Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 63
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
| Archive 60 | Archive 61 | Archive 62 | Archive 63 | Archive 64 | Archive 65 | → | Archive 70 |
File:Brett-Gardner-225x300.jpg
Just looking to get this picture undeleted the link to it I believe is this: http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/05/26/brett-gardner-is-probably-still-good-at-stealing-bases/ The author should be there also, "Hippeaux"
Also can somebody teach or give me step by directions on how to upload a picture on to an article b/c I would really like to contribute to the site. I don't quite understand the directions in the help section of the site. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjryb (talk • contribs) 05:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Not done. That image will not be restored because it is copyright, like almost everything on the internet. For advice, read Wikipedia:Uploading images which includes:
"Before uploading images at Special:Upload, make sure you read and follow the image use policy. Most images you might find on the Internet are copyrighted and not appropriate for uploading to Wikipedia. If you did not create the image, or if you are unable or unwilling to verify its copyright status, do not upload the image."
- For step-by-step advice on how to place an image within an article, see WP:Picture tutorial. JohnCD (talk) 20:52, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Listen you can't just upload the picture for me I'll look at and reference it for the future? I would really like to learn the exact right way this is done so you guys don't delete my pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjryb (talk • contribs) 21:19, 19 February 2012
- I've moved your new message down so the conversation follows in sequence. Please sign your messages by ending them with four "tilde" characters ~~~~ which the system will turn into a signature with your username and the time and date.
- No, we can't "just upload the picture", that would be illegal, because it's copyright. If you want to learn how this is done, Lesson 1 is: you mustn't upload what you don't have the rights to. If you do, it will be deleted; if you keep doing it, you will be blocked.
- If you do own the copyright, for instance if you created the image, the best place to upload it is Wikimedia Commons, where it can be used by any Wikimedia project. They have a simple guide at commons:Special:UploadWizard. JohnCD (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm just trying to help you guys out I'm sorry...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjryb (talk • contribs) 22:05, 19 February 2012
- I'm sure you mean well, but uploading other people's copyright images doesn't help at all, quite the reverse, it could get Wikipedia sued. JohnCD (talk) 22:13, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
So where exactly can I find the copyright information if I find a picture online? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjryb (talk • contribs) 02:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Usually it'll be alongside the image or (if a photographer's website) at the bottom of the page. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- But even if you don't see a copyright notice, you must assume it's copyright unless you have positive information, which you can show to WP or to Commons when you upload it, that it isn't. You can't just label other people's pictures "Own work" as you did with that Brett Gardner picture. Copyright in a photograph belongs to the photographer, unless he assigns it, e.g. to a newspaper or a photo agency; then it belongs to them. Read again the passage from Wikipedia:Uploading images which I quoted in my first reply to you above. JohnCD (talk) 09:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Somebody really needs to teach me how this copyrighting works, this is really difficult to understand. I would really like to know how to do this too... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjryb (talk • contribs) 05:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Here's the easy version: the person who TOOK the picture OWNS the copyright. Only the person who OWNS the copyright has the right to use it. In order for someone else to use it, the OWNER has to clearly and directly give absolute permission to do so. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok when I get the PERMISSION from the OWNER how do I go by getting the picture back up and running on the page? Anybody?
Scroogle
This page has been nominated twice. The first time it was kept, and then without much explanation, it was listed again, and then, without much explanation, the mod deleted it. It seemed to me always as a notible service, even now it has stopped working. I am in no position to review the deleted page, but in the comments I read it was decently enough sourced. -- Honorsteem (talk) 08:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC) -Honorsteem (talk) 08:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- The text had 8 references, since we have an AFD I had better not undelete it. There may also been a DRV. Myself I think this should have been kept and the close should at most have been a no consensus. However if you feel that there is newfound notability with more independent references then you could get this into a user sandbox and fix it up. Do you want to go this way? I note that there was a recent story about google cutting out scroogle due to an interface change. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Also there were two deletion reviews Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 November 22 and Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 December 1. Clearly deletion was controversial. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Okay I thought this request page was for requesting any undeletion. Please restore Scroogle in my user space. -- Honorsteem (talk) 11:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done Personally, I'm not willing to do so after 2 apparently controversial AFD's, nor do I think it would be wise overall. You can use DRV to both review the deletion, AND ask for temporary undeletion during the review (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Done With respect to Bwilkins' opinion, the deletion and DRV occurred in 2009. A quick search revealed numerous sources from 2011 & this year, indicating the subject has gained notability since deletion. I am going to be BOLD and undelete it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
reasoning -116.71.41.251 (talk) 20:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- The article has not been deleted, only proposed for deletion. See WP:DEPROD for how to contest the proposal. The article is not likely to be kept, in the longer term, unless references are provided to show significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources in order to establish WP:Notability. See also WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. JohnCD (talk) 20:58, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Gillian Andrassy
- Gillian Andrassy · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- Gillian Andrassy Lavery · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]
Are there any revisions that do not infringe copyrights of soapcentral and pinevalleybulletin? --George Ho (talk) 20:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- There is nothing non-copyrighted at Gillian Andrassy Lavery. A former version of Gillian Andrassy can be seen at http://www.enotes.com/topic/Gillian_Andrassy. It looks clean to me, but let me know if that text is useful to you before I restore it. The history is quite messy so restoring only legit revisions will take some time, which I don't want to waste if it is not desired. (If it is useful, please have me restore the restore instead of copying form enotes' mirror.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Useful for diehard soap fans, such as Casanova88 but not for me. People at WP:WikiProject Soap Operas are very lively and dedicate to soap operas. In fact, take time to find non-infringing ones when you can; eventually, after that, I may redirect "Gillian Andrassy" back to "List of All My Children characters" article. --George Ho (talk) 00:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Done I have restored the non-infringing versions of the history. This does cause strange "jumps" at places, but all such jumps contain only the insertion/deletion of material that doesn't require attribution (categories, temapltes, etc.) If anyone uses information from the history, please make sure they follow Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and the the page gets tagged {{R from merge}} to (hopefully) prevent accidental deletion of the necessary history for attribution purposes. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Paul Penzone
This page was deleted due to "No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content)". I believe that it should be undeleted since the subject fits the notability requirements, despite being a candidate for political office.
Essentially, Paul Penzone is the Democratic Party candidate running against controversial Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is one of the most well known sheriffs in America. This county office is not normal: Maricopa County is the fourth largest and one of the most well-known counties in the U.S. due in large part to the numerous controversies surrounding Arpaio and a TV show about his Sheriff's department which ran on national cable network TLC. As a result, there is quite a bit of coverage surrounding the office. For example, running a Google News search for "Maricopa County Sheriff" yields "about 1,750 results" whereas a search for, say, "North Dakota Senator" yields "about 619 results." It is a local election in the sixth largest U.S. city and has an enormous national profile.
While I believe that the profile of the race alone proves notability, before his candidacy Penzone previously appeared on CNN numerous times as an expert (more appearances here). And now his candidacy has been covered nationally by USA Today and multiple times by Phoenix's major daily newspaper, not to mention local TV news. I believe that those stories confirm that even though he is a political candidate, he is eligible due to the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article" and the fact that he was well-known in Arizona and to CNN viewers before his candidacy. -Yoss48 (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done we do not host articles on candidates for elections, unless they are notable for some other reason already, as there is very high opportunity for promotion going on. Since this is a county election, even elected people may not get an article here. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
COVINC
reasoning -Covinc (talk) 23:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Note: Surely you jest! No page's ever existed under that title (or any reasonable permutation of it) in any reasonable namespace! Are you sure that the page's title, capitalisation and all, is correct? Also, you should not be editing pages about entities you are personally involved with, nor should you have a username implying that the account is shared. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done. The page was User:Covinc, deleted WP:CSD#G11 as promotion. User is a role account (Circle of Voices, Inc) so has been given {{uw-causeblock}} which invites them to set up an individual account but explains notability and COI. We need a way to explain at account set-up time that WP is an encyclopedia, not another Myspace, and that user pages are for communication within the project, not for self-promotion. JohnCD (talk) 10:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
The Cody Wolfe Band
reasoning -Bandgeek529 (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2012 (UTC) This is an important page about a band as American as you and me. It has an important spot in the history of southern rock. Deleting the page would be an unjust and unfair decision, this is a vary popular band and as a fan I want wiki to recognize that I created this page about a very significant band of up most importance. Please keep this page so us fans can read more about the band and show how much we love their music. Thank You, -BandGeek529
User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G11
User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G12
User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G4
User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/U5
User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G10
User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G5 Please note that we are not a substitute for a fansite, and all subjects MUST be independently notable. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done. See WP:BAND for what a band need to have achieved before having a Wikipedia article. JohnCD (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Uncredited background singer
The article was created by User:Ortolan88 several years ago, and it was recently nominated for deletion at WP:AFD by User:TenPoundHammer. Since that nomination, all other editors commenting at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uncredited background singer have proposed that it be kept, and several (including myself) have begun the process of expanding it. However, Ortolan88 - who has intermittently been an editor here since 2002 - has now deleted it without any discussion, either through misunderstanding the notice put on his talk page, or through pique at the fact it was nominated at all. Other editors would like to see the article undeleted and developed. -Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done ...and I'm sure this is going to ruffle additional feathers (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Gibson/Miller Band
I have no idea what would've required deletion here. It was just a talk page with WikiProject banners. -Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done *shrug*, I'm going to assume that fastily deleted the wrong talk page. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
File:GTUGLogo.png
The article was moved from incubator to main space. -Aygulka (talk) 01:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Alfredo Gonzalez (baseball)
The article was deleted through a PROD (Reason given was Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable former minor league baseball player) after it had already been through an AFD with a decision to "KEEP" (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alfredo Gonzalez (baseball player)). My understanding is that PROD should only be used for articles that have not already been through an AFD, and that if the nominator still thought it should be deleted, it should have gone through another AFD. -BRMo (talk) 03:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done Since the article had been renamed, the PRODer likely didn't know about the previous AFD. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Verject
erroneously deleted as hoax without admin bothering to investigate first -Drew.ward (talk) 04:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done on ANI --Guerillero | My Talk 04:31, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
CR Narayanan
This page is already created and need to improve. This is important Page, people should know about him as he is well known in IT industry, especially in IT & SAP implementation. -Gokulchandola (talk) 11:54, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done You have the valid response at User talk:Peridon. Please do not WP:FORUMSHOP by asking at multiple locations at the same time. This article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject.. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Navigators_USA
I wish to access the article and update information as needed to deal with putative issues that caused it to be deleted. As the article is currently deleted I can not personally assess what needs to be updated. It appears the editor removed this file for personal religious reasons as this articles describes a scouting organization for atheist and agnostics. -74.139.50.216 (talk) 14:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done It's offensive and inappropriate to suggest that someone deleted an article "for personal religious reasons". The article was deleted as no explanation of significance, and therefore must be deleted. Wikipedia contains notable subjects that have third party reliable sources. The "article" in question contained an unsourced brief description of how they broke away from a scout troop, a poem, and the "laws" - the latter two which have no business in an encyclopedia article. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Sachi Foundation
reasoning -Infocatt (talk) 22:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi I received a speedy delete notice by one of reviewers as you can see in my talk page as copyright violation. I respond to his concern and obtain the required copyright permission letter. Another reviewer meanwhile deleted the page and I requested him to undelete the page as I have obtained the copyright consent letter. He did replied me this is cannot be done by him and need to go through the process.
As you can see from the posts, Sachi Foundation operates on set of principals vastly different from that principles promoted by current social constructivism. The principles promoted by Sachi Foundation are Principle of ever-advancing civilization, principle affirming the inherent nobility of humankind, Principle of solving problems through group consultation, Principle of taking unified action in a spirit of service, and principle of one common happiness for all.
I am resigned to the very possibility that Wikipedia has been oriented toward promoting articles that are mostly in accord with social constructivism school of thought. But to delete such an article about the existence of a non=profit organization in the world working hard to break down existing Barriers between communities by promoting the concept of "one common happiness for all" would breach the standards set by Wikipedia founder for wikipedia to become a common place for sharing noble knowledge for all humanity.
I do not believe Wikipedia tags are a mere tools by sense makers from social constructivism school of thought as a way to filter knowledge contrary to their believes.
Please let me know of your measured reasons and objective guidance that how I can modifiy the article to make it acceptable. Thank you.
Best Wishes Bahram
- Hi, this was actually at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sachi Foundation. When the OTRS volunteer confirms the permission, they will arrange to get the page back. However as it stands the article would not be accepted at AFC as it is only referenced to pages by the organisation. To show notability we need to have reliable independent writings. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
The Time Book of Simpsons
Page shall be restored and userfied -Thinginthemap (talk) 13:28, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why? It's unreferenced, WP:CRYSTAL and was deleted appropriately as a likely hoax. I'm not sure why this belongs even in userspace right now (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Nevada Day in Florida
Page shall be restored and be moved to Thanksgiving Holiday -Thinginthemap (talk) 13:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- An article with that name would be duplicating Thanksgiving (United States). Bazj (talk) 13:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Additionally, page consisted only of a redirect to school holiday and thus there is nothing useful to restore. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- An article with that name would be duplicating Thanksgiving (United States). Bazj (talk) 13:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
What date was the page created? Thinginthemap (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- April 15,2011. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:20, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Faceless_girl_in_stockings.JPG
reasoning -Artcollectorgirl (talk) 14:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I noticed that the uploaded file "Faceless_girl_in_stockings.JPG" was deleted from the Wiki page that I am preparing about the artist Thomas H. Cayne. However, due to questions about copyright about this and other files, the artist himself was asked to submit the filled-in-form concerning permissions to the appropriate page, which now has been done (for all uploaded files).
Could the copyright issue now be solved for all these files , and in particular for the deleted one ? Thanks,
Artcollectorgirl
Note: Admins cannot confirm what you say above is true without the OTRS ticket number. It's not enough to claim to have permission here; you must prove it. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:04, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
GameCola
The article was deleted under "section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion". However, I feel that this article represents a very significant organization in the realm of video games. This organization produces several reviews, comics, news, blog, and video segments on video games and is a significant contributor to the video game review industry. I request that this page be reinstated so the history can be maintained. While the organization is not as big as other companies, there's no reason that this organization's page can't remain, as it was written in a fair and objective manner. -stealthrabbi (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who implemented the deletion request, user NawlinWiki (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. GB fan 19:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Iroku
the subject is an accomplished author and public speaker; the page was deleted because of claimed vanity -Ositairoku (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. GB fan 19:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Grooves (archaeology)
reasoning -Stavgard (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
please restore to (cur | prev) 14:13, 23 February 2012 Stavgard (talk | contribs) (5,531 bytes) (Undid revision 478418551 by OpenFuture (talk) OpenFuture reverts to unsupported speculations) (undo)
I don't know if OpenFuture is blocked. He now has changed his signature to Mrund
The old version was a shambles with unsupported speculations. I have re-written the article in accordance with the good help I got from Kim Dent-Brown
The re-written article has been cleansed from unsupported speculations and the following refernces
The basis for this article is an article in Fornvännen 1983 http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1980talet/1983_021.pdf This article was edited and approved by the previous editor of Fornvännen Fil Dr Jan-Peder Lamm Fornvännen is a highly reputable magazine Göran H. wrote the article in 1982. Jan-Peder Lamm edited the article but suggested that Göran H. should include a comparison with Stonehenge. Therefore did J-P L supply Göran H. with archaeological history about Stonehenge. Göran H. re-wrote the article with comparison with Stonhenge and the article was published in 1983.
Jan-Peder Lamm, born 27 October 1935, is a Swedish archaeologist. He received his PhD in 1973 from the University of Stockholm for a dissertation about a Migration Period elite cemetery near Drottningholm. Lamm taught archaeology at the University of Stockholm in the 1970s and then worked until retirement as Head Curator for the Swedish Iron Age at the Museum of National Antiquities in Stockholm. He is a member of the editorial board behind the journal Fornvännen and has taken active part in the Helgö project since the 1960s. Fornvännen (print: ISSN 0015-7813, online: ISSN 1404-9430) is a Swedish academic journal in the fields of archaeology and Medieval art. It is published quarterly by the Royal Swedish Academy of Letters in Stockholm, Sweden. The journal's contributions are written in the Scandinavian languages, English, or German with summaries in English. Fornvännen has the alternate title Journal of Swedish Antiquarian Research. The editor in chief is Lars Larsson. Fornvännen began publication in 1906 when it replaced two earlier journals, Svenska Fornminnesföreningens Tidskrift and Vitterhetsakademiens Månadsblad. Early contributors included noted archaeologists Oscar Montelius and Hans Hildebrand.[1] Since 2000 it has an online version, since 2007 its first 100 annual volumes have been available on-line, and since 2009 Fornvännen is published as a delayed open-access journal with the online version of each issue appearing six months after the paper version. Fornvännen is an ERIH category B journal. According to Ulrich's, it is indexed in Anthropological Index Online, Anthropological Literature, British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (Online Edition), Nordic Archaeological Abstracts, and FRANCIS. It was previously also indexed in Internationale Bibliographie der Rezensionen Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlicher Literatur and Linguistic Bibliography.[2] Henriksson, Göran. The grooves on the island of Gotland in the Baltic sea: a neolithic lunar calendar. Paper presented at Conference: SEAC 8th. Moscow 2000 Publisher: Institute of Archaeology. Russian Academy of Sciences. Title: Astronomy of Ancient Civilizations ISBN: 5-02-008768-8 Editor(s): Prof. Tamila Potemkina & Prof. V. Obridko Gotländskt Arkiv is the official yearbook for the Gotlandic Heritage Board, Föreningen Gotlands Fornvänner Stavgard (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Note: Admins will not entertain requests to become involved in content disputes here. This page is for requesting that a page that was deleted be restored, not for requesting reversions. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry if I have pressed the wrong button. I have problem to find the right person to turn to
21:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stavgard (talk • contribs)
- You're not going to find any administrator anywhere who's going to help you in your content dispute, end of. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
More All My Children redirects
There are many redirects that were deleted as redirects to copyvio "List of All My Children miscellaneous characters". I don't know which revisions do not violate copyrights of and plagiarize http://www.soapcentral.com or "Pine Valley Bulletin" website. Nevertheless, I wonder if below articles are worth restoring... or not; I also wonder if there are more redirects than these.
- Reggie Montgomery · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- Greg Madden · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
"Reggie" page should go to List of All My Children characters#M; "Greg" should go to either Erica Kane or Josh Madden. --George Ho (talk) 23:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done but not restored - IMO it's not worth going through the deleted versions to end up with the last redirect as the only non-(c) violated version & all the previous ones would need to be revdelled anyway - have created redirects as noted above. Skier Dude (talk) 06:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Follow up: I have restored the history of Reggie Montgomery as it appears to consist entirely of original work. There are no non-infringing versions of Greg Madden. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Mock chop
On attempting to ascertain the exact ingredients of the mock chop, I found that the Wikipedia article on the mock chop had been deleted due to lack of proof that it actually existed. Well, I've eaten a few - as part of a 'mock chop supper' (mock chop + chips), as illustrated by a photograph on this website http://mockchopsupper.blogspot.com/. You can also find it on the online menu of this Perth chip shop: http://www.chinachinaperth.co.uk/chip-shop-menu/. So, it does exist, and therefore the grounds for it being removed are no longer valid. As other chip shop items (red pudding, white pudding, fishcake, etc.) all have their own pages, it would seem mock chop should also be restored to its former status. Mcruic (talk) 23:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Now under discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mock chop. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Stars Park
Talk page was deleted due to article being merged and redirected, I unmerged and added refs, etc. Requesting undeletion of talk page just in case there was any relevant discussion. -64.85.215.60 (talk) 05:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done but not much there ;) Skier Dude (talk) 06:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Laurel Banning (Dillon)
- Laurel Banning Dillon · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- Laurel Banning · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- Laurel Dillon · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I wonder if above articles have non-infringing revisions that do not plagiarize Soapcentral and "Pine Valley Bulletin". --George Ho (talk) 07:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done - The redlink histories consist of only redirects. On Laurel Banning's third edit, the text was copied from [1]. It was changed/improved from there overtime, but not significantly. As such, I have restored only the first two edits. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Paul Stefanidis
I have found more references that I wish to add to the article that will make it credible. -Erinipanas (talk) 09:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. However, I strongly encourage you to improve the article to avoid possible more permanent deletion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
File:Woodrow Wyatt.jpg
needed for article, I will fix licensing -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:59, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done Skier Dude (talk) 04:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! Can you take a look at the one above?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 08:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Astrid Chevallier
article has been completely rewritten, following TParis' advices. Article has been resubmitted to TParis for his consideration, but TParis has ignored and deleted request. I'm looking for an administrator who would review the new version of the article, and republish it, or help me refine it. Your consideration is much appreciated. Thanks. -Wikidesign9 (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2012 (UTC) Wikidesign9 (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think you forgot that it's sitting right here (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, I believe he is looking for someone to review the updated version before it returns to mainspace. If that is indeed the case, I encourage Wikidesign9 to use the "submit" function of the {{Userspace draft}} I've added to the page. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- yes, thanks for your help ThaddeusB! Wikidesign9 (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
More female characters of All My Children
- Donna Beck · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- Donna Beck Tyler · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions] (should be similar to "Donna Beck")
- Vanessa Bennett · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
- Vanessa Bennett Cortlandt · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions] (similar to "Vanessa Bennett")
- Ava Benton · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I wonder if there are revisions that do not infringe copyrights of and plagiarize Soapcentral and "Pine Valley Bulletin". They should be redirects to List of All My Children characters. --George Ho (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done since you can do this yourself right now as none are salted. Just create each page as a redirect, i.e., with the code
#REDIRECT [[List of All My Children characters]].--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
File:Padlock-silver.svg
Local copy of File:Padlock.svg is fully-protected, while the Commons file of that still exists. Why can't the silver padlock be the same? Why not reviving the local copy of silver padlock and then restrict editing the image page itself to only administrators? -George Ho (talk) 09:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
viwit
Viwit is not a Non-notable small company,Viwit has formed competitive advantage globally in the supply of certain chiral APIs, highly-active borane & phosphine reagents and etc. Products and services are served to customers and partners in Asia, Europe, North America and South America.The third-party references has already been provided,so it should not be deleted. Besides, this article can broaden users' horizons and increase the quantity of vocabulary -Xiangzhuang-pg (talk) 02:18, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Note: You do realize you just deepsixed your own undeletion request by speaking like a marketroid, right? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Katie Sheridan
Article was deleted as being 'Not notable yet' Katie has done much more work which was not updated on to her Wikipedia page, particularly in the past 6-12 months. I would very much like for her page to be undeleted and so I could up date it, to show her notoriety. -RyanKinguk (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks
Ryan
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Astronomical calendars on Gotland
reasoning -Stavgard (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
This page has been re-written in accordance with instructions discussed with Kim Dent-Brown The references are:
The basis for this article is an article in Fornvännen 1983 http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1980talet/1983_021.pdf This article was edited and approved by the previous editor of Fornvännen Fil Dr Jan-Peder Lamm Fornvännen is a highly reputable magazine Göran H. wrote the article in 1982. Jan-Peder Lamm edited the article but suggested that Göran H. should include a comparison with Stonehenge. Therefore did J-P L supply Göran H. with archaeological history about Stonehenge. Göran H. re-wrote the article with comparison with Stonhenge and the article was published in 1983.
Jan-Peder Lamm, born 27 October 1935, is a Swedish archaeologist. He received his PhD in 1973 from the University of Stockholm for a dissertation about a Migration Period elite cemetery near Drottningholm. Lamm taught archaeology at the University of Stockholm in the 1970s and then worked until retirement as Head Curator for the Swedish Iron Age at the Museum of National Antiquities in Stockholm. He is a member of the editorial board behind the journal Fornvännen and has taken active part in the Helgö project since the 1960s. Fornvännen (print: ISSN 0015-7813, online: ISSN 1404-9430) is a Swedish academic journal in the fields of archaeology and Medieval art. It is published quarterly by the Royal Swedish Academy of Letters in Stockholm, Sweden. The journal's contributions are written in the Scandinavian languages, English, or German with summaries in English. Fornvännen has the alternate title Journal of Swedish Antiquarian Research. The editor in chief is Lars Larsson. Fornvännen began publication in 1906 when it replaced two earlier journals, Svenska Fornminnesföreningens Tidskrift and Vitterhetsakademiens Månadsblad. Early contributors included noted archaeologists Oscar Montelius and Hans Hildebrand.[1] Since 2000 it has an online version, since 2007 its first 100 annual volumes have been available on-line, and since 2009 Fornvännen is published as a delayed open-access journal with the online version of each issue appearing six months after the paper version. Fornvännen is an ERIH category B journal. According to Ulrich's, it is indexed in Anthropological Index Online, Anthropological Literature, British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (Online Edition), Nordic Archaeological Abstracts, and FRANCIS. It was previously also indexed in Internationale Bibliographie der Rezensionen Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlicher Literatur and Linguistic Bibliography.[2] Henriksson, Göran. The grooves on the island of Gotland in the Baltic sea: a neolithic lunar calendar. Paper presented at Conference: SEAC 8th. Moscow 2000 Publisher: Institute of Archaeology. Russian Academy of Sciences. Title: Astronomy of Ancient Civilizations ISBN: 5-02-008768-8 Editor(s): Prof. Tamila Potemkina & Prof. V. Obridko Gotländskt Arkiv is the official yearbook for the Gotlandic Heritage Board, Föreningen Gotlands Fornvänner
Stavgard (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Misplaced request. This page has never been deleted. (But I shall be proposing its deletion soon as an implausible redirect .) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:26, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that this is an implausible redirect. The article on grooves does not mention calendars, and their use as pointers to astronomical entities needs a reference. Why does every ancient artifact have to have a deep meaning? Honing stones (in this case, grooves) are practical and reasonable. David Spector (user/talk) 17:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Dror Green
reasoning -Davidtolberg (talk) 21:08, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand why this page was deleted in Speedy deletion.
I wrote this entry after examining many similar entries about persons who contributed to their profession or to other people.
Dror Green is a well known author in Hebrew, and a prominent psychotherapist, who developed the first online clinic for psychotherapy and also the new method of Emotional Training that suggest a new support for PTSD victims.
His books about the israeli racism and apartheid were excommunicated by the Israeli media and banned by book chanis and its distribution in the palestinian territories was forbidden by the army.
I believe that if is important to know about people who contribute to mental health and fight against rascism.
This was my first contribution to Wikipedia, and it hurts to see your text deleted instead of being asked to improve it.
David
- 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. In any case, G11 speedy deletions cannot be undeleted here because they require complete rewrites to become viable encyclopedia articles. See WP:Notability (people), WP:Verifiability, WP:Spam. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 22:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- I was the admin who deleted the article, and I cam going to restore and edit it. I think I judged too rapidly, and it can be edited to make it acceptable. I shall, in fact do so, immediately after restoring it. I see nothing wrong about asking for a G11 restore here--G11 is to a considerable extent a matter of judgement, and anyone's judgement about something like this can be wrong. What a particular admin doesn't think possible to improve, the original editor might. DGG ( talk ) 19:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
File:The Guard logo.jpg
This logo is ineligible for copyrights in the US; still awaiting for answer about Canada in WP:MCQ. Are there any more revisions? -George Ho (talk) 22:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- There's a near-identical 200 × 200 (8,128 bytes) square version. Skier Dude (talk) 05:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)`
- Can you undelete that? --George Ho (talk) 07:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done revision restored Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:35, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Can you undelete that? --George Ho (talk) 07:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
jzebraa
all true -Jourdan Zebraa 00:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Note: Of the speedy deletions this article has, the most recent deletion is a G11. Articles meeting this criterion are generally not undeleted either because they require a complete rewrite or they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. The A7 speedy is likewise incontestible. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done To have this topic you will need to have references and a claim of importance. If there is a magazine in second life that covers the topic that would help. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Visionfriendly
I was informed that the page would be able to edit and I could correct whatever possible mistake was made in its creation. Other the unambiguously promotional, there was not details of what was wrong. I was talking about the biggest web design company in IL and the Midwest, how is that promotional? All I stated was the current management, the departments, the origins and the success because of the contributors. Thats all. I never had a chance to fix whatever was wrong because I was looking into how to conform to the WP writing criteria. It was less than 30 minutes and the article is gone already, that's unfair and elitist towards new users. -BFischer8 (talk) 20:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done I'm sorry you feel that way. However, WP:FIRSTARTICLE might be a very good place for you to start. The key aspects about your first attempt are 1) there is no proof of notability, especially as highlighted in WP:CORP; 2) there were no third party reliable sources for any claims or statements; 3) our manual of style is quite clear about formatting, although that's pretty minor in the long run. As your attempt met none of the above, it's quickly defined as promotional based on the non-neutral wording, and must therefore be deleted. You're welcome to create a WP:USERSPACEDRAFT, but be sure to get some advice before trying to move it back into article space. From a personal perspective, I'd also warn about conflict of interest, and really a piece of advice as to reminding you that this is an encyclopedia, not a business directory. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Alejandro Correa Rueda
reasoning -190.21.65.122 (talk) 03:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Due to unfortunate errors in the wikipedia page Alejandro Correa Rueda, want to delete. All this for wrong interpretation of the meaning that said: "This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; suggestions may be available. (February 2012)". Daniel Cases in a very arbitrary denunciation his said was an autobiography. It's just a humble biography of a great biologist in Chile. Incorrect changes that were made same day and Señor Daniel Cases is nominating and delete the page of Alejandro Correa Rueda. Undeleted the page of Alejandro Correa Rueda, please help. All this only to see history on 24 th February of Alejandro Correa Rueda. I think what would have been more logical and correct to stay on as an orphan page
- 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 or contact the administrator that closed the deletion debate instead. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Pai Lum
The page on pai lum kung fu was very informative and interesting for practitioners of the art. I dont understand why the page was taken down in the first place. -117.120.18.132 (talk) 04:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. see Pai lum Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Anwar_Farrukhabadi
I searched in book and crawled web for couple of hours to get some data for this article and its all wasted through deletion -alimola (talk) 05:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. However do not reproduce the copyright infringements that were there before. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
PureView Pro
I have done all I could be for making it neutral. I have following advices of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yngvadottir. And also you can see the conversations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cchallag where Yngvadottir has approved it. Also there are lot of other articles similar and they are hanging in there. -Cchallag (talk) 12:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Can I second this request, please? This editor created the article in his/her sandbox, was demonstrably trying to make it neutral, but did not understand the role of references or the notability rules. (See edit summary in which they remove a reference added by someone else - which was not 3rd-party - on the grounds that refs make the article less neutral.) They contested the prod on the talkpage and I gave them advice to add references to demonstrate notability, and that non-3rd-party refs are useful from an informational standpoint and they should tehrefore add that one back, too. Yes, it's pretty clear they are employed by Nokia, as the deleting admin pointed out on my talkpage. But a contested prod to which someone is now adding or has agreed to add 3rd-party references - 2 non-Nokia reviews were mentioned - should go to AfD per policy. And COI policy as well as WP:BITE both advocate educating a new editor rather than assuming they will always be single-issue or that the mere fact they are employed by the company makes them unfit to edit here. Please undelete it so it can be taken to AfD - and so that I and others can tone down the promotional language. I had to go to bed last night! Yngvadottir (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- This was not done via WP:PROD (in which case, undeletion would be valid) but under WP:CSD#G11. It is horrifically promotional, and WP:COI is pretty apparent. Because of the promotional tone, and really non-encyclopedic nature of what's there, I'm really not sure it should be undeleted at all - no intent to WP:BITE, but it doesn't cut it ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. Unfortunately I am unqualified to help rewrite technical articles (or even to do a good job searching for sources), or I'd offer to do so. Without seeing the deleted history, I can't be sure the new editor did add the references; and they were subsequently editing logged out, and I obviously have no way of knowing whether that means they scrambled their password, or that they simply moved to a different location and didn't remember the password. But it does seem to me to be a clear case of a newbie who is unfamiliar with the COI rules and notability criteria but shows signs of wishing to learn them and abide by them. I'm going to see if they have e-mail enabled and if they do, suggest they contact you. I'd prefer it to go to AfD to attract other eyes, but perhaps you would be willing to userfy it for the creator, but not to restore and AfD it, since it clearly struck you as more irredeemable than it did me? (What I saw was massive peacock language but a clear exposition of the technology itself, and the editor did refer on my talkpage to 2 potential references; but as I say I don't know enough about technology to be a good judge of such articles). Yngvadottir (talk) 19:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- The text is very spammy - sandbox version. I am satisfied from contribution histories that Cchallag (talk · contribs) and 192.100.120.41 (talk) are the same person and the IP address is registered to Nokia, manufacturers of the device. The article should stay deleted until someone with no COI thinks it is notable and writes it up. This request is misplaced anyway - deletion was speedy as spam not an expired prod. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. Unfortunately I am unqualified to help rewrite technical articles (or even to do a good job searching for sources), or I'd offer to do so. Without seeing the deleted history, I can't be sure the new editor did add the references; and they were subsequently editing logged out, and I obviously have no way of knowing whether that means they scrambled their password, or that they simply moved to a different location and didn't remember the password. But it does seem to me to be a clear case of a newbie who is unfamiliar with the COI rules and notability criteria but shows signs of wishing to learn them and abide by them. I'm going to see if they have e-mail enabled and if they do, suggest they contact you. I'd prefer it to go to AfD to attract other eyes, but perhaps you would be willing to userfy it for the creator, but not to restore and AfD it, since it clearly struck you as more irredeemable than it did me? (What I saw was massive peacock language but a clear exposition of the technology itself, and the editor did refer on my talkpage to 2 potential references; but as I say I don't know enough about technology to be a good judge of such articles). Yngvadottir (talk) 19:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- This was not done via WP:PROD (in which case, undeletion would be valid) but under WP:CSD#G11. It is horrifically promotional, and WP:COI is pretty apparent. Because of the promotional tone, and really non-encyclopedic nature of what's there, I'm really not sure it should be undeleted at all - no intent to WP:BITE, but it doesn't cut it ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I am about to give up now guys. You guys are great and you proved your point. I think Wikipedia is the wrong place to spread the tech message. I will try to find another way. There are so many cool technologies out there which deserves to be known by people. I would have appreciated more help from you guys in helping a new bie. Anyway the discussion now is totally inappropriate. The discussion needs to be on article not COI or Ip addresses which are very minor details compared to deletion of article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchallag (talk • contribs) 05:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- You guys win anyway. Can you delete my user space totally. My objective was to spread the knowledge and let people know about technologies. Not to support any company. The discussion was taken to totally a wrong way and became personal. So I would like to stay away from further comments. Means totally delete it so that it cannot be Googled. I would like to reduce one click for users who want to know more about the technologies. cchallag talk
- Can anyone point me to the latest article which was deleted as I have done some changes there. I will submit to cloveapple and he said help me in making it better. Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchallag (talk • contribs) 18:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
The Sales Factory
The article is unbiased. I have included wikilinks as well as links to my references. I am at a loss on how to make this page appropriate. Please help me. -Wehra06 (talk) 13:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done and will not be done That was not an article, that was a shameless sales pitch: an absolute crapfest of promotional bumfodder like "We engineer marketing solutions"!!!! --Orange Mike | Talk 18:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
File:North York Rockets Official Program (1987).pdf
Permission was obtained and accepted by permissions (Ref. Ticket#2012012010000286 North York Rockets Official Program (1987).pdf -Xave2000 (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done I still need an OTRS volunteer to confirm this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
American Karate Black Belt Association
The page contained a history of instructors and black belts and a basic "who taught who" in the history of martial arts in the South. Please undelete this page as a lot of the information is unreplaceable. Thank you. -216.81.81.83 (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
File:Logo_OS_B.png
The file was deleted because there was not the related article. I have uploaded the Logo while working at the article in my send box, now I have uploaded the page Officina Stellare. I have tried to contact first the administrator who deleted the file Fastily, but he suggested to make the request to undelete in this page. Thank you for your assistance.LaZingo 09:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC) -LaZingo 09:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done --Tikiwont (talk) 20:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
yafone technologies in india
reasoning -117.204.66.7 (talk) 19:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
forgot to add copyright info -Judas6000 (talk) 19:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done Timer reset. Greetings --Tikiwont (talk) 20:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
T-Cut
I believe T-Cut should be allowed to remain on Wikipedia as members of the public constantly ask what does T-Cut stand for? What does it mean?
Please advise how companies such as Coca Cola and Persil have live business pages about the background of their products and T-Cut (a houselhold name)can not? -SARAHELIZTAYLOR (talk) 09:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Not done Sarah, the major difference between T-Cut and its parent company compared to say Coca Cola is notability, especially as per WP:CORP. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a site for WP:PROMOTION nor a directory of businesses or products. Wikipedia has no place for phrasing such as "the legendary...". It is a common mistake that many new editors make, so please do not take it personally. I recommend that you read WP:FIRSTARTICLE, which will introduce you to everything from our requirement for sourcing to notability. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
ICC Permanent Premises
the article was merged into the International Criminal Court article and then deleted. However, the biggest part of the article was just deleted and not used in the article about International Criminal Court. Also, the article about International Criminal Court is too long and I don't know if it is wise to add more information about the Permanent Premises there. I am of the opinion that the ICC Permanent Premises article can be more expanded, offering more information about the design and the whole procedure, especially since it is about a project that will start being built this year -elma (talk) 12:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Some content was included, but the rest has actually not been deleted but converted into a so called redirect. Which means (1) anybody clicking on the link above will right now find at least the essential information and (2) the content is still available in the edit history[2] so it can be reversed and expanded anytime without administrator action, ideally after digging up better references on this yet to start project and discussing further at at Talk:ICC Permanent Premises. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)