Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

Welcome. Please note that this page is NOT for challenging the outcome of deletion discussions or to address the pending deletion of any page.

Requests for undeletion is a process intended to assist users in restoring pages or files that were uncontroversially deleted via proposed deletion, under certain speedy deletion criteria (such as maintenance deletions or rejected Articles for creation drafts), or in "articles for deletion" debates with little or no participation other than the nominator. This page is also intended to serve as a central location to request that deleted content be userfied or emailed to you so the content can be improved upon prior to re-insertion into the mainspace, or used elsewhere (you may also make a request directly to one of the administrators listed here). This means that content deleted after discussion—at articles for deletion, categories for discussion, or miscellany for deletion among other deletion processes—may in some cases be provided to you, but such controversial page deletions will not be overturned through this process. Copyright violations and attack pages will not be provided at all.

This page is only for requesting undeletion of articles or files which have already been deleted. If the article you are concerned about is still visible, but has a warning message (template) at the top, please do not post here, but follow the instructions in the template or on your talk page.

Note that requests for undeletion is not a replacement for deletion review. If you feel an administrator has erred in closing a deletion discussion or in applying a speedy deletion criterion, please contact them directly. If you discuss but are unable to resolve the issue on their talk page, it should be raised at Wikipedia:Deletion review, rather than here.

Instructions for special cases

• G13. Abandoned Articles for creation submissions - see Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13 for instructions.

float

float

Please enter the page's title to request its undeletion:

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sara Jay

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sara Jay · ( logs | links | watch | mfd ) · [revisions]

I caused the deletion to occur. It was an accident. I in no way wished to delete this page. I was attempting to click on a user name. As I clicked, I apparently jerked my hand a bit and my cursor moved to the "delete" button, which was quite close. I am hoping someone will restore this page.ElPasoWalt (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Seriously, you never even edited that page using this account - but then again, you have multiple accounts, don't you. On top of that, you have zero access to a "delete" button - so, um, no. Finally, that article was subject to WP:MFD because of sockpuppets and recreation multiple times. DP 16:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I can't believe you don't believe this perfectly plausible story about accidentally hitting the delete button. Shameful.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

All things considered, you actually have to push two buttons in order to delete a page, so there is that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Mid-Atlantic_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition

• Mid-Atlantic_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

The article was originally deleted citing 'A7: Article about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject'. The article is inline with the other CCDC (Collegiate Cyber Defense Competitions) articles: National_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition & Southeastern_Collegiate_Cyber_Defense_Competition. Significance (multiple industry sponsors, including US Government funding) are provided within the articles. I am requesting the article be undeleted; and, if necessary I'd be more than happy to provide other indications of 'significance' or any other edits required. Thanks. -Justin M. Wray (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion a7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user RHaworth (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of The AmpHour Episodes

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of The AmpHour Episodes · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, 110.143.247.222, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 110.143.247.222 (talk) 07:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

The backup of this page was lost, so this is my only copy I didn't know existed. S please undelete so I can capture and reedit as required. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.247.222 (talk) 07:41, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Kent Pavelka

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

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Kentpavelka (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

You need to provide a source or else it will not be undeleted, per WP:BLPPROD. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 17:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Kentpavelka/Kent Pavelka. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Centro de Justicia

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Centro de Justicia · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Centrodejusticia, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. cogito ergo sum 20:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences

• University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Was working on this page when it was deleted, originally it was flagged for having a very broad title "Biological & Environmental Sciences". Which absolutely was titled incorrectly. It was changed to Biological & Environmental Sciences (UTC) both of which still need to be deleted.

This was changed to "University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences" and flagged as a part of Wikiproject universities and I was in the process of adding more information to the article in an attempt to do something similar to Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences which is linked from Cornell University in order to provide more information regarding the department referenced.

The Link would go into a group of links at University of Tennessee at Chattanooga to give further information regarding the departments and colleges at the university and hopefully turned into a sidebar similar to the Cornell University example above.

Please reconsider the deletion of this info I was rather upset when I went to add a box with department statistics to the wiki and it had been deleted.

The deleted article was at University of Tennessee at Chattanooga: Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences.

Please forgive me for being slow at learning how to do this as it is the first wiki page I have attempted to contribute towards.

Edit: Here is the original comment regarding why this was flagged:

"A tag has been placed on Biological & Environmental Sciences requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable."

"Just so you're aware, you also shouldn't make an article about a university department that uses such a generalized title. There are probably other university departments in the world with the exact same name - Wikipedia is not Tennessee-centric. ProtossPylon 21:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)"

From Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion Section A7: "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.[5]"

Faugaun (talk) 00:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I posted this on the board of the user who deleted I was unsure the correct was to contest this then I found this. Sorry for the double submission -Faugaun (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

P.P.S. After reviewing the notability section I have found some sources

UTC Students Help Renovate Prairie Dog Exhibit At Zoo - From a local news outlet citing a department specific action

recognition of a professor from the department

Another department professor discovering a new species

the department hosting a national non-profit symposium

university newspaper congratulating a different professor in the department on her $300,000 national science foundation grant

Carnegie museum of National History, naming a department professor as one of their research associates

recent peer-reviewed publications

recent books and literature from the dept

more recent publications

recent presentations

Awards received by students within the dept

notable acceptances to further education from graduates of the department

I'm not sure what else is required to show that the department is notable and worthy of it's own page within the university. There is plenty of content and information and if given an opportunity to expand I am sure it would find no difficulty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faugaun (talk • contribs) 03:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• Part of the problem I see with some of the sources you've listed is that several of them are primary sources, meaning that they're something that has been released by the college or department. (WP:PRIMARY) I'm also concerned about the awards, since they seem to be given out by the department/school itself. That's sort of WP:NOTINHERITED mixed with primary sources, as notability for one person's achievements doesn't entirely link to notability for the department. Also, as far as publications go, it's expected for any given college department to publish materials in different formats and make presentations, so just making publications isn't really enough. You'd have to first show that these are presented by the department themselves (as opposed to them listing things published by someone who is connected with the department in various ways) and that they've been the focus of independent and reliable sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
• I'm willing to userfy the content for the time being, though. I just don't think that these sources really show where it passes notability guidelines to where it could be in the mainspace. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:40, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • here's a7 "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.[5] This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works. This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s). The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

, – for people, – for bands, – for clubs, societies and groups, – for companies, corporations and organizations, – for websites, – for individual animals, - for events It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion."

• • even if I have not substantiated entirely the notability in your eyes it still has enough claim to not be an A7, first it has to do with a school (and if a highschool is immune then surely a research department at a university is immune), second I have submitted info that would suggest potential notability, some of it was rejected due to the information not being an external source but the very first link I provided is an external source citing the students of the department therefore even if rejection of notability is the case it still doesn't fall to the level of A7 deletion and deserves the opportunity to grow and see if it is able to meet the criteria for notability upon it's own merits.

• • This link to the discussion of the school exception it says "For schools at both primary and secondary levels that can be shown to have a real existence, actual deletion for lack of notability is never the appropriate option. Not that they should all have articles--but they can at least always be merged to the school district, or other body, or, failing that, to the locality. I have never seen a single actual primary or secondary school so non-notable that listing in such an article with a redirect at least would not be appropriate." and "Since deletion for lack of notability is almost never the solution, speedy for lack of notability is all the more never the solution." and "Other people convinced me that we would make fewer mistakes if we just took them all. Our purpose is to build an encyclopedia, not have endless disputes over minor articles at AfD." and "so the fact that there are people that object to school articles being on Wikipedia, or to the apparent notability of schools, is no reason to delete" and "Encyclopedic school articles, whether we're considering a world famous, award winning academy, or a run-of-the-mill elementary school with at least 200 students, are unique, are of interest to some people, are topics that people would search for in Google, usually can be individually indentified and be researched, usually can be the subject of at least a considerable Wikipedia stub, and when all else fails, can be merged somewhere rather than deleted via speedy deletion. Also, such articles are useful to some people, do not hurt Wikipedia's reputation, give younger readers a reason to get interested in editing, help Wikipedia reach its goals, and can be verified." and "A7, in my opinion, should only be for articles that make Wikipedia look silly because they are obviously non-notable." in any case I think it is a safe bet that in under 2 hours of being a page (sorry I do not know the exact length) that someone can for sure make a claim that there is obviously no notability to this article.

• • Here is a claim of notability "Students from the department of biological and environmental sciences at the university of Tennessee at Chattanooga helped to revamp the prairie dog exhibit at the Chattanooga zoo" Independent objective source here. "The department cohosted with ARCS national GIS day in 2007" third party independent source here. "Tennessee has nine other universities that offer environmental science degrees and the University of Tennessee at Chattannoga department of biological and environmental sciences graduates the most (44% of the states total graduates in 2010)." source here for notable claim.

• • Faugaun (talk) 21:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• The problem is that the school rule tends to go for colleges/schools as a whole and isn't generally considered to be applicable for the specific sections of an overall section of a college. It's part of the University of Tennessee and does not operate as a separate facility. It's possible for departments to get notice specifically, but it's not a rule that every department automatically gets a separate article. Now as far as speedy deletion criteria goes, there's still the overall issue with notability as a whole. We could restore this to the mainspace, but I'll be honest that this has a very high likelihood of getting deleted at AfD. I honestly don't think it would survive based on the sources you've posted here. The issue with the sources is that it's not actually about the department. They're mentioned in relation to another event and aren't the actual focus of the article. In general, any college worth their salt will have their students participate in local events for college credit. It was a requirement for my degree that I get involved with the community and I know it was for other degree fields as well. The Chattanoogan could be very easily argued to be little more than a notification of an upcoming event, which would mean that it wouldn't hold up at AfD to show notability. It looks to be pretty heavily taken from a press release issued from the college itself, which doesn't help matters either. As far as ranking the highest in a poll... that doesn't mean automatic notability for the department. It may make it more likely that it'd gain notability but it's not a guarantee, especially since a lot of college rankings system will rank the college as a whole and not really focus on the individual departments much. Offhand I'd say that quite a few of the individual school departments that do have articles probably fail notability guidelines and could be deleted or redirected. That's why we usually see so many of them up for various forms of deletion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your quick response, I think that I have stated my case as best I am able to at this time so I will rest at this time and let you and the other powers that be make whatever determination you decide in regards to this. It is my firm opinion that when the united states is the major country involved in environmental fields worldwide and when a department is at the forefront for an entire state then it is definitely notable. However, if you say otherwise I will accept your determination as final and let this rest. Cheers, Faugaun (talk) 22:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Bell Gardens (band)

• Bell Gardens (band) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Bell Gardens is a current band with members of Stars Of The Lid . Other Stars Of The Lid related bands have pages such as Winged Victory For The Sullen ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Winged_Victory_for_the_Sullen ). Bell Gardens is no more or less relevant. Bell Gardens has released albums on well known labels such as Southern Records. The page was not finished when it was deleted. -Ambient.Trivia (talk) 01:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done by Casliber. GB fan 11:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Kenneth james Gibson

• Kenneth James Gibson · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Looks like by adding information about the band Bell Gardens (Brian McBride of Stars Of The Lid & kenneth james Gibson) i got a page that has been up for years deleted. I am new to Wikipedia and i guess i did something wrong - because i got the Kenneth James Gibson page and the Bell gardens page i started deleted. Kenneth james Gibson is a musician of 20+ years with 100's of releases under a ton of alias and styles, only some of which were explained on his page that was deleted... Not only that but he has been running a record label which is part of the legendary techno / house conglomerate Kompakt, i think for at least 10 years or more. I think this is all very notable. I tried to add reference links, but I'm apparently doing something wrong...but One google search would bring millions of hits. Can you please restore this page? I'd like to help and make it a better more in depth page as well if it restored. If there is anything else I can do please let me know. Thank You. -Ambient.Trivia (talk) 05:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC) Ambient.Trivia (talk) 05:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Ambient.Trivia

Done by Casliber. GB fan 11:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Gamut_Infosystems

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

Gamut Infosystems is leading ERP company in India , but in this online world only few people known about this company, We are not promoting any thing through wikipidia . We juts try connect with peoples if they want to know about Gamut they will get some information . And Wikipedia is the best way. So it's humble request please do not delete this page -Farvisionerp (talk) 06:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user Peridon (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. GB fan 11:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I've already contacted them to explain the deletion. Peridon (talk) 11:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The View from The Shard

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The View from The Shard · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Andrewswilson87, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Andrewswilson87 (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. GB fan 10:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

aadarsh mishra

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

Enter your This page contains information about thin films here and then click the "Save page" button below -Aadarshscholar (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done The article has not yet been deleted. GB fan 10:54, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I have since the above notice deleted the page as it was a copyright violation as well as an advertisement. GB fan 11:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

the american public high school . please dont delete this page its my lovely school page... i want to give information about my school. thanks!

• The American public high school, Sialkot · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

its my school page i just want to change this name to concept school system . and then click the "Save page" button below -Sheezarathore (talk) 11:46, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

@Sheezarathore: The speedy deletion nomination was declined here, less than one hour after it was added, and about 21 hours before you posted here asking for it not to be speedy deleted.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I fixed the spelling of the article name in the above request. EdJohnston (talk) 12:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

List of Wineries in Florida

• List of Wineries in Florida · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Deleted as an expired Prod. I would like to work on the article. Thank you. -Candleabracadabra (talk) 12:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. GB fan 14:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Mason Bendewald

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

This article should be reinstated because Mason Bendewald is a notable filmmaker who has had his documentaries screened at film festivals all over the country. The official reason his article was deleted was because it was deemed "advertising" but I don't believe that's true because I've read it, and I think it was only trying to highlight the achievements of a filmmaker. Please reconsider undeleting this page. -172.251.63.24 (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mason Bendewald, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Mr. Stradivarius (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Royal Farros

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Royal Farros · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Rube3000, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rube3000 (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Goiswintha

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Goiswintha · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Daryl Kohlhoff, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Daryl Kohlhoff (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - @Daryl Kohlhoff: as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

ljkdfghfg

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Revolt of Hermenegild

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Revolt of Hermenegild · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Daryl Kohlhoff, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Daryl Kohlhoff (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I Am Vengeance

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I Am Vengeance · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Mseely60, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mseely60 (talk) 21:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Sauer S 1800 UL

• Sauer S 1800 UL · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Someone mistakenly have thought Sauer S 1800 UL is the same engine as the certified Sauer S 1800 engines and then just deleted the Sauer S 1800 UL article and redirected to Sauer S 1800. They have similar names, but all Sauer "UL" versions are different from the certified versions, different cylinders, different crank shaft, different characteristics. I find it extremely odd that someone would delete pages based on purely on semantics, not content and facts -SvingenB (talk) 00:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC) SvingenB (talk) 00:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: - nothing has been deleted, as far as I can see: there has never been an article at Sauer S 1800 UL before it was created as a redirect yesterday by user Petebutt (talk) (nor at Sauer S 1800UL or Sauer S1800UL). There is nothing to stop you creating an article there by over-writing the redirect, if there is enough material and sources to justify a stand-alone article. JohnCD (talk) 11:16, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

There is an article titled Sauer 1800 UL. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

So there is, created by the OP a day before he posted here. @SvingenB: - the names of all these engines are confusing, but if your article Sauer 1800 UL should actually be called "Sauer S 1800 UL", leave a note below here and we can move it to that title. JohnCD (talk) 20:40, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done - article moved, now at Sauer S 1800 UL. JohnCD (talk) 10:21, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Mehgan James

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

This page was deleted based upon some one's opinion that it was not worthy of a wiki article. This is not fair this page was interesting and had sources -50.15.202.106 (talk) 04:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review instead. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 04:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mehgan James, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user FreeRangeFrog (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 10:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zedbazi (2)

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zedbazi (2) · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Sinatt, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sinatt (talk) 05:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

The article was not accepted for publication due to having inadequate citations, and due to time concerns, I was not able to improve the article, and it was deleted after 6 months. I would like to improve the article now if that is possible. -Sinatt (talk) 05:21, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 11:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi-Tech ITO

• Hi-Tech ITO · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

i am writing more about Hi-Tech ITO it's not even written 10% about an agency yet so please allow me time for 1 or 2 days to write more about Hi-Tech ITO. -Dhawalhitechito (talk) 10:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves: "We have branches in India, USA... " etc. Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and the WP:FAQ/Organizations; then, if you want to proceed, use WP:Articles for creation so that what you write can be reviewed by an uninvolved editor. Bear in mind that Wikipedia is not for promotion of any kind: if what you write is in PR-speak or seems to try to "sell" the company, it will not be accepted. JohnCD (talk) 10:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Dixon

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Dixon · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Everettdix (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC) I was unable to complete the article. Sean Dixon has since gained fame.

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

University of Pennsylvania Student Federal Credit Union

• University of Pennsylvania Student Federal Credit Union · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

This article should not have been deleted due to the credit union's alleged lack of notability. Although the SFCU is small and has one-branch, it is should be recognized that it is the only student-run credit union in the Ivy League, and only one of two student-run credit unions in the nation. Georgetown University Alumni and Student Federal Credit Union is the only other student-run credit union in the US and this credit union has its own Wikipedia page. The SFCU has 100 University of Pennsylvania students who volunteer their time to work at the credit union, and over 1200 members from the University of Pennsylvania community. The SFCU is also part of the AllPoint ATM network, which is one of the largest surcharge-free ATM networks in the nation. It was founded in 1987 by three Wharton MBA students, and has been in business for 27 years now. One of the founders is Kenneth Beck, who is the CEO of CEO Connection, the President of The Wharton Club of New York, and a Board Member of the Wharton Alumni Association. He is on the SFCU's Board of Advisors. There have been many articles written about the SFCU as well. -2607:F470:6:3:E48D:33A:BDCF:1283 (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Pennsylvania Student Federal Credit Union, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Malcolmxl5 (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dakshin Gujarat Adivasi (Tribal) Sevamandal

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dakshin Gujarat Adivasi (Tribal) Sevamandal · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

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

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 11:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Committee of Elites

• Committee of Elites · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Yeowwwai (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion A7. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 18:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about groups or organizations or articles about people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. JohnCD (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

James Cusack

• James Cusack · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd | afd2 ) · [revisions]

Page was deleted January 5, without reason, source of information on radio presenter -94.118.101.195 (talk) 22:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

• Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. The reason was the lack of any references. I am having trouble finding any independent references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The Como Brothers Band

To Whom this may concern,

The page was charged with these counts: 21:57, 19 April 2014 FreeRangeFrog (talk | contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 18:58, 19 April 2014 NawlinWiki (talk | contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content) 07:27, 24 February 2013 Qwyrxian (talk | contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

I do not understand why The Como Brothers Band Wikipedia page was deleted. I contested the deletion and it appears no one even looked at my objections. I request this page be restored. Read through the page and you will see that all information being relayed can be verified by third party persons. All facts written are referenced and sources are clearly outlined. All material is objective and unbiased. This page was not created for the promotion/advertisement of any person, place or product - FreeRangeFrog is with G11 unjustly labeling the page before reading its content. The Wikipedia page is needed to clarify information regarding the nature of the band, history, and its verified web sources - NawlinWiki and Qwyrxian with A3 and A7 are wrongly assuming that the facts being relayed are not relevant and important to fans, agencies, and record companies. The band needs a source to relay information that is accurate as there have been several discrepancies. The Como Brothers Band is even referenced in other Wikipedia pages. Several bands of lower caliber than themselves, with fewer references have Wikipedia pages. Please explain what make the Como Brothers Band a lesser entity than The Brooks Young Band, Kingsfoil, Jeff Leblanc,Push Play, Rachel Elelynae, Patent Pending, Colortheory, John Tagileri, Juliet Ashby, Katie Cole, Erene, Jamestown Story, Joesph Jett,Rattlin' Bones, Gary Hoey, Jenn Bostic,NO (Band), Action Item, and many many others. You did not even give me a proper amount of time to complete or fix the supposed problems. I do not understand why this band is being discriminated against. Fans have tried to make a Wikipedia pages for the band int the past and it is consistently deleted. Please let me know how this problem can be resolved.

Thank you, Marissa

• [[:Contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

18:58, 19 April 2014 NawlinWiki (talk]] · ( [[|talk]] | logs | [[Special:WhatLinksHere/ contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 18:58, 19 April 2014 NawlinWiki (talk |links]] | [{{fullurl: contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 18:58, 19 April 2014 NawlinWiki (talk |action=watch}} watch] ) · [[[Special:Undelete/Contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 18:58, 19 April 2014 NawlinWiki (talk|revisions]]] contribs) deleted page The Como Brothers Band (A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content) 07:27, 24 February 2013 Qwyrxian (talk -Bco66209 (talk) 23:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

• Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning musicians or music groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Although I disagree with the A3 delete (it was only minutes old), and the G11 delete, (it was written like and advert but would be easily stripped of marketing language) it qualified for A7 deletion: read WP:Band. I have read your objections, and there seems to be more claims of importance on the talk page. So it can be recreated if you wish, including the reasons why the band is important and leave out terms like: "in depth knowledge" "songwriting genius" "deep appreciation" "clever lyrics" as they sound promotional. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David E. Flynn

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David E. Flynn · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, 96.18.165.234, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 96.18.165.234 (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/IPR Aware World

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/IPR Aware World · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Davidwr, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13 on behalf of Sandeep K Khichar. Please restore the page as this editor re-created a new draft (which I moved from Wikipedia:Articles for creation/IPR Aware World to User:Sandeep K Khichar/IPR Aware World (2)), which is strong evidence that he intends to work on this topic. This same editor was involved in the G13-deleted draft. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:22, 20 April 2014 (UTC) Added "moved". davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 05:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Trillbass

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Trillbass · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Kittycolada911, 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 have new reliable sources and plan to shorten this article. Kittycolada911 (talk) 11:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. GB fan 11:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Ramakrishnan Swamiji

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

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Themunozgroup (talk) 13:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Both the criteria applied for the Speedy Deletion of this Page doesn't apply to this page.

This is not a page created to promote Swamiji Ramakrishnan. He is already a popular Swami in North India - Rishikesh, Himalayas. He has an Ahsram that is visited regularly by many people. Moreover, his contributions & works on the traditional Sanskrit works in particular Bhagawad Gita, Brahmasutra & the canonical philosophical systems of India has been lauded across the country & adopted as texts in many of the Universities. He has been christened "Dravidacharya" owing to his works. He is regularly invited for lectures in all the important Mutts in India including the birth place of Shanakara the most revered of Indian philosophers.

Surely the deletion of this page is by someone who is unaware of the importance of such young Swamis & their contributions to the contemporary philosophy & scholarship of India.

I request an un-deletion of this page.

• Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning 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. The "ministers" and "philosophers" of any faith group are extremely rarely notable. Someday when he does meet requirements, there may be an option  the panda  ₯’ 13:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Neubauer Family Collegium for Culture and Society

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Neubauer Family Collegium for Culture and Society · ( logs | links | watch | mfd ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -A.Jacobin (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I have just added sourced info, including the $26 million founding gift, and the fact that a large Gothic revival building (former home of a theological seminary) at the edge of te campus is being renovated by a notable architecture firm to house the new Collegium. The Collegium is new, but it is clearly a well-supported, major institute. I also linked the names of the leading professors involved to their Wikipedia pages, but note that the unlinked faculty on the list all qualify for Wikipedia pages because they hold endowed/distinguished/named professorships at a major university.A.Jacobin (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I have corrected the malformed request. The draft has not been deleted, so doesn't need undeleting. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I think. If it is not too much trouble, can you explain why this article is still not qualified to be a "regular" article, it seems patently notable to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.Jacobin (talk • contribs) 17:55, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Now that you have made the page Neubauer Family Collegium for Culture and Society you don't have to worry about the AFC page so much, and I have redirected it. The decline reasons were for promotional language, rather than non-notability. There was a threat to use WP:MFD but it did not eventuate. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thomas C. Card (photographer)

• Thomas C. Card (photographer) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I now have more information and links to add to make this page a substantive one. In the past I did not have enough citations. -Marygv (talk) 17:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Media Idee

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

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -115.186.121.30 (talk) 20:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello. The Page 'Media Idee' was deleted for the company not being notable at the time.

Since then, the following are some of the projects that have gotten it into the limelight:

The biggest one is the Organization of the first ever Dolphin Show in Pakistan. Please see http://www.dolphinshow.org/partner.php and www.facebook.com/dolphinshowkarachi for proof that MI was the main organizer. Just Google 'Dolphin Show Karachi' and you will get about a 100 links back from major media companies in the country discussing that including some that actually Cite Media Idee. This is one FB page which lists the event's as MI: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Media-Idee/346860588664883.

Some pages which list MI are: http://tcsconnect.com/dolphin-show-ticket-12897.html

http://www.awamiweb.com/dolphin-show-in-karachi-from-10th-of-january-67671.html

http://www.mediakorner.com/pakistans-first-ever-dolphin-show/

Media Idee is also part of PAS - The ruling body for all advertisers and agencies.

PAS - Pakistan Advertisers' Society: http://www.pas.org.pk/media-idee-celebrates-8th-birthday/

Other Links Include: http://trango.co/interview-with-umair-mohsin-of-media-idee/

http://www.pas.org.pk/mira-media-idee-research-analytics/

http://www.crunchbase.com/company/mi-digital

http://www.midigital.co/nestle-fruita-vitals-production-handled-mi-productions/

Network Companies include: www.miproductions.tv

www.mievents.asia

www.creativecom.co

• 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/Media Idee, 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 Mark Arsten (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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nightfever is an open prayer evening with Eucharistic adoration, prayers, music, confession and talk.

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nightfever is an open prayer evening with Eucharistic adoration, prayers, music, confession and talk. · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Diana.Sylvia, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Diana.Sylvia (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Image:Alice 2010.jpg

• Image:Alice 2010.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Image was deleted as orphaned, but it shouldn't have been put in that situation; it was being used at article Alice (Alice's Adventures in Wonderland), for which there was a discussion with consensus to keep it (along with the video game cover art, which is currently used at the article). -Diego (talk) 21:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• I cannot see that was the picture that consensus said to keep. Your request comes from 2010 remake of Alice in wonderland. More likely the review wanted File:American McGee Alice box.gif · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]. Do you want that restored? (actually a variant is already in the article, so no need to restore that one) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• There was a second discussion, which I closed. See WP:NFCR/Archive 36. The second discussion concluded that the live action non-free file (this one) was not warranted. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 22:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• In that case  Not done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

How did that discussion happen? User:Grandiose states that (s)he would address a notification to editors involved, but I didn't get any. The decision to remove the image seems to be based on Masem's assumption that Alice in Wonderland (2010 film) already contained a depiction of Tim Burton's depiction of the Alice character in its cover art, but I explained that the film's cover art did not contain it. I disagree that that this discussion shows a "consensus that live action should be removed from article". I would have liked to expand my stance at that discussion before it was closed by a non-admin. Diego (talk) 10:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Lorenzo Tartamella

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

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -174.94.92.85 (talk) 22:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I am the owner of the page. All the content and information is completely legitimate and ethical. I have conducted some of the the most important interviews of our time for New York Wisdom. There is a fine line between many od the pages I see posted on Wikipedia and this page which demonstrates the many accomplishments as an entrepreneur and active member of the community are rather puzzling and maybe personally motivated by third parties who envy the success of others.

• 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/Lorenzo Tartamella, 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 Tawker (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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Logo_Tecnologico_de_Monterrey.svg

• Logo_Tecnologico_de_Monterrey.svg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

The logo is under copyright. We had this fair-use version but was deleted because someone falsely claimed copyright on it. -José Gnudista (talk) 23:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• I cannot find any evidence of an image under that name. There is File:ITESM official logo.svg, is that what you are talking about? TLSuda (talk) 23:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
•  Done Nevermind, I found it. File:Logo Tecnologico de Monterrey.svg. TLSuda (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaali_Venkat

• Kaali Venkat · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Avskishore (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Its my brother's page -Avskishore (talk) 06:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

• This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. You will need to come up with independent references such as in magazines or newspapers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:49, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ben Harrison (Sound Designer)

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ben Harrison (Sound Designer) · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions] 90.220.199.42 (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
•  Not done Unfortunately, this article was undeleted due to a request, but no additional work was done to it. As AFC is not a place to indefinitely host draft articles, it cannot be undeleted under G13 anymore. the panda ₯’ 23:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. I undeleted it but did not remove the G13 tag in time and it got deleted again. Anyway no detagged as well as undeleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Judicaël Perroy

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

The reference deficiency has been addressed - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zinjanous (talk • contribs) 22:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

• Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning musicians or music groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. the panda ₯’ 23:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Plini

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

I provided more than enough sources to prove that the subject was notable, yet the page was deleted anyways. I worked rather hard on creating this page, so it irritates me that it would be deleted so quickly. -John Weiss (talk) 00:48, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Exactly what criteria in WP:BAND does this band meet? ~Amatulić (talk) 06:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stacy Doris

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stacy Doris · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Wattsirod, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Wattsirod (talk) 12:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC) ,

Maybe this time around I will be able to work more fluidly with your system. Maybe with acceptance for non deletion I won't use my Mac... and things will be clearer and easier. I think you wanted me to provide a source for where Stacy Doris was born? The verification of sources for each of her books seems odd, if that is what you were asking me for. Should I put links to the Library of Congress or the Bibliotheque Nationale de France for each? I found the system hard to work with, but can perhaps get used to it. But then having the minimal things I started putting in there questioned was disheartening... How can I start editing this again? Many thanks!!!! -Wattsirod (talk) 12:30, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. Please read the links in the rejection message carefully, particularly the golden rule. That should give you a good overview about what is required before the article will be accepted. Links to libraries won't be considered sufficient, because those are simply directory listings, not actual coverage of the subject by an independent reliable source. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brodie Smith 21

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brodie Smith 21 · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Jlsmith5963, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jlsmith5963 (talk) 14:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" ~Amatulić (talk) 18:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Nicole Diar

• Nicole Diar · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I personally think she is notable enough to have a wikipedia page - she murdered her own son which is rare.

What you personally think doesn't matter. Rarity doesn't equal WP:NOTABILITY in Wikipedia standards.

However, the subject seems to meet the standard, at least minimally, and since it was deleted as an expired WP:PROD, I have restored it. Done. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Trawick international

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

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Waheedchuahdary (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion a7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user Darkwind (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Sitka Fine Arts Camp

• Sitka Fine Arts Camp · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Contested PROD yesterday morning, after noticing through Article alerts that the PROD was about to expire. The contested PROD was either ignored or overlooked (or not saved, but since I posted it through my phone rather than a real computer, it would be difficult for me to determine if that were the case) and the article was deleted perhaps less than a half hour later, which was about three hours short of the time listed on the PROD notice purporting to be the "deadline to contest PROD". Seeing as how the article does at least give hint of the organization's notability, AFD is the more suitable venue for this. - RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 18:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:45, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Kamrul Ahsan

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

I, Lixiaowang, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Lixiaowang (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. Nothing to do. The article has never been deleted, and has existed for several years. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kamrul Ahsan

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kamrul Ahsan · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I didn't edit the text within the stipulated 180 days and then click the "Save page" button below -Lixiaowang (talk) 19:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Ryaneagle

• User:Ryaneagle · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I would like to contribute to the website and I have revised my user page to remove the promotional-type / resume-type information for your review if you'd like. Please give me another chance, I would really appreciate it. I'm new to wikipedia and I didn't mean to make the mistake I did -Ryaneagle (talk) 19:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done. There is no value to the Wikipedia project in restoring promotional pages.

The page is not protected, you are not blocked, so you are free to re-create the page in compliance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Loki Ojha The Dancing Devil

• Loki Ojha The Dancing Devil · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Loki ojha (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC) I hope and wish that you would be doing good

Here i am facing problems again so please help us

First i was finding to how i can authenticate my work in which you help me out (and i am really very grateful for your kind help

)

Now second problem is Wikipedia person remove page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Unique_Artist as they find its bit of

promotional but its bit of inspirational and motivational

See if i give you one Gift and say u cant open it you can see it you cant use it so what the point of that gift

see Wikipedia is a gift but with many limitation thought i respect there systems but some time system create limitation and bounding.

Plz help me to let keep page

Loki

 Not done. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Among other things that Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia is not a platform for you to "authenticate your work". It is not a platform for providing inspirational or motivational gifts. We don't publish original work, original research, or original thought here. See Wikipedia:No original research for more information. Please use Facebook or your own website or any number of other venues for promoting your work. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

County Road 869 (Lee County, Florida)

• County Road 869 (Lee County, Florida) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

history undeletion under redirect -NE2 19:26, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

County Road 509 (Brevard County, Florida)

• County Road 509 (Brevard County, Florida) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

history undeletion under redirect (the history might be in Wikipedia:Article Incubator/County Road 509 (Brevard County, Florida), in which case that should be undeleted, moved, and redeleted) -NE2 19:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. The history from Wikipedia:Article Incubator/County Road 509 (Brevard County, Florida) has been merged with the redirect page County Road 509 (Brevard County, Florida). ~Amatulić (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. --NE2 20:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hold 'Em (Windows)

• Hold 'Em (Windows) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I am requesting history-only undeletion for this page (and the corresponding talk page); that is, for the page history - this page is currently a redirect but was previously an article - to be restored. -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 01:40, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, the problem is, those revisions were deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hold 'Em (Windows), and therefore they don't qualify for restoration by request on this page.

I suggest you contact the deleting administrator Salvidrim! if you have not already done so. If the deleting administrator doesn't agree to restore the revision history, then your next step is Wikipedia:Deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:49, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Amatulić: Looks like I restored it just as you were writing your comment. According to my understanding, the deleting admin's permission or DRV is not required in the case of history undeletion, unless the admin intentionally specifies that the history should not be restored. Per WP:DRVPURPOSE, "Deletion Review should not be used: ... 4. to challenge an article's deletion via the proposed deletion process, or to have the history of a deleted page restored behind a new, improved version of the page, called a history-only undeletion (please go to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion for these)." -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I specifically declined to restore the history of the page on my talk page, but I don't feel strongly enough about it either way to go back and unrestore it now that it is done. This is not a request for "the history of a deleted page to be restored behind a new, improved version of the page". ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 12:58, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

King of Hearts: the part you quoted doesn't apply here, because this isn't a case of restoring the history of a new improved version of the page. There is no new improved version of the page. Therefore, DRV is the appropriate place to discuss it, possibly for re-listing the debate, given that the AFD discussion had only two participants. But the deed is done now, and Slavidrim! doesn't mind either way, so the issue is now solved. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:40, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Nathan Swann

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

Nathan Swann is owner of SURE! Industries I think people should know about him. Nathan has been a close friend of mine. He deserves to be on here. -Heshwear (talk) 03:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - a deleted page with this name does not appear to exist. If a claim of significance is made (and owning SURE! Industries is not necessarily such a claim), the article will no longer be subject to speedy deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 04:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The lowercase version Nathan swann did exist, but still...

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion a7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user Mojo Hand (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sandown Park Greyhounds

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sandown Park Greyhounds · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

My article was deleted due to copyright infringement, I requested my article to be recovered to edit and re-do the page, he refused saying I'll restore almost anything, but I don't restore articles deleted as copyright violations. I would like my article to be restored for editing to correct the issue. Thanks. -Jason3613 (talk) 06:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done. Sorry, there is no benefit to the Wikipedia project in restoring copyright violations. We won't do it. You must start from scratch. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tim Lihoreau

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tim Lihoreau · ( logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I, Sciencebase, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tim Lihoreau is an important member of the radio community as weekday breakfast presenter on UK radio station ClassicFM.Sciencebase (talk) 07:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.. JohnCD (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Kali Venkat

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

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Avskishore (talk) 08:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion a7. You do not need to copy the speed-deletion notice here. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user RHaworth (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review.. Read WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:CREATIVE for the relevant WP:Notability standards. JohnCD (talk) 11:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

 Comment:: I see that this has been twice deleted and protected as Kaali Venkat; rather than try to get around the protection by mis-spelling the name, you should talk to the administrator who protected the title, user Alexf (talk). JohnCD (talk) 11:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)