Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Joyce Michel: new section
Line 548: Line 548:


}}
}}

== Wenderholm Regional Park ==


*{{revisions|Wenderholm Regional Park}}
<i></i>Ridiculous deletion. Got deleted because of copyright infringement. I created an article about a park, and it gets deleted. I only used the website as a source, not to copy entire information. -'''''[[User talk:Porchcorpter|Porch corpter]]''''' <span style="font-size:12px;">([[Special:Contributions/Porchcorpter|contribs]]/[[User:Porchcorpter public|public policy]])</span> 20:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC) --'''''[[User talk:Porchcorpter|Porch corpter]]''''' <span style="font-size:12px;">([[Special:Contributions/Porchcorpter|contribs]]/[[User:Porchcorpter public|public policy]])</span> 20:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:54, 31 August 2011


Welcome. Please note that this page is NOT for challenging the outcome of deletion discussions nor to address the pending deletion of any page.
Shortcuts

Requests for undeletion is a process intended to assist users in restoring pages that were uncontroversially deleted via proposed deletion, under certain speedy deletion criteria (such as CSD G6), 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 XfD processes—may in some cases be provided to you, but such controversial page deletions will not be overturned through this process.

This page is only for requesting undeletion of articles 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 on 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 are unable to resolve the issue on their talk page, it should be raised at Wikipedia:Deletion review, rather than here.

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

Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

Userify request

Could I get copies of the following deleted articles I authored placed in my userspace, so I can copy them offsite?

Thanks Mathewignash (talk) 01:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mathew. Since this is such a large request, would you mind if we simply emailed the articles to you? Arbitrarily0 (talk) 12:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great! Mathewignash (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone done this? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet. Anyone? I'd appreciate it. Mathewignash (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is too much work, you can just undelete the first couple, and I'll request a few more in a little while, until I get them all. Thanks! Mathewignash (talk) 21:00, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Please look at the original article titles for likely search results (basically anything that doesn't end in "(Transformers)" and recreate redirects to the appropriate titles. Also I removed categories and deletion templates but I didn't check for non-free media. Try to make sure that none of the userspace articles have non-free media in them. I botched the first move (as previously deleted revisions don't move with the new page name where the page was deleted and a redirect recreated, but I think I got almost everything. There may have been 1-2 where either the link was wrong or I erred in restoring and moving the page. I would appreciate some double-checking to ensure I didn't break anything important. Protonk (talk) 21:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but you missed Steel Wind and TFCon, if you can get those it will complete the list of wants. Mathewignash (talk) 22:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
User:Mathewignash/TFcon. TFCon is just a redirect. I don't really know what happened w/ steel wind or where the original content is (apart from a redirect). Protonk (talk) 22:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:SarfarazNiazibokehexample.jpg

See talk page, Permission apparently sent to OTRS -Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can OTRS confirm that they have received the permission and that it is correct? JohnCD (talk) 20:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The email exists (OTRS#ticket:2011081810014407) and does appear to be a valid release; however, image permissions are not my area, so you'd be best off double-checking whether the release is adequate with another OTRSer before restoring. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When will this be resolved? Kitabparast (talk) 15:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

niki raapana

There is plenty of evidence that Niki Raapana exists as a very strong presence online and is mentioned in every article cited. -72.35.101.41 (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user JamesBWatson (talk), who proposed it, in case he wishes to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion. The first five references are to her ACL Books website (and #2, 4, 5 are deadlinks); #6 is something she wrote; #7 does not mention her name, and searching down all I find is a link back to one of the ACL Books deadlinks. To establish notability needs evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. JohnCD (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas Hartmann

The article was accurate and it was being verified, please reinstate so we can verify the page -216.113.168.136 (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:All She Can Movie Poster.jpg

I would like to add the correct copyright information that is now available to me. It was not available to me when I created the file. -Kapokpictures (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Note: This file was deleted because there was not sufficient copyright information for the photo. I am still trying to familiarize myself with the correct wiki protocol. Thanks!

This looks to be a non free image, how do you want to use it and why? Also it is too big for non free images. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:RubelLife19561001a.png

This image was originally nominated for speedy deletion as failing the Fair Use criteria. I provided a detailed rebuttal but got no response, either from the person proposing deletion or from anybody else. I then did further research and discovered that the image was not under copyright -- pre-1964 U.S. copyright never renewed. So, with hindsight, it should never have been proposed for deletion in the first place. It does not appear that anyone even read either of my responses, and that the image was just summarily deleted without discussion or explanation. I respectfully request that it be undeleted, or that a valid reason for deleting a public domain image be provided. Thank you. ServiceAT (talk) 03:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -ServiceAT (talk) 03:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Samuli Peltonen

It was deleted because of no referred sources. There are plenty of them available (try to google the name for example. Here is good one: http://elokuu-ensemble.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12&Itemid=27. -Bowsbows (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. For future reference, note that articles about living people are deleted after ten days if no reference has been supplied. This needs expanding to show that he meets WP:MUSICBIO. JohnCD (talk) 11:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I Am Equal (photo documentary)

So, there are too many admins with their hands in the pot on this article. Last discussion I had was that this article was being moved somewhere I could work on it to address the concerns of G11 raised by other admins. That was less than an hour ago...and now the page is completely gone without notice. This whole wikipedia process is crazy. So many different admins with opinions and procedures and most of them seem to be working independently. I would appreciate it if I could continue to work on this article (being it's my first attempt to produce a wikipedia contribution) and then add it back to the site when it's ready. Steinway1701 (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -Steinway1701 (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I can't restore the article unilaterally, even though it isn't exactly "blatant advertising". However the tone of the article is completely inappropriate for a general interest encyclopedia. I can move a copy of the article into your userspace if you like. There you can work on it so that it can meet our core content policies of neutrality and verifiability. Protonk (talk) 20:18, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that, but (as a newbie) I'm not totally clear what moving it to my "user space" means. I can research it and figure it out. Deleting the page outright seems extreme, but since there are so many admins involved in just about every aspect of my article, I don't even know where to begin a conversation for answers, guidance, or reasons for their actions. At this point, the only option I can see is to move it to an area where I can figure out how to please ALL the admins at the same time. At this rate, it seems like that's going to take a lot of work. I appreciate your willingness Protonk to give me a hand in getting this where it can be work shopped for the site. Thanks Steinway1701 (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's ok. I'm sorry for not elaborating. Your userspace is a page where you can work on drafts without worry that someone is going to delete a work in progress. For example User:Protonk/BTM is not really at a point where it could be an article but I can work on it at my leisure because it is not in the "encyclopedia" space. I agree that the deletion was hasty, however I don't think it was so egregious that I am empowered to immediately overturn it. If you want to contest the deletion you can make a post at deletion review--a process where a user can ask for consensus to overturn deletion. By contrast this page is for requests that can be performed unilaterally. I understand this is probably confusing, but if you want I can help you through the process. But before you make that decision take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article for some reasons as to why your submission may have received the attention it did. Protonk (talk) 20:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article and all past revisions are now at User:Steinway1701/I Am Equal (photo documentary). You can work on the article there. The issue is less "pleasing all the admins" and more toning down the prose to ensure Wikipedia presents a neutral picture of the subject and finding reliable sources to ensure it meets our guidelines for inclusion. Protonk (talk) 20:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you Protonk for getting that moved over. I'll work to get the article up to Wikipedia standards. I have more than 40 news articles I pulled to build this page and I'm happy to go back and work on my referencing model. I was under the false impression that I should only use an article once (or twice) as a citation, but now I know better. The reality is, the news coverage is all very much the same because the project is pretty easy to grasp. I felt that repeating the same information in 6 citations was strange, so I deleted them, but I'll be sure to put them back now. Steinway1701 (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The other big issue was the over-enthusiastic addition of this project to articles on famous people, just because they had their picture taken. We have a rule about adding undue emphasis to an article; and face it, having your picture taken is not exactly a major portion of the life even of a Chelsea Handler, much less a more significant human being. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I get what you're saying Orange Mike and would agree, except that (at least in the case of Chelsea Handler) some of these individuals have gone out of their way on their websites and social networks to emphasize their involvement with the project (which is how I got introduced to it in the first place). It would seem that if it's important enough for a celebrity to get involved, use their photo as a catalyst for conversations about their charity work, post it on their social network, and have the image printed and placed in their office, it would constitute at least a mention in their article (or at least that was my reasoning behind adding the references in the first place. That and responding the the admin that added the ORPHAN template to the page implying that I needed to create those references. I don't think I would have gone down that road if not for that Orphan template on the page.). Steinway1701 (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at WP:UNDUE: just because Notable X blogs or tweets about a topic, does not mean that it constitutes a significant event in their lifetime career; and WP:NOTCONTAGIOUS: just because Notable Y interacts with Subject Z, does not lend notability to Subject Z. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AiMatch

The original article was deleted on 8/5/2011 as spam. I would like to edit my company page to be more informational and remove and edit any promotional verbiage and tone -Dhouston119 (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lion Of Judah

It is indeed a music album by Paul Wilbur Please note the references given in it for further cross verification -59.99.251.45 (talk) 10:29, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning 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. We don't even have an article about Paul Wilbur; far less are we going to have an article about an obscure album by a non-notable musician. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. David J. Goldberg 2011

Page was deleted for "unambiguous advertising or promotion"; however, format, content and links all resemble as the approved WIKI page of Dr. OZ. Kindly reconsider and assist in restoring the page. In good faith, I simply was attempting to upload page to preview (as searching for guidelines). Please advise what would need to be revised to ensure content fits appropriately with your guidelines.

Best. Marianna -75.151.135.29 (talk) 17:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The difference is that Dr Oz is slightly notable. Promoting a non-notable entity is not accepted. If you create an account, I will be able to provide you with more detailed information, but start with the 5 pillars of Wikipedia (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 08:37, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bloc Party - The Prayer.ogg

This was orphaned due to a stupid error on my part. It should be restored to the article, as it meets fair use guidelines and has critical commentary in the text. Sorry. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:21, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

reasoning -Shawmjennings (talk) 17:52, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider undeleting this photo based on the following new photo description:

File information
Description

Colonel Payne Jennings, Jr., USA

Source

United States Air Force

Date

1950

Author

Unknown

Permission
(Reusing this file)

Not Needed

Other versions None

No, I cannot show that an airforce employee took the picture. However, the photo, which is of my father and has been in my families possession for over 60 years, was released by the air force to the press following his (Col. Jennings) death. This leads me to believe either my father had his portrait taken by a private photographer or by an airforce photographer.

Transparency Monitor

OTRS permission from tmonitor.co domain received for CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL release of content at http://www.tmonitor.co/ in ticket 2011082410013503. -– Adrignola talk 19:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Itchyworms2011.JPG

we're ready with ownership/copyright information -Chinosingson (talk) 10:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Rovetch

I didn't see the original article but it seems to have been deleted because someone couldn't find out much about him. In fact an internet search will reveal a lot including his books on Amazon, his biography at his publishers site etc etc. He has written two very amusing books on his travels (The Creaky Traveler series), which have been positively reviewed in various places, and has had a very interesting and distinguished career. It just seems very odd to me that there should not be any article on him, however brief, on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.148.168 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:SarfarazNiazibokehexample.jpg

Release by owner was supplied to Wikipedia and accepted; see OTRS ticket 2011081910011426 -Kitabparast (talk) 15:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Lawrence (folk singer)

Now have full sourcing -Davidlewis39 (talk) 16:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done. I have restored the article and removed the deletion tag. Please add the relevant sources. If you need any help on how to do so you may ask me on my talk page or here. Protonk (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

London_Hackspace

Hi, I'm a new Wikipedia user and the article was deleted before I had a change to improve it, or even before I learned that there was a problem with it. BTW: it's a really, really discouraging new user experience to have content deleted moments after it's been created with no chance to fix problems with it, or even to learn about what the problems could be! -JasperWallace (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Avraham Gileadi

I stumbled across Avraham Gileadi through a broken redirect, and looking through the history, it seemed to be a decent article until User:יום יפה hacked all the substance out of the article and then spearheaded the deletion process (for notability). Upon further investigation I began to suspect foul play when I noticed that User:יום יפה was just one of like a thousand socks run by User:אֶפְרָתָה, a user who has been blocked, but continues to make socks for the purpose of "hacking material out of articles about progressive Jewish organizations and then PRODding them" (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/אֶפְרָתָה/Archive). Also, the other user who voted for deletion was also later confirmed a sock. --- Adjwilley (talk) 17:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not done. No content has been deleted. If you look at the history page you can see all old revisions. Anyone may restore the article w/ new sources provided you meet the objections of the AfD. As you say, much of the AfD decision turned on the then current revision of the article so returning it to an old revision with solid references is a good way to meet those objections. Protonk (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will revert to the state before the user hacked everything out. -- Adjwilley (talk) 18:04, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

skrapz

someone deleted the article for Detroit based Rapper "Skrapz" of which I was appointed by the artist himself to update with new information. The user who deleted cited Skrapz as a "myspace rapper" which is wrong. Skrapz has globally available commercial/retail music in various media outlets worldwide including iTunes and Amazon. Skrapz is on the brink of inking a record deal with a major American record label. Please undelete his deleted article. Thank you in advance. -Detroitstruth (talk) 00:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not done. There are a few problems here. First, it is usually inappropriate for our articles to be written by someone directly involved with the subject. I understand that many biographies for publishers and record labels are written at the direction of the artist but on wikipedia one of the chief expectations of our readers is that our articles present a neutral view of the subject. A conflict of interest between an editor and the subject imperils that neutrality. Second, the deletion summary here indicated that the article was sourced entirely to MySpace, not that the artist was a MySpace rapper. I apologize for the confusion. What the deleting administrator surely meant was that the references in the articles pointed to the artist's myspace page and not to a reliable source. Without significant coverage in reliable sources it may be impossible to meet our guidelines for inclusion. I recommend that you wait until the subject has released a major record and in due time I'm sure the publicity and coverage he receives will be more than enough for any editor to build a neutral, verifiable article. Thank you. Protonk (talk) 01:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philip_Coppens

reasoning -98.148.247.185 (talk) 01:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am Philip Coppens and I do not see why there is an issue of copyright infringement, as per the reason why my Wiki was deleted last year. Please restore my Wiki entry.

  • Hello Mr. Coppens. Text on wikipedia must be released via a free license where material may be altered, reused, repurposed or sold with very few restrictions. Text from your website cannot be copied into wikipedia unless the original work is released under an identical license. Whoever copied the text into wikipedia did not (unless I am mistaken) have your permission to alter, reuse, repurpose or sell your original biography. Under almost all circumstances the way we deal with this issue is to delete from our edit history all trace of the copyrighted material--hence the deletion of your article. In order for us to use the text from your website the material must be licensed under a creative commons license. There are a number of ways to do this, but I won't detail them unless you are interested. Protonk (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-Mission Against Corruption-

this is improtant page for our organisation plz dont delete this -Sunnylino (talk) 18:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Mission Against Corruption'

Folkdirect.com

subject is notable and additional verifiable third-party links can be added to further enhance its credibility -Encoderops (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request.

However, the sources on the article subject are spare. I don't mean the article itself but the sources I can find on the internet. I have nominated the article for deletion. Protonk (talk) 22:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PunBB

Software is active development and widely used -Dimkalinux (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PunBB, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Jayjg (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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blade Brains

The article titled Blade Brains has been deleted without any prior notice to me. The reason stated for deletion was company promotion. However, the article does not promote the company in any manner. Requesting you to undelete the article. -LnBbladebrains (talk) 10:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. The page was indeed promotional in nature and, therefore, its deletion was warranted. Furthermore, you appear to have a serious conflict of interest; please, familiarise yourself with WP:COI. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jayen466/Hannibal Fogg Watch

Wasn't advertising. It was related to a hoax and contained relevant info for amusement on Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia. Keeping it does no harm since it's in userspace. -Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 15:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alla, Bhutan

Page was deleted because no publication was available showing the village existed. Page was also deleted apparently because the deletionist could not locate the settlement on Google Maps (original research). A reference for this village now exists; once restored, it should be redirected to Oola, the current spelling. See Chiwogs in Wangdue Phodrang, p. 16. -JFHJr (㊟) 19:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 19:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

08:04, 18 August 2011, American Yakuza ‎

I have the criminal records and news reports that support my facts -Mr. Kenshiro (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article is not deleted; it's being discussed at AfD. LadyofShalott 21:29, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yet, my info has been deleted and the wrong information remains. As a Criminal Contractor (mediator for crime syndicates)with 22 yrs. of experience I am offended that Wiki would take such an action. My policy... "Don't condemn unless you have a solution to the problem".

My solutions; bōryokudan (暴力団), literally "violence group" is WRONG! My translation and britannica encyclopedia agrees that bōryokudan is "Tough Gang" NOT "violence group". Yakuza (“good-for-nothing”), or gyangu (“gangster”) are well known facts and your source DOESN'T even have it listed!

Please, help me help you to correct these errors. The Criminal Underworld is my home. I am one of the worlds leading experts on crime. I have extensive knowledge in the following; criminal linguistics, hand to hand combat, identity theft, slide of the hand con artists, prostitution, drug addiction and distribution, counterfeiting (checks, money, documents, ID’s etc.), home invasions, criminal traffic stops, weapon chains, drug chains, human trafficking, animal trafficking, gathering and countering intelligence, tracking across international boarders, setting and breaking perimeters, arsenals (Guns (attack and defense), explosives (compositions), and cyber-gates), extractions (homes, buildings, cities and countries) and interrogations.

NOTE: My literary skills are...I would need some help with my writing. If any body that reads this has any suggestions...don't hesitate to talk to me.

Are you sure you have the correct title? American Yakuza is about a film, and that does not seem to be what you are discussing. This board is only for undeletion requests of deleted articles. LadyofShalott 23:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at your contributions, I'm guessing you are talking about Yakuza. You should take your desired changes to the talk page of that article. LadyofShalott 23:13, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posigrip

Template:Content is visible and notable

reasoning Notable and verified -68.230.121.203 (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC) Hello, I appreciate the amount of time and effort you have logged in to verifying information about my company www.posigrip.com and myself. It might appear that the author is struggling a bit as he has mounted a tremendous campaign of his own. I was having a look at the exchange and there seems to be a question of notability and of course you would need to verify the source and there seems to be an ample amount of both in the way of Trademarks, Awards, memberships and key associations like Dun&Bradstreet, BBB, Etc, On the other hand I wanted to glance at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerhouse_Gym#External_links our client, because I needed some of the same verifiable information your requesting, however I found it to be incomplete and not much in the way of external links or references except those from their site (some of which were no longer there). Quite a bit less than we may have provided, however they are a real company, they do exist and they are permanently recorded in your annals.[reply]

I would like to ask you if there is anything I could provide in order to help move this along because I started these companies, I still run the operations and develop new products and handle the many small business and Fortune 1000 companies we provide product and services for. Would you like me to add the 20 or so International web addresses on the main website to your external links section? We also have hundreds of written references from just about every franchise, car dealership, hotel, city, county, state, and federal institution in the country.

If your looking for a newspaper article or story, we probably have those too, however we have never been interested with interviews and have turned many down. I appreciate all you have done and let me know if I can help, if I cannot then lets both move on because the question of notability I feel questions the effort I have put into this organization to make it what it is today, and I don't want that to continue to be a question at all. In spite of all that I think your doing a great job and hope to see further commentary from you, preferably with someone else.

Mario Signorelli President/Posigrip/Ceiltech/Posishield— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.230.121.203 (talk • contribs)

The page was userfied, not deleted; you can find it here. You can work on improving the notability assertions and, when you're ready, ask for feedback at WP:FEEDBACK. That said, you have a serious conflict of interest here; therefore, I must point you to WP:COI, which is one of Wikipedia's policies instructing you on how to best handle it. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kirstie Alley DWTS.jpg

File:Kirstie Alley DWTS.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions] Seems important. -Plankton5165 (talk) 15:55, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done unless you can provide source and copyright licensing information - see the note on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Aranoff

Article was apparently deleted for lack of source material. Here is some: Progressive Architecture April 1993, The Making of Public Buildings; Book, The Supreme Court Building - Jerusalem, 1993 Yad Hanadiv; Alan Aranoff was the architect for the KSYM Synagogue, Modiin, Israel, 2011; Alan Steven Aranoff designed and authored Ichud Hayeshivot: Seminary and Housing, UCLA Architecture thesis/dissertation, Melvyl 1984, A New Brooklyn Museum: The Master Plan Competition, with Kohn Pedersen Fox, Rizzoli, 1988; designed The Be'er Sheva regional courts building with Barchana Architects; architectural design of the new home of the Israel Ice Hockey Federation... -84.228.137.153 (talk) 19:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Transitions lenses

The original article was meant to explain how the lenses work. Is it possible to flag it instead of delete it and give users the opportunity to try to re-write it? -Millerph (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This topic is covered at photochromic lens. Would you like the article's content emailed to you? Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

YoungPete Alexander

Article was posted before it was actually completed, YoungPete Alexander's management have now finished the content and would like to post/update the page so it doesn't get deleted. We would gladly appreciate of the article would be put back online so we can make the change and make sure the info is shared. Thank you. -Jeanfrancoiscd (talk) 05:31, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! The article has not been deleted, but merely redirected to El Pus. Please discuss the matter with Happy5214 (talk) or NawlinWiki (talk), the editors who have redirected the page. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Literary parallels in the Book of Daniel

It was charged that the article was all OR, but I believe that this article could be improved, or that parts of it could be used in other articles -CedricElijahHenry (talk) 05:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cedric! Please consider contacting Fastily (talk), the editor who deleted the page, about this. Fastily (talk) seems to have done considerable looking-into this issue already. Regards mate, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lady of Iloilo

I just can not see the point why it is deleted, i am writing independent based on an event which i personally witnessed. i do know the Artist and i got his speech for the purpose of using it i am not making unnecessary links i am just telling the world about the lady of Iloilo which is a great new bronze sculpture located in the philippines -Klausius (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - this article was deleted because it was found to be "unambiguous advertising or promotion". To keep Wikipedia topics neutral and verifiable, articles need to include multiple reliable sources. Please contact the administrator who deleted the article, Jimfbleak (talk), if you believe the deletion was made in error. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:BertMizusawa.jpg

This is a free photo pulled from www.BertMizusawa.com. To take extra precaution I have sought, and received, the permission of the individual pictured to use the photograph obtained from the website www.BertMizusawa.com -Missclark (talk) 15:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. I can't see any indication at the source that this is a free image, so we will need confirmation of permission from the owner. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for details of the procedure. January (talk) 18:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sunil Narnaulia

so more and more persons can take information about the subject -122.161.70.23 (talk) 15:21, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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 Bkonrad (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seay (musician)

reasoning -Vidente123 (talk) 18:03, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


While I understand your ability to delete this I am concerned as I can provide and direct you to at least a dozen artists who are Seay's peers that have very similar articles here. None of them are being targeted for deletion. I am happy to have Sirius XM music directors verify this is a bone fide music artist with global airplay and sales. I can also have several magazines and music reviewers do the same. Please help me understand the process and provide responses to any of your concerns.

Respectfully submitted

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa Seay Harshaw, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Cirt (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. January (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin Lift Truck Corporation

need an administrator to userfy this page so that I can continue working on it. Aware of conflict of interest issue and will fix that as well. -KC WLT (talk) 21:23, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inkie

May be useful to see old article in advance of copying contents of User:Trevj/Inkie across (refs to be included but ProveIt doesn't work in userspace) Thanks. -Trevj (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Sorry, can't restore the old article as it was a copyvio. The site pointed to from the copyvio notice is now a deadlink, but much the same text is at http://www.filthymodernart.com/artists/inkie. JohnCD (talk) 16:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No probs. Thanks for checking. --Trevj (talk) 22:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of NBC slogans

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Seven Network slogans (2nd nomination) (closed as no consensus) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Network Ten slogans (closed as keep) -nymets2000 (t/c/l) 19:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:William Preston Signature.JPG

I don't know the proper tag for a picture I took myself -Ben6288 (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Monolith Software

Our company nor product are expired and we are considerably notable sense a large majority of the fiber infrastructure of the world is monitored with our product and we are the first and only unified infrastructure management software -Jonathanmlsw (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who is we? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"We" is the same as "our company", Monolith Software--Jonathanmlsw (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Metamorphosis Alpha

I am the publisher and personally took the photo, and will release it under creative commons -Morbius of Oz (talk) 20:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not done The image in question is a compilation of four different covers. In order to be released under CC all of the individual covers must be released under a CC license. If you are the copyright owner of each cover image then you can verify this with our OTRS team and we will restore the photo. The compilation image itself cannot be released under a free license alone, as it is a derivative work of the four covers. Protonk (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CareWell VIP

Permission for content at http://www.carewellvip.com/ to be released under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license received from carewellvip.com address in OTRS ticket 2011083010013564. -– Adrignola talk 20:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree. What is the way forward, though? I can't imagine asking the OTRS queue to police our inclusion guidelines as well as process copyright questions and I don't feel comfortable refusing to restore a G11 page/file when the reason for deletion has been obviated. That said, 75% of the pages like this I have restored have been deleted again, so something has to give. Protonk (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it's unfair to the newbies to let them go through OTRS and then zap their article as spam. When I delete a copyvio, I usually add a message to the author's talk page like:

Please note that even if the copyright issue were resolved, the promotional tone of a company or personal website is likely to be unsuitable for an encyclopedia article, which requires a neutral point of view. Article subjects need to have notability, which is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." There is more detail at WP:Notability (people), and good advice on how to write an acceptable article at WP:Your first article.

with minor variations for companies or bands. How about adding something on those lines to the end of the copyvio warning templates? JohnCD (talk) 20:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joyce Michel

Joyce Michel · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I think the note said my page was deleted because "unambiguous advertising"?

I would very much appreciate your help with the restoration of my page. I am an American fashion designer. Today I was updating my page and noticed that the web-designer that I hired to put my page up did not put up the appropriate symbols for trademark registration for the companies that I have worked for during my 25 years as a fashion designer. This is required under the patent and trademark rules so I corrected the pages. Suddenly the page was removed. Is this the reason my page was removed? If so, what changes need to be made so that it can be restored?

Re: "unambiguous advertising". As a designer/inventor with over 25 years experience designing products for myself as well as other notable companies in the world of fashion it is hard to write about my accomplishments without referencing the products I have conceived of and designed. It is my hope that the scope of my life's work in this context will not be considered "unambiguous advertising" as that is what I have contributed as a designer.

How do I check back? Where?

I am really over my head here and could use some help please.

Thank you,

JOyce Michel

  • Not done Hi Ms. Michel. Your article was deleted because it appeared to be much more promotional than our content policies allow. We are a general encyclopedia and as such we cannot host articles which are non-neutral in tone. This includes articles (such as yours) which are substantively portfolios of work or which appear to be written to solely promote the subject. In general we avoid this problem by suggesting that editors with a close connection to a subject refrain from editing articles on that subject. It is much easier to write neutrally about a subject in which you have no personal investment. In this case you had an article written and edited at your request and the result was deleted as advertisement. There are a number of professional directories which you might find more appropriate for this sort of biography. Wikipedia, however, cannot play host to it. I do apologize for the situation. Protonk (talk) 23:43, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

kodondo

To address the concerns that this is an irrelevant or defunct martial art, this is indeed a legitimate marital art practiced at a number of schools nationwide. Official website is http://www.kokondo.org and is referenced in the article. I do not have a comprehensive list of dojos, but I know they at least exist in Connecticut, Florida, Washington, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Idaho, Missouri, and Ohio. The reviewer who indicated that it was clustered around a city in Connecticut is incorrect. There are no notable competition successes from students because the art discourages competition and instead focuses on real-world self-defense. It was founded around 50 years ago, which I would argue doesn't qualify as a recent splinter, and has been continuously practiced since. There are at least a dozen other websites on this art. See example links at http://www.kokondomartialarts.com/links.htm -71.146.66.77 (talk) 02:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kokondō, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Cirt (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. Protonk (talk) 04:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

VersionOne

reasoning -Ian.buchanan.v1 (talk) 13:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page was deleted for "unambiguous advertising or promotion". If the page were userfied, I would happily recitify the content to have more encyclopedic content.

XSQL

LEARNING -98.203.154.151 (talk) 19:18, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joyce Michel

requested list of publications about my work: I am not sure exactly why my page was removed. I was making some simple changes the addition of trademark and registration marksw and then parts of it, such as my degrees, BS and BA (should have been BFA) which I added appeared in red with warning signs and then the page just disappeared. In one note from wikipedia I was advised to include publications that reference my work. Some of them are:


JOYCE KMIECIK, Times Picayune, NO, LA 1981

LEGWEAR REPORT, IN THE MARKETS, WOMEN'S WEAR DAILY (WWD), FEB. 7,1992

LEGWEAR/BODYWEAR, The Pretenders, WWD, May 16, 1991

LEGWEAR REPORT, IN THE MARKETS, WWD, May 1, 1992

INNERWEAR/LEGWEAR, Donna Karan's New Way With Legs,WWD, July 8,1991

LIGHT SUPPORT, Control Tops-Legwear's Snappy New Business, WWD, Oct. 26,1981

Best Selling Feature, WWD, Spring 2004

The Beauty Report, DKNY Women's Scent Gets a Mate, WWD, July 21, 2000

ABSOLUTE MICHEL AND CULLEN, GQ, Details Magazine, March 1991

ABSOLUTE MICHEL, Vanity Fair, November 1991

ABSOLUTE BOOK., by Richard Lewis, copyright 1996 pages, 115, 117 and 121

The Cowboy Boot Book, by Tyler Beard, copyright 1992, pages 134,141

ABSOLUTELY MARTHA, WWD, November, 1991

MARKETING AND MEDIA, Wall Street Journal, February 12, 1992

F!D Fax, The Dallas Morning News, March 1991

BEHIND THE SCENE, DNR, February 26,1991

AR Accessories Ad, WWD, August 25, 1997, Congratulations Joyce Michel Accessories/Travelware•Special Section/November 1997, AR Accessories Featured, pages 24, 25, 26

Accessories Advance, DNR, August 15, 1997, The Marauder the Merrier, page 12

AR Accessories Ad, WWD, Congratulations Joyce Michel, VP Design, March 1998

IN STYLE, JOYCE MICHEL: ELECTRONIC SELLING, Knitting Times, November, 1995

Business Week, Polishing Up The Cubic Zirconia, July 31, 1995)

Would you please reinstate my wiki page and advise if there are to be corrections made.

Thank you,

Joyce Michel -Joycemichelny (talk) 20:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Joycemichelny (talk) 20:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]






}}

Wenderholm Regional Park

Ridiculous deletion. Got deleted because of copyright infringement. I created an article about a park, and it gets deleted. I only used the website as a source, not to copy entire information. -Porch corpter (contribs/public policy) 20:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC) --Porch corpter (contribs/public policy) 20:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=447722631"