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
Want to add content but page deleted after only 30 minutes.
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Abdella2 (talk | contribs)
129 edits
No edit summary
Line 362: Line 362:
*{{revisions|Draft:Marathon_Artists}}
*{{revisions|Draft:Marathon_Artists}}
''I, StDionis57a, request the undeletion of this [[WP:AFC|Articles for creation]] submission deleted under [[WP:CSD#G13|CSD G13]]. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' [[User:StDionis57a|StDionis57a]] ([[User talk:StDionis57a|talk]]) 17:07, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
''I, StDionis57a, request the undeletion of this [[WP:AFC|Articles for creation]] submission deleted under [[WP:CSD#G13|CSD G13]]. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' [[User:StDionis57a|StDionis57a]] ([[User talk:StDionis57a|talk]]) 17:07, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

==Draft:Kaeya Majmundar==

*{{revisions|Draft:Kaeya Majmundar}}
''I, Abdella2, request the undeletion of this [[WP:AFC|Articles for creation]] submission deleted under [[WP:CSD#G13|CSD G13]]. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' [[User:Abdella2|Abdella2]] ([[User talk:Abdella2|talk]]) 20:02, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:03, 27 January 2016

Page only added 30 mins prior and links and citations were not added within 30 minutes. Surely it deserves longer than 30 minutes??

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

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


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

'

File:LesSampouPRPic sm.png

Ticket:2015121110002195 covers this file, which should be attributed to Samuel Haddix and licensed under cc-by-sa-4.0 -Storkk (talk) 10:45, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @Storkk: Restored and OTRS ticket looks good; please verify that I added the correct templates. — Earwig talk 20:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Storkk (talk) 10:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CAA Marketing

Our page was deleted for this reason: 17:34, 12 January 2016 DGG (talk | contribs) deleted page CAA Marketing (ExpiredPROD, concern was: Does not appear to meet GNG or CORP. Possibly merge to parent organization?) We would like to request our page be restored; while we are part of Creative Artists Agency, CAA Marketing is its own organization. People often look at our Wikipedia page to get more information about our group specifically and the work that we do, which the Creative Artists Agency general page does not give them. For example, while CAA the company normally represents talent, CAA Marketing represents brand clients like Coca-Cola, AB-InBev, General Motors, and more. The corporate community is more likely to come to our page specifically rather than the Creative Artists Agency general page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.135.189 (talk)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shrikant Bhasi

The page was deleted without any specific reason. The cause of the deletion mentioned on the page was as follows: (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page. Please restore the page, since all the information provided on the page was accurate, as per guidelines of Wikipedia and was not intended for any advertisement or commercial benefits. Looking ahead to your co - operation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piyushratnu (talk • contribs) 11:54, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion G11. 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 Tokyogirl79 (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:32, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CollapsedShell

Draft:Vulcan blazers

I, BeeCeePhoto, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Robco311 (talk) 12:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arch Brook

Article was deleted through PROD because "notability not established" (and subsequently redirected), but per policy, named geographical features are considered notable. ---Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 14:34, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, I personally checked this brook and considered that there was not enough verifiable content to make a decent article, as per WP:GEOLAND. Not all named natural features are notable. The only thing I did find was one mention that suggests that the location was a good spot for a picnic...Jokulhlaup (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, because this is a contested PROD, I have restored the history but left the current redirect in place. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Venford Brook

Like above, was deleted through PROD even though named geographical features are notable. ---Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 14:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again I disagree, yes there are more passing references than the Arch Brook, and there is a nice waterfall. But I don't think there is enough to produce anything much. The Venford Reservoir is probably notable, so it could be included in that if needed...Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:22, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request.
However, I agree with Jokulhlaup that there isn't enough there to warrant a stand-alone article, so after restoring the page history I converted it to a redirect. @Jakec: please consider expanding the parent article instead. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:39, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Committe on monetary financial and balance of payments statistics

I, Cmfb.secretariat, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Cmfb.secretariat (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmfb.secretariat: I restored it, but before you do anything else, please go to WP:CHU/Simple and change your username to something that represents only you as an individual. Wikipedia does not allow organizations or roles to have accounts here. Change your username right away before your account is blocked for violating Wikipedia:Username policy. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Peter Zellner

I, Aspenarnthors, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Aspenarnthors (talk) 20:32, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I need this article reinstated as I wish to keep improving it. -Aspenarnthors (talk) 20:33, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:41, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User opposing the Partition of India

This userbox is useful to show user's disagreement with Partition of India--Human3015 It will rain  20:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Restored. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Edventure More

I, 108.240.218.144, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 108.240.218.144 (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to continue editing and updating for re-submit. Have new information to add about our company and it's benefits to the community. -108.240.218.144 (talk) 21:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. There is no value to the Wikipedia project in restoring drafts that are nothing more than advertisements. This was far too promotional in tone. You are welcome to start over... and please refrain from touting its "benefits to the community". Wikipedia is not to be used for promotional or publicity purposes, ever. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:18, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

start.me

Page was removed, citing speedy deletion, but without any chance to discuss. It was a good article and its importance is obvious, as this particular service is more popular and higher ranking than other similar services with aticles on Wikipedia (cf. List of start page services) -Michieldewit (talk) 06:37, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • 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 DGG (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Michieldewit: On a side note, I do have to say that you need to disclose your conflict of interest up front. Your username implies that you're one of the founders of this company, but you still need to post this somewhere. Also, creating articles on things that you're directly affiliated with - especially if you stand to gain from the article being on Wikipedia - is highly discouraged. If you want to try to create this page again you should only do so through WP:AfC. The thing to remember is that you will need to show how the company/service is notable by showing where it's received coverage in independent, reliable sources. Routine notifications, primary sources, trivial sources, and similar items will not show notability and companies/products are not automatically notable because they exist. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tokyogirl79: Thank you for your explanation. Honestly, I was not aware of the WP:AfC procedure. I am indeed co-founder of start.me and have no intentions of hiding that. It would have been easy for me to leave that information out, but I chose to be honest, as I believe that is the only true way. I could have asked reputable Wikipedia friends to post the start.me on my behalve, but did do so. Now please tell my I wasn't wrong for choosing to play fair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michieldewit (talk • contribs) 08:09, 21 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]
You were not wrong to play fair, but you must use the afc procedure. And your must have good suvstantial refenences that ae more than mere notices to get a draft approved/ If you have then, try again in draft space, but the ones you have brought� forward so far do not sdequate. DGG ( talk ) 09:10, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • DGG is correct - you're not wrong to want to play fair, but you need to understand that there are certain requirements to editing with a conflict of interest and to notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:39, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tokyogirl79: and @DGG: I understand there are more rules than I had anticipated. I am more than happy to comply with these rules. Simply deleting an article I spent almost 2 hours on without any due diligence, honestly feels quite unjust and a little rash. Waiting 2 hours for feedback before deleting the article seems awfully short (considering different time zones) and impulsive. The wait could have been longer, as the article in question was decent and neutral. I feel notability has been sufficiently established and feel confident the page would get a positive vote on the WP:AFD list. So please put it out there and make this a democratic decision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michieldewit (talk • contribs) 10:04, 21 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]
    Honestly, that would be more trouble than it's worth. For what it's worth, mainspace is the most-scrutinised namespace on Wikipedia, both by admins and by the general public, so anything in mainspace absolutely must be up to par as far as policies go. This includes the suitability of sources (if it's as DGG and Tokyogirl say, restoring it to mainspace would only result in a summary AfD deletion), so I would take their advice, find better sources, and write it in the Draft space. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 10:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jéské Couriano: Thank you for your advice. I would at the very least like to continue writing this page in Draft. Unfortunately, the admin removed the page without notifying me, so I haven't had a chance to make a backup. I would have to write the page from scratch. About the summary deletion: I am not too sure about that. I genuinely believe this to be an 'uphill battle'. There is quite some room for discussion about the quality of the sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michieldewit (talk • contribs) 10:36, 21 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]
@Michieldewit: I have emailed you a copy of the page, but please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a business listing directory: the WP:Notability standard is delibrately set high, looking for references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Youtube, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? See also Wikipedia:Notability (summary). Many perfectly worthy companies, particularly new ones, cannot meet that standard. JohnCD (talk) 13:13, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@JohnCD: Thank you for sending me the original article. I created a draft. I still believe start.me is a notable subject, but do realize proving this with reliable sources is quite hard. Michieldewit (talk) 13:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Draft:Writers & Directors Worldwide

I, Ocr69am, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Ocr69am (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. This was a copyright violation of this and this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mch

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Nijamahmed (talk) 18:07, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nijamahmed. What page exactly are you requesting be undeleted? Mch has not been deleted but has been redirected. That is not undone here, because it's not the type of deletion that requires any administrative intervention. The redirection can be undone through normal editing, but in my opinion should not be, until such time as you've carefully read pages like Wikipedia:Your first article, and are willing to attempt to write this citing to reliable sources, using a just-the-facts neuteral approach without promotional language and not copying from anywhere. The only pages you've created under this account that have been deleted are a A Thousands Years, which cannot be undeleted because it was a copyright violation, and Moju Chowdhuryhat (the same topic as "Mch"), which was blatantly promotional, was very hard to understand by a native English speaker, and also looks like a copyright violation, but was deleted on other grounds.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:13, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Gerald Gorman

I, Kcmaher, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Kcmaher (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vijay Batra

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -LaliBanerji (talk) 21:34, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, nothing to do. The article isn't deleted. If you want to provide a policy-based rationale for keeping it, you may participate at the deletion discussion taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vijay Batra. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) Not done. Hi LaliBanerji. This page is for requesting undeletion of pages that have already been deleted (on uncontroversial bases). If you want Vijay Batra not to be deleted, make your case at the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vijay Batra. Note that if this is ultimately deleted based on that discussion, this page would not be a correct forum to request undeletion – as undeletion of articles deleted at a discussion forum like AfD is not uncontroversial. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:57, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Open Networking User Group (ONUG)

I, CJolicoeur, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. CJolicoeur (talk) 15:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Michigan Conference of the United Church of Christ

I, Pklk5945, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Pklk5945 (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Our church organization recently hired a new social media editor for the first time since last school year, and we look to expand and finish the Wikipedia page of Michigan Conference of the United Church of Christ. Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pklk5945 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • 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. Your social media editor should disclose their interest on their user page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:26, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic CD: The Movie

I was the person who made this page and I want to see what it was. -67.82.166.6 (talk) 23:41, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Here is the content which will not be restored to article space. It was labelled as a hoax and said: "This movie is coming out December 23, 2023 but first the producer needs to ask the team who made the Castlevania movies! They made a movie out of a VIDEO GAME. Sonic CD needs one. Hey! Didn't someone make Sonic the Hedgehog: The Movie? Oh yeah, there was Super Mario Bros. The Movie! Anyways, this movie is the storyline of Sonic CD. But, you can see what Amy Rose does with Metal Sonic." credit to Amyrose3339 for this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, that's actually pretty cute. I never knew I was so fluent in video game movies as a kid. Now I've gotta play them all. (talk) 15:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Duque

Hi. I work with the PR team of Ms. Sarah Duque. We've been trying to write an article about her career since october, every time we tried to edit the text, it was unsuccessful. We ourselves asked for the article to be deleted so we could rewrite from scratch with all the corrections on the text. Now, we tried to write the article again and it was deleted right away. We already wrote an article for her in the spanish version of Wikipedia - https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Duque_Lovisoni, and we don't understand why is so hard to do the same in the english version. Please take all of this into consideration so we can finish this job for Ms. Duque, thank you. -Unpollofrito (talk) 01:56, 23 January 2016 (UTC) Unpollofrito (talk) 01:56, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Unfortunately, this is very much what Wikipedia is not for. Conflict-of-interest editing is strongly discouraged. This isn't a public relations vehicle. Articles must be completely neutral, and they shouldn't be written for the benefit of the person they're about. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:01, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's why it was edited, it's no meant to benefit anyone, it jus states facts and we haven't been able to do so. We made a neutral version of the article and it was rejected by many times, that's why we tried to delete and rewrite it and it backfired. Now we are unable to write the article at all using the name of Sarah Duque. Unpollofrito (talk) 02:06, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A PR person's actions on behalf of a client aren't meant to be for the client's benefit? Anyway, the upshot of the deletion discussion was that no evidence of notability could be found. The only way to fix a notability problem is to bring to light previously overlooked qualifying sources. There isn't any kind of article rewrite that can fix that. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Unpollofrito: 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/Sarah Duque Lovisoni, 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 The Bushranger (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. You may create a draft article at Draft:Sarah Duque and when you believe it is ready for Wikipedia you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page to alert an experienced editor to look over the article and decide if it meets the inclusion criteria. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 02:21, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Crime in Stereo

Contesting PROD of recently deleted article (not sure whether the most recent version was located at Crime in Stereo or Crime In Stereo). Noteworthy punk rock band with several releases on a longstanding record label and one charting album. I would be happy to add substantiating references to this effect. -Chubbles (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC) Chubbles (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Could I also request the restoration of Explosives and the Will to Use Them and I Was Trying to Describe You to Someone? These are full-length albums by the band which were speedy deleted as A9s after the band article disappeared. But now that the band article has returned, A9 is no longer a rationale for their speedy deletion. Chubbles (talk) 06:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kanda Uruvam

We are at the pre-production stage of the film and all links related to the film have been provided. We can provide more details like the poster and our official film website -Neilquadras (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Project Shrine Maiden

This was a hoax that I made in 2012 that Xezbeth deleted. I'd like to see it's source. -Now I've gotta play them all. (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to the deletion history, you didn't make that article. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
One of my old accounts made it, but I'd like the source, but I don't want the page undeleted. Now I've gotta play them all. (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Society of Quantitative Analysts

I, 2604:2000:E04C:800:4489:FD22:FA93:FDBC, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 2604:2000:E04C:800:4489:FD22:FA93:FDBC (talk) 16:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ace von johnson

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -207.237.149.238 (talk) 03:15, 24 January 2016 (UTC) Deleted for lack of sources of BLP. Many sources exist.[reply]

  • Not done Not only was the page very promotional, but it's also WP:COPYVIO since it was taken from his official website. I have no objection to anyone wanting to start a new page, as long as it has sources that would pass WP:RS. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Jdellapina: I saw that you edited the IP's listed sources, so I assume that you're the IP. The bottom line here is that the issue here is no longer whether or not there are sources, but rather that the original article was a copyright violation and very promotional. Either one would be a barrier to recreation, but the copyright violation means that we cannot legally restore the page as it was. I have no problem with you wanting to create a new page that is not taken verbatim from Johnson's official website. On a side note, the sources all have problems with them. The first link goes to a Wikipedia entry and you cannot use Wikipedia as a RS to show notability. The following three appear to be self-published sources, which cannot be used to assert notability on Wikipedia because they aren't considered to be reliable. This is because they undergo little to no editorial oversight that would satisfy requirements on Wikipedia. Now what you need are sources like this interview with Dread Central. Now you'd need more than one source to assert notability, but this is an example of what you'd need to find. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Yvonne Drewry

Djb99 (talk) 11:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Djb99: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sparks@LSE

I, 92.27.7.54, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 92.27.7.54 (talk) 16:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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. Hut 8.5 17:12, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thelakkat Kalathilthodiyil Kesavan Nayar

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Ahsamkr (talk) 15:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to edit and re-submit the same.

@Ahsamkr: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 16:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Surfing the Healthcare Tsunami: Bring Your Best Board

I, Radom event gen, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Radom event gen (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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. BethNaught (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Tracy

Brian Tracy is an World Famous public speaker and the author of over 60 books. He has millions of social media fans and followers. -RobertPoling (talk) 21:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RobertPoling:  Not done. The title has been protected against creation after a series of articles about him were deleted as copyright violations and/or too promotional. If you want to write an article, you should use WP:Articles for creation to make a draft; if it is accepted, the protection can be lifted. Read WP:Your first article for advice, and take care:
JohnCD (talk) 21:25, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BC Safety Authority

Quinn newcomb (talk) 22:48, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Quinn newcomb: 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) 23:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Undeletion - Moved to Drafts for Corrections

Hello - I was working on an article title (Martin Babinec) which was deleted on Jan 25, 2016 by administrator @Cryptic while being advised by another uninvolved editor @Drm310 15:41, 25 January 2016 (UTC)]. Drm310 advised I place a WP:PAID disclaimer on my user and talk pages. This step is complete. He then advised I submit this request here for undeletion, and ask the article be restored in the draft space where I can work on it and review with other editors. My intention is to create a page similar to @BradFeld and possibly continue shining light on other experienced entrepreneurs and startup investors helping Upstate NY grow. Thank you in advance, --KathrynCartini (talk) 20:10, 25 January 2016 (EST)[reply]

I've draftified it myself, against my better judgment. —Cryptic 01:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So, @KathrynCartini:  Done - restored by Cryptic to Draft:Martin Babinec. Please check out the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. JohnCD (talk) 11:11, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jean Tixier

Js229 (talk) 00:26, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Js229: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Jean Tixier. 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!" JohnCD (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now I can see it again, I note an article on this person was independently created after my creation request was deleted. The draft submission for Articles for Creation could now be deleted, but I am not going to do that, partly as I don't know how to. Js229 (talk)

@Js229: thanks, I should have checked that. I have done better than delete your version: I have done a history-merge so that it is visible in the history behind the current one at Jean Tixier de Ravisi. Do you have a source for his birth date? You have 1524, but the current article says 3 Dec 1542. JohnCD (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Duque (2)

Hi. I created this article but when I tried to edit the sources and change the way it was written up, the changes I made wouldn't stay on the article. I decided to delete the article so I could rewrite it properly from scratch but then it was up for speedy deletion as soon as it was published. I ask you to takeall of this into consideration, thank you in advance. Unpollofrito (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G4, which means the page is a near-carbon-copy of a page previously deleted via deletion debate. Pages deleted via deletion debate will not be restored here; go to WP:Deletion review or contact the administrator who closed the deletion debate instead. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:16, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Unpollofrito: Please read the advice you were given further up this page. As Jeremy says, articles deleted after a deletion discussion like WP:Articles for deletion/Sarah Duque Lovisoni will not be restored here; before posting it again, you need permission from the deleting adminsitrator or from WP:Deletion review.
In any case, since you "work with the PR team of Ms. Sarah Duque" you have a WP:Conflict of interest and have no business writing about her directly. Wikipedia is not for PR. Read that guideline, and read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.
Note in particular that you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4) to disclose your interest in any edits where you have a COI.
If you want to persist, and you can find better sources to overcome the reasons for deletion at the AfD, you should make a draft article via WP:Articles for creation and submit it for review by an uninvolved editor. JohnCD (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:3FM logo.svg

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -XPanettaa (talk) 21:20, 26 January 2016 (UTC) This image was deleted for this reason: 02:39, 16 July 2015 Cryptic (talk | contribs) deleted page File:3FM logo.svg (F5: Unused non-free media file for more than 7 days). I would like to request this page be restored so I can license it under a free license or in the public domain and put it into articles. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.[reply]

  •  Done It could be used under fair use. This logo would not be automatically public domain due to simplicity. Do you own the copyright on it so that you can change the license? Our description claims that Netherlands Public Broadcasting is the owner. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:29, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Artour Babaev

subject is notable (see Arteezy), requesting history to be merged into that article -Prisencolin (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed link. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 23:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Prisencolin: no Declined. A history merge isn't practical in this case due to the large overlap between edits in both articles. Furthermore, I don't see anything in there worth restoring; the deleted version contains a lot of hype, unsubstantiated claims, and only one useful citation: http://www.dota2.com/international2014/results/ ~Amatulić (talk) 03:20, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Susan Perrow

Hello - I would really like this page restored with the following changes - sorry it was posted a few hours ago before I had a chance to put this request on top - here it is again!

Wall of text not relevant to this page removed

I, Jasadam, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jasadam (talk) 01:06, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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) 03:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Si Panya School

I, Sarah white 1, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sarah white 1 (talk) 05:24, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to continue working on the age and update it ready for publishing

Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921

The page Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921 (Phipps Act) was moved to this page. Old deleted revisions of this page still need to be restored for attribution reasons. -GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 05:33, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Angel Sense

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Angelsense (talk) 12:27, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done if you are talking about User:Angelsense, this was an advertisement. Wikipedia is not for promoting your company and products. Also User's must be individual people and not appearing to be companies, as your user name appears to be. You can ask for you user to be renamed, or pick a new name. However you should not be promoting your company here. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:09, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:David Mindel

I, Moviebuff2589, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Moviebuff2589 (talk) 15:30, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Moviebuff2589: 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) 15:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Marathon_Artists

Draft:Marathon_Artists

I, StDionis57a, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. StDionis57a (talk) 17:07, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kaeya Majmundar

I, Abdella2, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Abdella2 (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=701992449"