there doesn't really appear to have been that many at the prior AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
@Tokyogirl79: I probably went offline just before you pinged me :) I agree this merits another AFD given the elapsed time. I looked around a bit and couldn't find much more than what is in the article, so it might be a tight fit through WP:CREATIVE and GNG. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:43, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

(no page specified, again)

Latest comment: 9 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.) 37.231.12.179 (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  Not done. We can do nothing unless you tell us what page you mean. If you are not sure of the exact name, it would help to know the name of the account that created it. JohnCD (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Circus Maximos Fashion Brand

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, 201.229.61.174, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 201.229.61.174 (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/RedBall Project

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Redballproject, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. All the content in the page was written by me or taken from redballproject website which was also written by me. There was no copyright violation. Redballproject (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Dee Dee M. Scott

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Dansuccess, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Dansuccess (talk) 18:33, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Sunshine shake

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I think people need to know about it -Dude123321 (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G2. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. Wikipedia is also not a place to drum up name recognition. A subject already needs to have had some press first. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  Not done See WP:NOTHOWTO. A blog or personal website is more appropriate for this type of thing. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 21:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ZEEKtheFREAK

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Zeek58, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Zeek58 (talk) 08:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

ZEEKtheFREAK

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

No reasoning given. -Zeek58 (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

tyler adkins

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Trooperstraw (talk) 06:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC) www.theadkinsfirm.com . It is clear based on the website and its content that nothing described was contrived or falsified. There is no reason why this worthy candidate should be deleted

Frosae Wine Sorbae

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The page was not used for advertisement. I followed the same format as Ben and Jerry's and other dessert companies, so if those are acceptable then why isn't this one? -Chrissip (talk) 15:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: You can't argue for undeletion based on the presence of articles in like topic areas. All articles on Wikipedia must independently satisfy our notability policies. If the article you are using as justification itself fails this, it will likely be nominated for deletion soon. G11s also won't unilaterally be restored here. One thing that people seem to always never realise is that G11 deletions are issues of tone as opposed to format or sources. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  Not done. @Chrissip: The article didn't resort to many promotional words or phrases, but it looked as a whole like a corporate brochure having the sole purpose of using Wikipedia for publicity purposes. That isn't permitted. If you disagree with the deletion decision, take it up with the deleting administrator Jimfbleak.
Also, if you are affiliated in any way with the company, you are required as by wmf:Terms of Use, to which you agreed when you created the account, to disclose your affiliation publicly. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

RTB2

Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I think I can add more citations, and was unfairly deleted. If restored, merge with Radio Television Brunei. -202.160.36.103 (talk) 10:51, 23 January 2015 (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/RTB2, 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 Randykitty (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. I suggest you create a new draft for it and start with your new citations. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

...why? RTB1 still remains, why not merge it? Or even userify the RTB2 page? 202.160.36.103 (talk) 11:14, 23 January 2015 (UTC) BTW, if you don't, I will be on break (for this account)

Because this page is solely for undeleting pages deleted uncontroversially. The presence of a deletion debate means there was controversy over it (And before you ask, admins will unilaterally overturn deletions based on no-participation AfDs, on the grounds that there was no debate, so it may as well have been PRODded). —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:48, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Userfy is possible. But you must request that. This article was a battle ground with much disruptive, and promotional editing, and reversals. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Dailypact

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

hi there i do not think that this page should be deleted i created the page as a founder of the website i created it so that people can find my site easily who are interested in creating blogposts. the page represents general information about the company and their is nothing spam with it and then click the "Save page" button below -Goodboysssszzz (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. If it does get deleted, admins will not restore G11 deletions here. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:00, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Also, having a page solely so "that people can find [your] site easily" is advertising, which we do not permit. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Not done The page was deleted via A7 and G11, neither of which are things that can be restored through REFUND. You can ask the deleting admin if they'll restore the page and if they refuse you can then go through WP:DRV, but I'll openly say that I think it will be extremely unlikely that they will restore this article. I'm also concerned about notability, as it appears that this site just recently launched and as such, will be unlikely to have received enough coverage to pass notability guidelines for websites. If you think that it has, then you can try making a new version of the article at WP:AfC, the articles for creation process. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:37, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Multi Image Group

Latest comment: 9 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.) Hueyoneil (talk) 05:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Center for Undergraduate Research in Mathematics

Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I, Dmcoff, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Dmcoff (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Please undelete this article--I have new sources to use. Thank you. Dmcoff (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. This page was undeleted on 9 Jan, and has been edited since by you. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
However, the draft article has now been deleted as a blatant copyright violation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:43, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Union Internationale des Guides et Scouts d'Europe.svg

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

maybe should have been deleted from offspring articles, but should not have been deleted from parent article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Union_of_Guides_and_Scouts_of_Europe . And yes, I have seen the deletion discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review/Archive_58#File:Union_Internationale_des_Guides_et_Scouts_d.27Europe.svg . Limiting use to the parent article would have saved the image in the first place, instead of deleting it wholesale. -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, just got back from the hospital, many thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Kyle Finnegan

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Kyle Finnegan is a current professional baseball player for the Oakland Athletics and is indeed a notable person, He has played in the prestigious Cape Cod Baseball League and is currently in the AA level for the Midland Rockhounds, a minor league affiliate of the Oakland Athletics {{Userspace draft|source=ArticleWizard|date=January 2015}}— Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeschmoe1991 (talk • contribs)

@Joeschmoe1991: I have restored the article to User:Joeschmoe1991/Kyle Finnegan. Please work it it there, expanding the content and citing to reliable secondary sources that are independent of this person which verify that content you add and indicate notability. Please understand that this was not deleted on the basis of notability (an assessment of notability requires looking at whether topic is notable regardless of what's currently written in an article or draft article). The speedy deletion criterion it was deleted under ("CSD A7") regards whether the content actually seen in the article credibly indicates importance or significance, and has nothing to say on the whether the topic is or is not actually notable. What can be confusing is that they do interface, in that A7, like the other speedy deletion bases is a line in the sand as to the current content, is a device that often gets rid of content that has a probability of being not notable, if we looked for sources out in the world.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Tieo Panther Bear

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I, 76.14.113.81, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 76.14.113.81 (talk) 03:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

wikipedia has many articles about Rap Artist, and has nothing about "Gangsta Leene" the rap artist. I felt it neccessary to include this artist, to let the world know about this well known, unknown rap artist, to those whom it may concern. -76.14.113.81 (talk) 03:46, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

  •   Not done I don't have a problem with you making a new draftspace entry, but the page was incredibly promotional in how it was written to the point where it would require a complete and total re-write to meet the NPOV standards. It's also written in a manner that comes across like it was taken from an official page, meaning that it kind of gives off the impression that it is likely to be a copyright violation. Also, please be aware that Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion like Bandcamp and is not intended to be used to "let the world know" about someone unless the person passes notability guidelines. I understand that this is an AfC submission, but it is still not intended to be used for publicity purposes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:04, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

The Great Martian War Saga (franchise)

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

in 2013 (as you didn't know), I was writing a new James Bond franchise before the deal with Disney comes to affect in this year -2.125.238.232 (talk) 00:53, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

  •   Not done and will not be done It was deleted as a hoax and as such is extremely unlikely to be restored without some good, solid proof that this actually exists. Also, it looks like this IP is User:Callump90 trying to evade his block, so I'm going to extend a warning that if you continue to try to re-introduce pages or further evade your block using IP addresses it is possible that your IP will eventually become permanently blocked as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/WTA Tier I, PM, P5 Series records and statistics

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I, Pindica, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Pindica (talk) 13:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Top Law Schools of India Rankings

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 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.) Hrithikashu (talk) 12:06, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

  Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_172&oldid=1083424587"