Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 223

Archive 220

Archive 221

Archive 222

Archive 223

Archive 224

Archive 225

→

Archive 230

Draft:Antoinetta Vogels

• Draft:Antoinetta Vogels · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, 76.28.204.208, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 76.28.204.208 (talk) 15:44, 17 February 2016 (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!"

Please read WP:Your first article, and note particularly the need for references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish "notability". JohnCD (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Selective Chemical Labeling of 5- hydroxymethylcytosine

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Selective Chemical Labeling of 5- hydroxymethylcytosine · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, MPOG2014, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. MPOG2014 (talk) 15:50, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

@MPOG2014: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Selective Chemical Labeling of 5- hydroxymethylcytosine. 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) 14:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Nicola Majocchi (photographer)

• Nicola Majocchi (photographer) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Jacqueline C. Moorby, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jacqueline C. Moorby (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

@Jacqueline C. Moorby: Declined pending further information. This was undeleted in July 2015 after this request, but no edits were made to improve the entry for resubmission. Articles for creation is not an indefinite hosting service for material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia's article mainspace. We may be willing to restore it again, but only if you provide a definite assurance that you actually intend to work on it and provide a short description of what you intend to do to improve it to meet our policies and guidelines. Please advise. JohnCD (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Fred Bendheim

• Draft:Fred Bendheim · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Staffer55 (talk) 00:21, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

@Staffer55: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!"

Check out the advice you were given here when the page was moved to the Draft space. JohnCD (talk) 16:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Speaker Gillett Signing the Suffrage Bill.jpg

• File:Speaker Gillett Signing the Suffrage Bill.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Clearly public domain as it was published in the US in 1919. The original source is International Film Service. -Kaldari (talk) 22:58, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

@Kaldari:  Done. The reason for deletion was lack of source information, so if you add the source all should be well. Pinging Explicit, the deleting admin, as I am not sure how much detail of the source is required. JohnCD (talk) 16:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Einstein Syndrome

• Einstein Syndrome · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Article contains multiple reliable sources from Scientific American, a published book source, a published journal response, and an article from the MIT press. -Ylevental (talk) 22:26, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Recommend rejection. AfD advises no notability and nothing has changed. MIT is not a reliable scientific source in this area and it was a blog anyway. Online, Scientific American is also a blog and also self published, which was the concern in the AfD re Cowell's work. Established as not a notable condition, and I believe it's symptoms/diagnostics were incorporated into the Autistic spectrum as part of the DSM-5 anyway. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Einstein_syndrome. 203.15.226.132 (talk) 23:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Not true, multiple sources have been added since 2007. Also, a person with Einstein syndrome outgrows autistic symptoms, so it is not the same thing. Ylevental (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

That is not correct and not proven either. There is no non self published coverage as noted in the AfD. This has not changed. Scientific American is self published and therefore not acceptable. No one outgrows autism - that is impossible. Einstein syndrome is not medically valid and therefore does not medically exist. 203.15.226.132 (talk) 00:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

The journal article is non self-published. I wish to wait for an official response. Ylevental (talk) 00:12, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

It is self published by Darold Treffort. 203.15.226.132 (talk) 00:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh the journal. That is not reliable. 203.15.226.132 (talk) 00:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Still waiting for an official response Ylevental (talk) 00:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Not done (official response) as an earlier version of this was already restored to User:Ema--or/Einstein syndrome. Please edit this to improve the page to acceptability first. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
• @Ylevental: also, note that articles deleted at AfD like this will not be restored here. When you believe you have improved the draft to overcome the reasons for deletion (check out WP:No original research: "If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it.") you should approach the deleting administrator, user Lectonar (talk). Then, if you are not satisfied, you can go to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 11:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I will not undelete; the recreated article had (in essence) the same content as the article that was deleted at AfD. If the draft can not be improved as recommended above, this has to go via DRV ultimately. Lectonar (talk) 11:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

• @203.15.226.132: WRT to whether this is or isn't a recognized syndrome -- we don't have hoax articles, intended to mislead readers. We do have articles on hoaxes -- like Piltdown man. If WP:RS have written about "Einstein syndrome", it may merit an individual article, even if genuine experts all state it is not a real syndrome.

  If this is taken to DRV I'd like to weigh in there. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:48, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

• I know nothing about Einstein Syndrome, but if the closer of an XfD blindly dismissed something hosted on the Scientific American magazine's site because it was called a blog i think they made a serious mistake. Similarly, those advocating not restoring this because something was called a blog, are also making a serious mistake.

  99.x percent of things called blogs are of very little value, and should not be considered reliable, verifiable sources -- because they are written by nobodies, who almost certainly don't have any kind of expertise, almost never bother to back up their opinion with any research, and, perhaps most importantly, aren't having their writing subjected to a skilled review by professional editors.

  However, the remaining fraction of one percent of things that call themselves blogs often are reliable, verifiable sources. Consider the Scotusblog, that comments on the US Supreme Court. Its writers are highly respected, and writings offered there are routinely referenced, cited, paraphrased by respected print editors.

  The term blog was first coined around the time that it became possible for respected institutions to allow their best writers to write about quickly breaking topics online. Print publications allowed their best writers to publish online only articles on topics that broke too fast for their print schedule, or for other reasons didn't fit within what they normally published online. Frankly the notion that we should apply the blanket dismissal appropriate to a non-notable blog to anything hosted by a respected publication merely because it is called a "blog" is such a short-sighted idea it really merits considerable mockery. It is a crazy idea, and it really disturbs me, every time I see this argument advanced.

  If Scientific American is paying for the hosting on their site I think it is absurd to not realize this "blog" was subjected to a review by the publication's professional editors -- unlike non-notable blogs.

  Finally, there are highly respected individuals, respected in their fields, who start publishing online, after they retire, or become consultants. If they are already highly respected, their online writings shouldn't be dismissed -- even if they call them a "blog". Geo Swan (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Anamika Mishra

• Anamika Mishra · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd | afd2 ) · [revisions]

I, 1.39.51.102, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 1.39.51.102 (talk) 20:01, 18 February 2016 (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/Anamika Mishra, 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 Jenks24 (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Tommy Hittz

• Draft:Tommy Hittz · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, 104.35.230.218, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. There was a lot of confusion as to what sources could and could not be accepted, what information could be included, and what sources were deemed reliable and then click the "Save page" button below -104.35.230.218 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 22:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Anthony Sheldon

• Draft:Anthony Sheldon · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Rdewan23 (talk) 02:30, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

• Rdewan23, this has not been deleted yet and you can edit it at the above draft name. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace and if you do not edit this, it's unlikely that this will be restored if it is deleted, given that you've made a request here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Cisco ASA

• Draft:Cisco ASA · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, TeeTylerToe, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. TeeTylerToe (talk) 21:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Gloria Joyce Lindsay Hobbs

• Draft:Gloria Joyce Lindsay Hobbs · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Echozone, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Echozone (talk) 23:33, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Nantongis/sandbox

• User:Nantongis/sandbox · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Nantongis, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Nantongis (talk) 06:00, 19 February 2016 (UTC) 6 months + not worked on -Nantongis (talk) 06:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

• Not done Nantongis, this is fairly promotional in tone and would require an almost complete re-write to fit Wikipedia's WP:NPOV guidelines. That aside, this also appears to be something that someone came up with one day and a search for the "Jackson Maxim" brings up nothing that would establish that this topic would ever meet Wikipedia's guidelines. Wikipedia cannot be used to host material that is not intended to improve Wikipedia and material that does not fit within the site's guidelines cannot be used on here. I'm sorry, but we cannot restore this. A better alternative would be to open an account with Wikia or WordPress to host material on this topic, as their guidelines on content isn't nearly as strict as Wikipedia's. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:52, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
• I also note that your username is similar to that of a school in Nantong, so I'm going to have to give you a username block as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:53, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Hi Babit

• Draft:Hi Babit · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, SteveChervitzTrutane, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. SteveChervitzTrutane (talk) 09:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@SteveChervitzTrutane: Declined pending further information. This was undeleted last June after this request, but no edits were made to improve the entry for resubmission. Articles for creation is not an indefinite hosting service for material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia's article mainspace. We may be willing to restore it again, but only if you provide a definite assurance that you actually intend to work on it and provide a short description of what you intend to do to improve it to meet our policies and guidelines. Please advise. JohnCD (talk) 09:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Norman Partridge (Painter)

• Draft:Norman Partridge (Painter) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Jepst, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jepst (talk) 13:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Jepst: 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) 14:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Soil Geography

• Draft:Soil Geography · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Alloquep, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Alloquep (talk) 15:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Alloquep: 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) 17:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Ico Group

• Draft:Ico Group · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, MariannaSchiavino, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. I was waiting for someone to check the article but it seems I didn´t do the right process button below -MariannaSchiavino (talk) 21:01, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@MariannaSchiavino: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. No, you never sent it for review - that's what the green button is for, when it's ready.

The article would not be acceptable in its present form - read WP:Your first article for advice. First, it lacks references, which are required for two reasons: (a) the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy, summarised as "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source", and (b) because Wikipedia's test for inclusion, known as Wikipedia:Notability looks for references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."

Second, its tone is rather promotional: "high-quality technology products managed by a qualified team" etc - we call those "peacock terms". It reads like the company telling the world about itself in a business listing directory. An encyclopedia article should be an outside view. See User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard for background. JohnCD (talk) 21:22, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The Shapers

• The Shapers · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Hello,

Could you please restaure the page of the French punk rock band The Shapers?

The band has toured USA, Canada, China, Thailand, France and above all Indonesia where they performed on many TV Shows. The band has shared the stage with NOFX, Pennywise (band), Face to Face (punk band), Superman Is Dead, Pee Wee Gaskins (band), and many other bands such as the Japanese girls band Scandal (Japanese band) at Le Bataclan in Paris.

Please find below some articles about The Shapers:

In English:

• Punktastic: http://www.punktastic.com/radar/stream-the-reckless-youth-ep-by-the-shapers/
• Real Gone Rocks : http://www.realgonerocks.com/2016/02/the-shapers-reckless-youth-ep/
• Underdog Fanzine: http://www.underdog-fanzine.de/2016/02/12/the-shapers-reckless-youth/
• TBFM : http://tbfmonline.co.uk/ep-review-the-shapers-reckless-youth/
• Altcorner: http://altcorner.com/reviews/the-shapers-reckless-youth/
• Dead Press: http://www.deadpress.co.uk/55545/news-the-shapers-announce-new-ep-reckless-youth
• Vents Magazine : http://ventsmagazine.com/2015/11/08/interview-the-shapers/
• Breathing the core : https://breathingthecoreofficial.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/news-the-shapers-reckless-youth-out-26th-february%E2%80%8F/
• BK Asia City : http://bk.asia-city.com/events/bangkok-music/save-pop-punk-vol-1-shapers

In French :

• Ma Musicale : https://mamusicale.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/nouvel-ep-pour-le-groupe-pop-punk-francais-the-shapers/
• Oui FM : http://www.ouifm.fr/the-shapers-bpi-15/
• Metalorgie : http://www.metalorgie.com/concerts/5856-GNARWOLVES-Boxkite-The-Shapers-01-12-2015-le-saint-des-seins-Toulouse
• Rise Mag : http://www.rise-mag.com/culture/musique/the-shapers-punks-not-dead/
• L'avis de jo : https://lavisdejo.wordpress.com/2015/04/26/scandal-au-bataclan/
• What's Up Street : http://www.whatsupstreet.com/article/283

In German :

• Underdog : http://www.underdog-fanzine.de/2016/02/12/the-shapers-reckless-youth/

In Indonesian :

• Hai  : http://hai-online.com/Feature/Music/Ngikutin-Serunya-Kegiatan-The-Shapers-Di-Indonesia-2
• Acara : http://acara.co.id/event/celebrating-20th-anniversary-of-superman-is-dead/
• Album Baru : http://www.albumbaru.com/ultah-sid-hard-rock-cafe-bali/

Thank you.

Best regards. -Poppunkskate (talk) 00:01, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Poppunkskate: 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/The Shapers, 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 Juliancolton (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 09:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Erin Lee Carr

• Erin Lee Carr · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

She is a notable documentary filmmaker. Not quite sure why it was speedy deleted, but the admin said to take it here if I had an issue. So I did. -~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 00:18, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Editorofthewiki::  Done. The article was deleted under WP:CSD#A7 WP:CSD#G7 because the author blanked the page (pinging Starsxxx for comment). I have restored it, but you should improve it if you can, because I do not think it would withstand a notability challenge - the only achievement referenced is a single documentary film, which is not enough for WP:CREATIVE. JohnCD (talk) 10:12, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:William Harvey-Kelly

• Draft:William Harvey-Kelly · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Myleskelly, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Myleskelly (talk) 10:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Myleskelly: 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) 10:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Anthony Donnelly

• Draft:Anthony Donnelly · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, PereckDDD, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. PereckDDD (talk) 16:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@PereckDDD:  Not done - this was hopelessly promotional ("focuses on providing exceptional care... dedicated to providing the highest level of service... " etc), and if restored would be speedily deleted as an advertisement. It needs a complete rewrite, but before putting much effort into it, you should read WP:Your first article, WP:Notability (people) and WP:Notability (summary) - Wikipedia is not LinkedIn, it is an encyclopedia and so is quite selective about subjects for articles. JohnCD (talk) 22:20, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

MaheshDarji

• MaheshDarji · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This is not about Personal biography.This article is made for giving inspiration to the youth and this is required for today's Generation,So Please Consider This Article as Helpful and Refund This Article
Thank You -MaheshDarji (talk) 12:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done. (User has been blocked for persistent self-promotion). JohnCD (talk) 16:06, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

14:22, 21 February 2016 Sphilbrick (talk

• 14:22, 21 February 2016 Sphilbrick (talk · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, 2601:742:4000:B60:DD39:3CB2:9ED4:86B3, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 2601:742:4000:B60:DD39:3CB2:9ED4:86B3 (talk) 16:04, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Please give the name of the page you want undeleted. JohnCD (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Translation Pedagogy

• Draft:Translation Pedagogy · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

OTRS ticket received -Darwinius (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Darwinius:  Done, though as usual when something written for other purposes is copied here, it will require work to make an acceptable article that is not original research.

As the link you provided goes only to the OTRS login page, and I do not have OTRS access, will you add the appropriate release templates? JohnCD (talk) 16:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@JohnCD:  Done, can you please check the draft talk page to ensure everything is Ok? I'll also forward your advice to the permission sender.--Darwinius (talk) 16:52, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Illinois Open Championship

• Illinois Open Championship · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

My reasoning is I work for the Illinois PGA as the senior director of operations and public relations, who owes and administers the Illinois Open Championship, and has since the early 1920's, and I uploaded the image of the Illinois Open trophy that we own and we photographed, thus we own the rights, making it fair use for us to do what we please with. Thanks! -Beeonenine (talk) 02:47, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

 Not done, nothing to do. The article isn't deleted. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft talk:Sandbox

• Draft talk:Sandbox · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Like Draft:Sandbox, the talk page was also deleted by mistake. -96.41.0.15 (talk) 04:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done, restored. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Goddess Garden Organics

• Draft:Goddess Garden Organics · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, TraciThomas, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. TraciThomas (talk) 23:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

• Not done This was fairly promotional and would need to be re-written to meet NPOV guidelines. You can find a copy of it here, but you need to completely re-write it. Also, if you have a conflict of interest you need to disclose this somewhere. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Jayna Tida

• Jayna Tida · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Jennifer2427 (talk) 10:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC) I would like to retrieve the contents written for this article as it was deleted. Have been advised by Cahk (talk) to do so here

Kind Regards Jennifer

• I'm sorry, but you actually need to ask the deleting admin, Liz. We don't really restore A7s here except in very specific circumstances (like the admin is long gone from Wikipedia), so Cahk kind of steered you wrong. It was a simple mistake and I've tagged Liz in this so she can see and restore it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
• Offhand it looks like she did have enough notability to pass A7, given her role in Ek tha Raja ek thi Rani. It's a pretty popular show (I've heard of it despite not living in India), so that'd be enough to pass A7. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
• @Jennifer2427: This was a little promotional so you'd probably have to re-write this. I'll get started on a userspace version at User:Jennifer2427/Jayne Tida for you. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
• I've made a skeleton article for you. Offhand I don't know that Tida passes notability guidelines at this point in time, although she would pass A7 criteria. To make things sound less technical, basically Tida is notable enough to where she would pass basic speedy criteria, but this doesn't mean that she would pass the overall notability guidelines, which are far more strict. Your best bet here would be to just slowly work on the draft article and look for more sources, which may take a while. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Italian school of differential geometry

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Italian school of differential geometry · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Ema--or, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Ema--or (talk) 15:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Explanation: more precisely, I would like to userfy said page. Hope we can come to a solution. Ema--or (talk) 15:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ema--or: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Italian school of differential geometry (better than userfying, you can work on it there, but it's also more easily accessible for anyone else). 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) 16:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Tosin Adarabioyo

• Tosin Adarabioyo · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Please restore the editing history prior to this article being deleted by PROD. Player now notable. Thanks JMHamo (talk) 20:54, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done. JohnCD (talk) 16:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Creating Draft:Holly Van Hart

• Draft:Holly Van Hart · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

User:Sky arth sky 23:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sky arth: 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) 17:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Derek ong sieng hui

• Draft:Derek ong sieng hui · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Dreamity6, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sincerely Yours 14:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@Dreamity6:  Not done - that was not an encyclopedia article about a person, it was an advertisement for his restaurant and his "(world famed) but (locally) designed (wood-fired) pizza... Balinese & water features themed garden venue... " etc. Nothing like that is allowed in Wikipedia. JohnCD (talk) 20:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Room for More

• Draft:Room for More · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Would like to updates article and provide additional references -Ncandr (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ncandr: 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) 20:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Tenet (ensemble)

• Draft:Tenet (ensemble) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, 124.171.142.179, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. I had been working on this page over the summer; however, I had then travelled to Australia to start schooling and became too preoccupied to work on the article. I would like to continue editing it and hopefully get it approved. -124.171.142.179 (talk) 22:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 22:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Parent Aide

• Draft:Parent Aide · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

137.118.104.172 (talk) 00:21, 22 February 2016 (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!"

Read WP:Your first article for advice, and note the need for references that verify what the article says. JohnCD (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Dada Nada

• Dada Nada · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Article was deleted by prod (I was the tagger) and subsequently recreated as a redirect. Article creator is contesting the prod on my talk page. I think the redirect is the obvious best resolution, but I'm willing to let it be restored so I take it to AfD. ---Finngall ^talk 23:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey Finngall. Done. Upon a quick glance, maybe there's some content that can be merged from it into Robert Ozn (if sourced), and maybe that page should have a dedicated section about the act (if it doesn't already), but it doesn't appear there should be separate articles.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jompson Brothers

• The Jompson Brothers · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd | afd2 ) · [revisions]

I, Danielclower, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Danielclower (talk) 07:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Danielclower:  Done as the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jompson Brothers was SOFTDELETE, the article has been restored on request. You are encouraged to improve the article to address the reasons for its nomination at AfD. JohnCD (talk) 10:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Fbot/Blacklist2

• User:Fbot/Blacklist2 · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Could someone copy-paste the contents of this page to my userspace at User:Fastily/Sandbox? This is one of my old bot configuration pages that I'd like to apply to my current bot. Thanks, -FASTILY 10:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Fastily:  Done JohnCD (talk) 10:44, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! -FASTILY 11:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Omni Journal

• Page name goes here · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -ArtistAeron (talk) 18:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC) There is currently no definition for this term, used by journaling folks, anywhere on Wiki... I was trying to start a page to explain what it is. I am NOT trying to promote or sell anything! Not sure how you came up with that... I don't have time to read the 800 page user manual; I used to write for wiki many years ago. Nowhere in my article, which I was planning on improving, was there anything being promoted!

@ArtistAeron: Y restored to draft. I agree that this is not promotional, but it is not ready for the encyclopedia so I have restored it to Draft:Omni journal where you can work on it. I am not too optimistic about its prospects, because an encyclopedia is not a place to introduce new expressions - Wikipedia is quite resistant to neologisms (see WP:NEO) and an article would require references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", i.e. that that this term is being used and discussed, independently of you. The only reference in your page is a deadlink; a quick Google search found only your Youtube video, several sites selling this kind of notebook (which may be why your article was thought to be promotion), and some journals called Omni.

So, if "Omnijournal" in your sense is a concept being widely used and discussed, please add to the draft references to show that, and click the "Submit" button when you are ready. Read WP:Your first article for advice. But if it is your new idea then, sorry, but Wikipedia is not here to help you spread the word. JohnCD (talk) 20:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok thank you, I will work on it..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtistAeron (talk • contribs) 19:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

File:NPS Logo.svg

• File:NPS Logo.svg · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This image was deleted for this reason: 01:51, 20 April 2011 Orphaned image deletion bot (talk | contribs) deleted page File:NPS Logo.svg (Unused non-free media (bot)). I would like to request this page be restored so I can license them under a free license or in the public domain, because I believe the NPS is simple and only consists of text, simple geometric shape (circle), and ellipsis. However, I'm not sure that the NPS may be possibly complex enough to have a copyright or not, but maybe I will license it under a free license, instead of in the public domain. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. XPanettaa (talk) 21:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@XPanettaa: This is an organization logo, more than text and shapes, it has an actual design to it. As such cannot possibly be public domain or released under a free license, unless you are a representative of NPS who is authorized to release it. The licensing and fair-use rationale for the image was valid; the only reason it was deleted was because it was not used in any article. If you can specify which article will have that image, I can restore it, and no further work will be needed. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:18, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Amatulic: Yeah, but this logo was deleted back in April 2011 because it was not used in any article, but I think you can restore it, because I am a representative of the NPS who is authorized to release it. I believe this organization logo might be simple enough as it consists of text and ellipsis. However, I want to see how simple enough this organization logo is. XPanettaa (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@XPanettaa: We cannot rely on the word of an arbitrary user account that it represents an organization and is authorized to release copyrighted material. You need to follow the instructions at WP:CONSENT. Be sure to send the email from an address that is verifiably from your organization, rather than from a free email service.

I also recommend that you disclose your conflict of interest publicly on your user page. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Jaybee319/sandbox

• Draft:Kristen Jensen (2) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Jaybee319, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jaybee319 (talk) 21:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Trying to locate documentation took longer than anticipated -Jaybee319 (talk) 21:48, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. The original target was G8'd, as the sandbox was moved to draft space; I've thus retargeted the request to point to the draft. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 21:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Jeremy.

@Jaybee319: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page Draft:Kristen Jensen (2) 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.

Some of the draft as you left it was flagged as a copyright violation, with material copied from the subject's website. That has been cleaned up by another editor; please read Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources and make sure to write in your own words. Even if the copyright issue were resolved, material written by or for the subject usually has a promotional tone unsuitable for an encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 22:31, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

TechFly

• TechFly · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I am of sole belief that suitable citations have been made and whilst we are currently searching for further and reliable citations we believe that as an organisation the information on the page is correct. -CharlieJamesTennant (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

 Not done because there's nothing to do. @CharlieJamesTennant: Why are you commenting on this page? The article isn't deleted, so there is nothing actionable here. Even if it was deleted, this page cannot be used to request restoration of an article that was deleted as a result of community discussion. You are welcome to engage in this discussion right now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TechFly. If the article does get deleted, then you must appeal to the deleting administrator to get it restored (not this page), and if that fails, your next recourse is Wikipedia:Deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :@CharlieJamesTennant: this page has not been deleted. Deletion is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TechFly, and that is where you should comment, but first read WP:DISCUSSAFD and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.

It is not enough that the information is correct: Wikipedia's criterion for inclusion, called Wikipedia:Notability, requires references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it important or significant enough to write substantial comment about? See also Wikipedia:Notability (summary). JohnCD (talk) 23:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Arjun Prabhakaran

• Arjun Prabhakaran · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I found the page and its sources as reliable and relevent, since the situation on the time of its deletion has changed and saw some reliable information about this person on web -8.37.224.157 (talk) 04:22, 24 February 2016 (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/Arjun Prabhakaran, 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 Bishonen (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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

• On a side note, please do not add content to the closed AfD or to the article's talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

• I must also warn you, if you're User:Aparna tutu then this would be considered block evasion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Great Lakes Education Project

• Great Lakes Education Project · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Cbailey15, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Cbailey15 (talk) 03:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Was waiting on approval from companies attorney pertaining to language -Cbailey15 (talk) 03:43, 24 February 2016 (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!" Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:48, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The_Last_Year

• The_Last_Year · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Unitednut, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Unitednut (talk) 01:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC) The band is releasing a new album in 2016. One of the singles released in 2015, Mania, was on the Top 20 best of the year in Central America. They have increased notoriety since they launched in 2014. -Unitednut (talk) 01:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:49, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Sabina Sakoh

• Draft:Sabina Sakoh · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, AntonioRusconi, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. AntonioRusconi (talk) 09:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC) OR, at least make a safety-copy of the latest editing and previous criticism. Please note that the said article has been accepted in the German Wikipedia, while also a French adaptation appeared in the meantime. Thank you in advance & kind regards 09:33, 24 February 2016 (UTC) AntonioRusconi (talk)

@AntonioRusconi: 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.

Acceptance in the German Wikipedia is not conclusive, as different WPs have their own rules and standards; but there may be references there that could be added. JohnCD (talk) 09:45, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

RoPeCast (no proper undelete request, but providing a copy)

Hi.

I got a highly polite pointer to put the following request here despite it not being an actual request to undelete an article. :-)

Could someone please provide me with a copy of the latest version of RoPeCast before deletion, I'd like to reuse the information in that article on a different page. A temp copy to user NS would be great, maybe User:Chrkl/RoPeCast would be suitable? Thanks! --chris 論 —Preceding undated comment added 10:37, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done See User:Chrkl/RoPeCast @Chrkl: --S Philbrick(Talk) 18:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! --chris 論 12:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Kamran Zahid

• Draft:Kamran Zahid · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Poetawan, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Kamran Zahid 12:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done This appears to be a copyright violation of his Facebook page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Benjamin_Rush_Maginley

• Draft:Benjamin_Rush_Maginley · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Hello! I've been busy with a project the last year and finished... and would like to attack this page again. and then click the "Save page" button below -Ropples (talk) 15:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 15:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Jubin nautiyal at promotions.jpg

• File:Jubin nautiyal at promotions.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

OTRS ticket received -Darwinius (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Darwinius: I added a note to the OTRS ticket. Some investigation needs to be done concerning the actual author of the photo. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Amatulic: Thanks.--Darwinius (talk) 18:35, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Felip III de Castella

• Felip III de Castella · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Elastut (talk) 20:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC) Deleted by mistake

 Not done, nothing to do. There is no deleted article with any similar name beginning with "Felip" in main space, draft space, or AFC space, and your user account has no deleted contributions either. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Elastut: this is the English-language Wikipedia. The article you mention is on the Catalan Wikipedia at ca:Felip III de Castella, and you should ask about it there - each Wikipedia is a separate organization.

Aquest és Wikipedia en l'idioma anglès . L'article que esmentes està en el català Wikipedia - ca:Felip III de Castella. Cada Wikipedia és una organització independent. JohnCD (talk) 22:21, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Mātrusri Anasuya Devī

• Draft:Mātrusri Anasuya Devī · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Rahik1 (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Fixing the links Hasteur (talk) 18:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Rahik1: 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) 22:24, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Cade Jay Hathaway

• Draft:Cade Jay Hathaway · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Daveyporter, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Daveyporter (talk) 22:17, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Daveyporter: 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) 22:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Life Science Network (LSN)

• Draft:Life Science Network (LSN) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This submission was not adequately supported by reliable sources. -HBorbital78 (talk) 07:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@HBorbital78: 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) 10:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:The Whipper Snappers

• [[:]] · ( [[|talk]] | logs | links | watch | afd | mfd ) · [revisions]

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Matupitu (talk) 10:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Well that might be because I followed the instructions and it only says to paste the heading into the title box. Draft:The Whipper Snappers It is frustrating when you follow instructions, only to get a condescending message. I regularly contribute financially to Wikipedia which is contingent on good will. There are a lot of people who are experts in their field with a lot of essential information, but rarely post to Wiki. Am sure there are Wiki experts which little expertise apart from the rules of Wiki. Disenfranchising the first group is counter-productive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matupitu (talk • contribs) 10:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@Matupitu: 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.

I will have another look at the instructions for this page, people do seem to have difficulty with them. The message in red is not aimed at you, but is provided automatically by the system to assist the volunteers responding to requests here. JohnCD (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Tim Harvey (Novelist)

• Draft:Tim Harvey (Novelist) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I now have extra info which should allow this page to be published once I edit it. [Special:Contributions/78.150.162.110|78.150.162.110]] (talk) 11:39, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Declined pending further information. This was undeleted last August after this request, but no edits were made to improve the entry for resubmission. Articles for creation is not an indefinite hosting service for material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia's article mainspace. We may be willing to restore it again, but only if you provide a definite assurance that you actually intend to work on it and provide a short description of what you intend to do to improve it to meet our policies and guidelines. Please advise. JohnCD (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:The Pearl Harts

• Draft:The Pearl Harts · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Tapfs, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Kzoo 12:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@Tapfs: 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) 16:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)