Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 October 8

8 October 2016

Patrick_McGuinn

Patrick_McGuinn (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

I have discussed this deletion with the closing admin, and was recommended by the closing admin to submit a DRV: User_talk:Kudpung. I am proposing that the decision to delete the page be overturned or that the page be rewritten with better information. The main (and only) concern by participating editors who advised for deletion (not all did) was that the subject did not meet Notability guidelines. Since notability is not limited to the sources listed in the article -- I think these further details must be brought into consideration: the subject's works are maintained at repositories such as UCLA's Film Archive, the ONE Archive, and such records are maintained by the Online Archive of California, the showing of his films at festivals such as Outfest and Toronto's LGBT Film Festival, the subject being featured as one of 30 filmmakers in the book: Out in the Dark: Interviews with Gay Horror Filmmakers, Actors, and Authors By Sean Abley. It was noted that his films have been reviewed in Variety - as it was listed as a source, but unknown were reviews from the NYT. His films have also been included in short film collections, one being a collection of award-winning short films, and that collection was reviewed in the Library Journal:. Thank you in advance for your consideration and thoughts on this -- and hopefully, I am following procedures correctly here. Pclibuser (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

ESPN College Football on ABC results

ESPN College Football on ABC results (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

I believe that undue weight was applied to several arguments in the discussion that were inadequate--specifically the arguments of NOTSTATS and TV Guide. The requirements placed out in the discussions were clearly met but the closer still considered them valid. Arguments that have been refuted should not be considered. I have attempted to discuss the issue with the closing editor but have not met with cooperation. Paul McDonald (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Mandhir Singh (Chahal)

Mandhir Singh (Chahal) (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

This article was deleted under the category G4. Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion.... and according to the deleting admin, Nabla he also quoted for this article - "I deleted the article, because it adds nothing to the one that was previously deleted." and he also quoted the previous deletion discussions and its facts and figures on his talk page when I appealed for the undeletion of this article on his talk page. Thanks to Nabla for taking out his precious time. So here is my appeal to restore this article or to undelete the article -

The deletion started with the reason g4 and then i gave explanation of it that does it mean that once an article gets deleted from Wikipedia, will it never can be created again, even if it is being improved and worked upon ? The main thing starts right from the deletion of the previous articles, as the reason is g4. I have seen the previous articles which were written and the editors of those articles have written too much about the subject of article but had not been possible to provide any proper reliable sources for it, or say only social media presence sources was there, proving the notability. It means it considers notability but no proper references. Coming to the article which i tried contributing on - this time i have not written full flagged things, facts and his biography about the subject of the article because though i am new on Wikipedia, but i have read before creating the article that it need reliable source to create an article or to prove the saying of the fact in article. So that was the reason that I have written less in this article, so basically, we can't say that I have written same to same as previous articles, those who were deleted. and as it is said in their reason by admin that - "I deleted the article, because it adds nothing to the one that was previously deleted." , its true but one thing - what is point to add on when a proper citation is not there for the saying. taking it on the other side, whatever was written and also less than those previous article was sited with a source, a media and primary source.

And also during the deletion, the requesting person for speedy deletion as taken help of the thing which general ization has said for PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab on the date 13 march 2016 which was - "Comment Considering that the Mr. Punjab contest itself is not notable at the English Wikipedia, it's a safe bet that the first runner-up in the 2015 contest, with no other credible claim to offer, will not be notable here. General Ization Talk 01:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)". That was true in those days as the principle network PTC Punjabi was not having significant media coverage, media resources and primary resources for PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab whom the subject to our talk, Mandhir Singh is first runner up in second season i.e. 2015. But when this speedy deletion was requested, i.e on 4 October, 2016, there was significant approach to media and resources etc. of PTC Punjabi Mr Punjab. I also tried contributing for it on Wikipedia at PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab. So a wrong assumption was taken by the requesting personnel during nominating/requesting this article for deletion. Even, there was no explanation was requesting user when i put my opinion in the second reply.

Basically, crusk of reasons/explanations for deletion of this article - g4, nothing add upon, and less source found, no notability of Mr. Punjab at that time which also played an important role in the deletion of the previous articles.

For all the reasons and beyond these - g4, nothing add upon and less source, no notability of PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab, I have tried with my earnest efforts to answer all the reasons. I am adding some more to the explanation. The time at which the previous article was deleted with the consent of admins, the subject of the article was not that notable on Google search not even the PTC PUnjabi Mr. Punjab was. At that time, no news was there for him in News tab of Google search, but now when this current article was made, the subject was having his notability in the google search, it's news tab also when searched with the following keywords - Mandhir Singh Chahal, Mandhir Singh Chahal Mr. Punjab and Mandhir Singh Mr. Punjab. At my appeal for undeletion to Nabla of this article on his talk page, he quoted - "The article's content are nearly identical. The first deleted article - Mandhir Singh Chahal - had 7 references, while the one speedy deleted - Mandhir Singh (Chahal) - had 3 references. 2 were the same, the 3rd one adds nothing as much as I can understand it." For identicalness of content and article, i have already explained. For references, I have checked that the earlier articles made on the subject of the article were not containing the references in the name of him, as they were in the name of winner of the 2nd season of PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab who is Aman Singh Deep/Amandeep Singh for whom, no contribution till now has been possible on Wikipedia, though he has very reliable source for him. 2 were deleted in his name. But this time all the references were in the name of the subject of the article. About adding, i have also explained. It was made with stub but with citations. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 14:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)