Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Y5nthon5a (talk | contribs) at 02:58, 14 June 2010 (→‎Sarona Reiher: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts

Requests for undeletion is a process intended to assist users in restoring pages that were uncontroversially deleted. Articles deleted via proposed deletion and pages deleted under certain speedy deletion criteria, such as G6, can be restored through this process. This page also serves 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.

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, and you are unable to resolve the issue on their talk page, it should be raised at Wikipedia:Deletion review, rather than here. To request the undeletion of images, you may also tag the file page with {{ImageUndeleteRequest}}.

float
float
float
float
Enter the page's title to request its undeletion:

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

File:Falcon Crest.svg

This particular image was deleted from Commons-it was not my image, but was a lot of work on the uploader's time, it just simply doesn't belong at Commons, it needs to be uploaded with a non-free license and fair use rationale. I had requested both someone at Commons and at the Graphics Lab have it moved safely to en:wp. Rlevse already e-mailed it to me, but I can't open/work with/upload svgs from my computer. If you will upload it to en:wp, I will fix the licensing tagging and write the requisite rationale -Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 06:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are no deleted revisions with that name. Is it possible that the filename is different? Do you know who the original en uploader was? --B (talk) 05:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's on Commons, not en:wp, that's why it was deleted there. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a Commons admin, but if you want to email it to me or have Rlevse email it to me, I can look at it and upload it for you, as needed. (Rlevse has my email address and I think you do too ... please send it to my yahoo account, not my work address). For that matter, you should be able to upload it yourself, even if you can't view svgs on your computer, you don't need to view it to upload it. --B (talk) 15:01, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
E-mailed, thank you! --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 09:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - please edit File:Falcon Crest.svg to include appropriate attribution and fair use claims. --B (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. I've been looking for the original Commons uploader, no dice thus far. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 17:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Found the original Commons uploader.--Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 17:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:WopMay1.jpg

Again, not my image but of use on an article I watch about a historical figure, please restore this image so the attribution is intact, then I will fix the licensing tagging. This image needs to be uploaded with a non-free license and fair use rationale. Again, Rlevse already e-mailed it to me, it is a photo of the Canadian WWI aviator, but I would prefer it restored to preserve its attribution path, I will license it properly and write the requisite rationale. -Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 07:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I have restored it and reset the one-week countdown. --B (talk) 05:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Working on it, probably still wrong yet, but... --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, what you have there is rather confusing. It comes from a British museum and you have copyright tags for American and Canadian images. If this image was first published in the UK and the author is unknown, then as long as it was published more than 70 years ago (1930), it is PD. --B (talk) 15:05, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, Beao fixed it, thank you for all the help everyone! --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 11:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keegan Taberner

Page now has references. -CanadianKman (talk) 03:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Page was originally removed for lack of references, it now has them.

Eleveneleven

The deletion debate was a tie, but the article was still deleted. -Tucayo (talk) 19:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done - I count 3 redirect, 2 keep, 1 delete if we're counting heads, but an admin is to evaluate the strength of the arguments, among other things, not just count heads. The close was correct. If you wish to contest it, the proper place to do so is at deletion review, but I doubt you're going to get the outcome you want. --B (talk) 20:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment by closing admin - irrespective of numbers, the keep arguments were weak - they amounted to no more than WP:UPANDCOMING. I have declined to change my close. JohnCD (talk) 16:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series

reasoning -Temporal88 (talk) 05:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I am making the request that the article title "Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series" be un-salted and an article be allowed to be recreated for this subject. I fully understand the reasoning for the previous protecting of the title, but in the two years after that I believe that this subject has become notable by Wikipedia's standards on web content. Specifically, "The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization." In 2009 the YouTube channel that this series is distributed on was nominated for and won the title of "Funniest YouTube Channel" (Cardgamesftw).

A link to the award: http://mashable.com/2009/12/16/open-web-awards-2009-50-winners/

Additionally, the creator (Martin Billany) has been invited to several conventions as a guest of honor, and I remember seeing something about his videos being hosted on "That Guy with Glasses", which would satisfy "The content is distributed via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators" (I cannot verify these personally, but I have included these two points as possible additional reasons for reinstatement that could be further examined if this is brought to a debate).

If this is satisfactory reasoning for a reversal of the protection on this title, I would think it most appropriate to create an entirely new article rather than bringing back one of the countless deleted pages. The vast majority were unfit for Wikipedia, fan written and not at all written as an encyclopedia entry. If a new page is allowed to be created, I will do my best to ensure that it remains acceptable by standards.

Temporal88 (talk) 05:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm.... even with the series coverage on the internet movie database? I just had this pointed out to me. this would, in addition to the coverage of anime conventions (invitations as a guest of honor) seem to be coverage by a outside sources. I can understand why this page keeps getting deleted given its eventful past, but per wikipedia standards i think it meets notability.Temporal88 (talk) 16:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • IMDB isn't a reliable source and attending conventions is also not normally taken as evidence of notability. In anyevent, ythis argument isn't for these pages as we only deal with straightforward requests. You probably should discuss this with the deleting admin and take advice on whether you have enough for another deletion review. Bearing in mind that there have already been 2 it would not be worth anyone's time raising another unless you did have really compelling evidence that is new. Spartaz Humbug! 06:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ola's Kool Kitchen

Ola's Kool Kitchen is a Radio Show on an Internet Radio Station called Radio 23. It has a massive internet fan base of which I myself and many other people I know are avid followers. The show has grown in popularity since it's inception on another Internet Radio station called Radionowhere. Ola is an an extremely likeable, affable presenter and her easy going, 'let the music do the talking' style is reminiscent of the late John Peel. Ola's eclectic musical tastes are reflected in the content of the show and a mixture of old and new music is a winner with fans. As there is no commercial show on terrestrial radio where you can hear new, alternative, exciting, musically ambitious young bands, Ola's Kool Kitchen is the only show I rely on to keep me informed of what is really happening in the world of alternative music. I was very pleased to see Ola's Kool Kitchen on Wikipedia as it fully deserves to be on here as it is a hugely importatnt and relevant part of the musical medium. Many of the new bands that Ola has championed on her show such as 'The Chap' are listed in Wikipedia, so surely it makes sense to have the Radio show that gave these bands their first break on radio to be listed also. Therefore I ask you to reconsider the deletion of Ola's Kool Kitchen as I feel bery strongly that it has earned it's place and judging by the amount fans Ola's Kool Kithchens has on Myspace (nearly 10,000) I would not be the only one.(fixed entry on behalf of original poster JamieB007 (talk · contribs · count)) -Spartaz Humbug! 11:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Not done. This article was deleted in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. Wikipedia generally considers a topic notable if it has been covered by reliable sources independent of the subject. Has this radio show been discussed in the media (other than the radio station's other shows)? Has it received national awards from a major outfit? Please note that the correct forum for seeking redress of this deletion is deletion review, though I would not suggest making a request there unless or until you have found reliable sources that demonstrate the importance of this topic. --B (talk) 12:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Repurpose

This article describes a new album by Woob who is recognised as a pioneer in the field of ambient music. Articles already exist for the artist and his previous albums. Repurpose is an important new release in its field and justifies a separate article. After a long absence by the artist, it may take a while before the new album is widely known, but this does not diminish its significance to ambient music. The deleted article followed Wikipedia norms, eg infobox, track-listing, cross-references and external links. In creating this article, I have no connection with the artist or the production company. -APB-CMX (talk) 07:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done The issue is that SchuminWeb has also deleted the article Woob itself per WP:CSD#A7. That made the album article eligible for speedy deletion as well. You should contact him directly about it. If you can't agree on a direct restoration, you can either go to deletion review or ask for restoration to your userspace. In any case, the articles need reliable sources in the light of WP:MUSIC.--Tikiwont (talk) 12:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Splinters Theatre of Spectacle

I am an Associate Lecturer in Drama in the School of Communications and Creative Arts- Deakin University- Burwood-VIC
The deletion of this page (which has just come to my attention) signifies a serious lack of understanding of the complex and inter-connected nature of the Australian Theatre Industry- and the history of Australian contemporary- avant-guard performance in Australia over the last 20 years

The group in question- Splinters Theatre Company-based in the ACT- was the inspirational training ground/collaborators for a significant number of Australian artists and companies- currently fully visible (and worthy of note) in the industry (both nationally and internationally)- The deletion of this page is a deletion of the necessary link to track the career paths of significant Australian contemporary artists- Please contact me if you require further information-120.19.19.22 (talk) 07:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - Well, this deletion was already undone more than two years ago. You're more than welcome to help addressing the open issues that the article has had since then. I've also redacted the given contact info. If you see the need to contact WP, please use the OTRS system --Tikiwont (talk) 10:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:QuickTime on Windows Vista.png (Previous version)

On May 29, revision 363638757, Mono (talk · contribs) tagged File:QuickTime on Windows Vista.png for speedy-deletion, asserting that:

Media being played in screenshot is not attributed (lacking permission info).

— Mono (talk · contribs)
Unfortunately, his assertion is WRONG and MISPLACED because even now you can visit this file and see for yourself that it properly credits the media being played:

QuickTime 7.5 on Windows Vista playing Big Buck Bunny.

Perhaps, this is not the best type of attribution, but the image did NOT merit deletion.
Unfortunately, on 31 May. revision 365123336, administrator Fastily (talk · contribs) uploaded a new problematic version and deleted the previous valid version: This version is obviously a digitally-altered copy of the previous version, only the still image of Big Buck Bunny is replaced with a QuickTime X logo! The window title bar still reads "Big Buck Bunny"! Now this image definitely violates WP:NFCC#3a because Big Buck Bunny was released under a Creative Commons license while QuickTime X logo is copyrighted!
I've dropped a note to Fastily, but until now there has been no response.

Would you please undelete the previous version? -Fleet Command (talk) 08:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done. I have uploaded a new version that does not include the logo and does not include the incorrect title bar. Incorporating the "Big Buck Bunny" content isn't a simple/non-controversial undeletion. While it may be released under a free license, it has nothing to do with Quicktime. I'm not sure I like the idea of including an arbitrary screenshot (other than the Wikipedia homepage) to show off a video player, image viewer, tv, etc. Such inclusion makes us too open for promotional use. For example, I could license an advertisement for my business under an appropriate Creative Commons license, then start replacing every video player image with screenshots from my advertisement. Using anything other than a Wikipedia screenshot is just asking for a slippery self-promotional slope. This decision needs more than just one or two eyes looking at it ... perhaps you could open a discussion on the article talk page (using WP:3O to invite other users) or open a deletion review. --B (talk) 15:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian Youth Association

I just today created an article about this subject under Spilka Ukraïns'koï Molodi, unaware that this article had once existed. The article should really go to this name instead, but to preserve the edit history and salvage any useful information, I request that the article be restored and (later, after a suitable rewrite) the two articles' histories merged. I will of course rewrite the material to alleviate the copyvio concerns that got it deleted in the first place. -Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 09:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, that's what I needed to know! Any way I can get a copy? Don't need the history, but something may be of interest. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I can use the cats and some basic framework. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 17:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

James E. Daigle

deleted for lack of verification, can be verified by US Army HRC. Please undlete. -Jimmyd22 (talk) 09:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wikipedia generally considers a topic to be notable if there is significant coverage in reliable sources external to the subject. Has this individual been covered in the news media (beyond simply being listed in an article that lists all persons who received a particular medal)? --B (talk) 13:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this soldier is notable. He is older, joined the Army after his son, a US Marine, was wounded in Iraq. This soldier saved many US lives and was decorated and wounded himself in Afghanistan. Soldier has been covered in Army Times and many other national publications. Please undelete.

Wayne Spitzer

I am hoping to undelete this article as there are abundant, if hard to find and/or difficult to format, secondary and third-party sources to support it. I have been slow and perhaps lazy to follow up until now, but would appreciate more time to complete this process. This article was deleted per 'lack of notability' guidelines, but I feel this can be rectified if I but take the time to familiarize myself with Wikipedia's technical requirements. Thank you so much, and best regards! -Akira1270 (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this soldier was covered in Army times umong other publications as he is older, and saved quite a few lives while getting wounded himself...Please undelete!!

Bachir Attar

reasoning -41.214.142.96 (talk) 13:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bachir Attar is a notable subject whose Wik bio has been available for a number of years. He did not make any changes to his own bio (using a username BachirAttar), and there are numerous references pointing to his accomplishments that are without dispute. Gyrofrog has stated that he felt Bachir was doing this, but in fact, Bachir Attar cannot write in English. Please restore. Admnistrator Fayssal, who has been uncommunicative to mails, would agree I am sure that Attar is a notable person whose biography should NOT have been deleted.

File:ELT image.JPG

the pictures shows the members of the band, so i think it should be restored. -Joyful563 (talk) 06:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done - this page has been deleted via a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_23#File:ELT_image.JPG. If you believe that the consensus of the discussion was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Fastily (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review.--Tikiwont (talk) 20:47, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sponge Software

Article deleted in breach of wikipedia guideline A7. Instead of deleting articles, it would be polite to contact the author first to encourage more content to be written, rather than churlishly deleting people's hard work. -Coolvidnetwork (talk) 20:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'd then try to give a good example of politeness and contact the deleting admin User: Athaenara first, maybe explaining the nature of the award. I note that it was written about a Software house, not a piece of software, including an Infobox company. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • (ec)  Not done - Please see WP:CORP for the relevant inclusion guideline. In general, Wikipedia considers topics to be notable if they have non-trivial coverage in reliable sources (news media, etc) that are external to the subject itself (press releases don't count). The overwhelming majority of companies on the planet are not appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia. This is not a question of how much work is done putting the article together - it's a question of whether it meets our guidelines for inclusion. Are there any third party media outlets that have taken note of this company? --B (talk) 20:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tinashe Severa

I would very much appreciate if you unblock this page or let me temporarily view it. I am doing an English project and liked one of his poems, "Justice Stands Still." I need to get more information on the author so I was hoping you could help me out. I would really appreciate it if you could help me

Sincerely, Sabith -99.239.10.206 (talk) 02:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The first deleted version had nothing useful and the second appears to have a copyvio by reproducing one of the poems so is unsuitable for REFUND. If you want to register an account and set up and email I will happily send you the text my email. Alternatively you can email me hint my email is my username and gmail and I will send it back. Please nudge me on my talkpage to let me know when you have done this because I do not check email regularly. Spartaz Humbug! 02:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Host-proof_hosting

The concept of "host-proof" hosting is fairly new but it will become increasingly important in this era of "cloud computing". The main reason I want this article restored is because I don't know of any better name for it. Although related concepts are an active topic of research in cryptography (homomorphic encryption, anonymous querying, plausibly deniable search), there is no other name for the idea of offering cryptographically proven secure and anonymous web based services. The text may need to be modified to include more references to actual cryptography research topics instead of "clipperz spam", as someone qualified during the deletion debate, but this area is an active topic of research (see for example, the dates on the references for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption) and will probably become more popular/notable as more web developers begin to understand and implement this type of applications. Just for your information I am not affiliated with, and I don't even use any product from Clipperz or Passpack, I am just a web developer interested in security and privacy. If the page is not restored I will try and put in the effort to rewrite the article from scratch. (I'm sorry that I had to post anonymously I don't have time to create a wikipedia account now.)-86.124.58.77 (talk) 09:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This was deleted after a discussion so you need to have this conversation with the deleting admin or seek a deletion review. Spartaz Humbug! 11:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cherie Nutting

reasoning -41.214.196.163 (talk) 15:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cherie Nutting is an accomplished photographer and author. She also has managed the Master Musicians of Jajouka led by Bachir Attar since 1988. The bio on Wikipedia should be undeleted. This template must be substituted.

The same Cherie Nutting whose name already appears on this page twice? Give it a rest. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 18:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Duhan

I wish to make the particle notable and try again -CDTi (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Innovatology

reasoning -174.30.113.167 (talk) 23:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please replace page "Innovatology". This is a practical and an innovative social science that emerged in 2008 and is growing quickly. Wikipedia is an important resource for people to reference in finding out about and contributing to the social record on this science. The initial article is needed as starting point for the many people that practice this science to collaborate. The founding social principle and value on which Wikipedia is based depends on an open and transparent documentation process to survive and thrive. Deleting this page at a critical point in the science of innovatology's evolution is an action that undermines the very foundation of the Wikipedia social platform. Please reconsider and add this page back. Thank you.

Not done – this is not an appropriate topic for inclusion on Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Wikipedia does not accept articles which consist of original research, or which lack any reliable sources of information. Furthermore, a Wikipedia article is not a place for practitioners of this so-called social science to collaborate; use your own website for that, please. BencherliteTalk 09:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Enviro Estates

This is Mr. Christopher here and i spent hours researching this company as I am a memeber and believe in Helping our planet. This company got my attention as they were the only property company in the UK to focus their attention around the environment. They are local to me and i want people to join them and help save our world, then you mysteriously take the page off your website, so it is not searchable and i've wasted my time to research this company. Please could you consider this, as i hope you are with this planet aswell. Thenk you and this is genuinly not aginst your articles as i have no relation to the company, all i want is for people to join them and know about the importance of our planet. You can email me [removed]. -86.182.52.70 (talk) 08:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not done – this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject.. This article had no independent sources to back up any of the claims made about it. BencherliteTalk 09:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Esenthel Engine

The article was removed without any specific reason. It's not written in any advertising form, and it does contain many of references from reliable sources. -87.99.21.41 (talk) 08:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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/Esenthel Engine, 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, Juliancolton (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. The page as most recently deleted appears to have differed little from the page as originally deleted, and not sufficiently to overcome the points made in the original deletion discussion. BencherliteTalk 09:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

reasoning -Dlgleo (talk) 13:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The imdb reference was missing when I intial submitted the information. Imdb proves that the information is accurate.

SHAYTARDS

SHAYTARDS is one of the most popular users on youtube. Shay Carl definitly a YoutTube celebrity. If CTFxC aka Internet Killed Television has a wikipedia page I would think that SHAYTARDS HAS to definitly have a wikipedia page. I'm shocked that they didnt already. So, then I created one but it got deleted instantly. SHAYTARDS is even more popular than CTFxC and somehow they get a wikipedia page. CTFxC's total upload views is 76,205,601 and SHAYTARDS total upload views is 123,970,318. Shay carl also isnt on the youtube celebrities list and charles trippy and alli speed are. If you look up the definetion of celebrity on wikipedia this is it: a person who is easily recognized in a society or culture. If you were to ever watch the SHAYTARDS then you would know hat they ALWAYS get pointed out while they are out vlogging. I Highly suggest listen to both my suggestions. And if you let me create a SHAYTARDS page I will take the time to make it as best as possible. Thanks. -Falcons8455 (talk) 19:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Though as the deleting admin, it is not appropriate for me to make a decision on this request, I would like to let you know that the proper place for contesting this deletion is deletion review. This forum is for non-controversial restoration of deleted content. --B (talk) 21:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshido

reasoning -213.60.142.142 (talk) 20:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is VERY important to the worldwide martial arts community!

Hacker Key

There are references to the hacker key around the internet. It is true that the original source of information was a web page that has been deleted, but hacker keys are still widely used (a simple google query shows a lot of people mentioning theirs: "hackerkey.com -site:hackerkey.com"). Also there is a tool to decode them: http://www.logicalchaos.com/projects/hackerkey/dehk.php . -Landhar (talk) 22:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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/Hacker Key, 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. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. --B (talk) 22:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charles M. Stack

added references -Kenevans71 (talk) 23:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Public_domain_characters

it contained very useful information -Duran3d (talk) 13:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Winnie Palmer Hospital for Women & Babies

Malicious actions by administrator user: Terrillja -Mjschmidt715 (talk) 14:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Jack H. White

I deleted the article in error -RFA Harlem (talk) 21:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the history of John "Jack" C. White · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions], to see if it should be restored or deleted, since the user's next created page, John jack h white · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions] was deleted under criterion A7. —C.Fred (talk) 23:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:CWii

Deleted by retired administrator Tanthalas39 per CSD G6. I'm interested in seeing the talk page to check on the proper disposition of this user's bots, User:John Bot, User:John Bot II & User:John Bot III. I don't believe it's usual to delete talk pages of a banned user (or user pages, for that matter: User:CWii). I'm not aware of any special circumstances in this case (like VANISHing). -TheFeds 00:08, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages. There are currently 17,042 mostly user talk pages scheduled for this unusual process. I'm loathe to undelete it for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that this individual is under 18. Looking into it, there is an ANI thread here and his former bot user page has not been deleted. Is there something specific you're looking for? He's indefblocked, as are all of his bots if that's your question. He answered a question on his Commons talk page a month ago, so if you need to get in touch with him (eg, to ask for source code for a bot), you may have luck finding him there. --B (talk) 04:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, John Bot II (and maybe its siblings I and III) was performing some image tagging and moves to Commons, and also tagged files with a somewhat malformed template, which I'd like to get rid of. I'm just wondering if there was any discussion as to the methods that bot was using, and whether it would be acceptable for another user/bot to resume that work, or if there were any concerns expressed about that bot's actions. Alternatively, if you can confirm there's nothing of interest to me (i.e. nothing about the bots) on that page, I don't really need it undeleted. Is there a specific privacy issue with this user? TheFeds 16:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, there is no specific privacy issue I'm aware of. The source code for John Bot II was at User:John Bot II/Code (looks unrelated to images, so I'm guessing it is out of date). User:John Bot II/Source looks related to images, so I'm guessing that this is the current code. Its request for approval is at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/John Bot II 2. John Bot's requests for approval are here and Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/John Bot 4. John Bot III's code is at User:John Bot III/Code and its request for approval is at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/John Bot III. You can use this link if there are any other pages in John Bot's userspace of interest ... several others seem to have things related to its mission. I'm looking back now through the talk page history to see if there is anything relevant to the workings of the bots. Nothing so far (back to Nov 2008). --B (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I went back to early 2008 and the only things I found relevant to the workings of the bot were a link to the code (linked above) and stating the tasks he was doing with his various bots (see their user page histories). I didn't find anything of use beyond what you can still get publicly. Please let me know if that provides you with the information you need. If not, I did keep an eye out for privacy issues and I don't see anything that would preclude temporary undeletion long enough for you to examine the history for other information. --B (talk) 19:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you couldn't find anything relevant, then there's no need to undelete it on my behalf. Thanks for checking it out. (And yeah, /Code is related to an old task of the bot; /Source is helpful, and I'll be looking closer at that.) TheFeds 01:03, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done - closing as withdrawn by the requestor --B (talk) 05:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neenyo

I posted this article and cited the differences that address the previous reasons for deletion, and it without any response from the mod why it was deleted. I made a valid attempt to correct the article. -Jacksonhewit (talk) 03:43, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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, 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, CactusWriter (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. Yes, this article is different in a lot of ways, but there were two separate AFD discussions that deleted it. I don't think this should be restored without a deletion review. --B (talk) 04:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am Tim Pryce

reasoning -Adultcrash13 (talk) 04:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am Tim Pryce. I would not make up fake information about myself.

nurul momen

The article on Nurul Momen the web-link http://www.ittefaq.com/issues/2010/02/19/news0328.htm used was accredited to Aurony Mohona International Foundation, Dhaka. This site acknowledged this fact at the bottom of that article. I am the owner of Aurony Mohona International Foundation, Dhaka and it is I Who submitted that article to http://www.ittefaq.com/issues/2010/02/19/news0328.htm and the entire article 'Nurul Momen : Father of Theatre in Bangladesh' was written by me. -Abu Zafor (talk) 17:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done It hasn't been deleted yet and I've listed it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 June 11 copied your claim to Talk:Nurul momen. Please red carefully the template how to clarify this matter.--Tikiwont (talk) 18:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rommel N. Angara

This article will provide information on Philippine minor writer Rommel N. Angara, author of the essay "Phlippine-Spanish Friendship Day: A Short Background," the first essay on Philippine Spanish Friendship to be published so far in The Modern Teacher, a Philippine educational publication of national circulation. Philippine-Spanish Friendship Day is a special nonworking holiday observed in the province of Aurora in the Philippines for commemorating the socio-cultural ties between the Filipinos and the Spaniards, who colonized the Philippines for 333 years but whom the Filipinos treated, not as enemies, but as friends after the Philippine Revolution in late 1890's -203.84.170.246 (talk) 01:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Not done Salted page with multiple recreations of the same text, none of the references are anything more then an article listing and writing the first article about a particular subject in a magazine is not an assertion of notability. Spartaz Humbug! 05:24, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Atmosphir

The Atmosphir Community wants to make a better article to inform and record the history of the game and not to Advertise -Marcod1419 (talk) 22:13, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. The article has been salted - protected from creation - and there was nothing useful in the last version. I suggest you prepare a draft article in your User space at User:Marcod1419/Atmosphir, and then approach user RHaworth (talk · contribs), the admin who protected it, for permission to post it. If he does not agree, you can go to WP:Deletion review. Before you start, read WP:Your first article carefully, and note that you will have to establish notability by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." JohnCD (talk) 11:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Walter J. Burien Jr.

Wikipedia needs to undelete the deletion on Walter Burien because his information is factual and enlightening as to the current fraud of government hiding income on the taxpayers. It is strongly suggested that Wikipedia leave Walter Burien's BIO and discussion on its website.

Bruce Eden, Civil Rights Director Dads Against Discrimination (DADS) b_eden@verizon.net -72.68.31.116 (talk) 03:41, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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/Walter J. Burien Jr., 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, 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. JohnCD (talk) 11:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OVH

The article has clearly been marked for deletion by people not familiar with the topics. The article subject matter - French company OVH - is a well-known name among IT techs dealing with hosting. A French Wikipedia article elaborates more on OVH - according to some rankings the company, with 80,000 machines in its server farm, is the 5th largest hosting provider in the world and no. 1 in Europe. Moreover, running Google search in French language brings up around 1,810,000 results for "OVH", and over 4,000,000 results in English. The company has also been recently listed by an independent statistics site webhosting.info as the world's 13th fastest growing domain registrar, with nearly one million domains registered, which puts it on the 8th place on the planet.[1] I suggest users do not request deletion of articles in the subject matter they are not familiar with, relying only on "Google Articles" (remember, rarely articles are written on services - not products - aimed at specialist markets). Thanks. -kashmiri (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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/OVH, 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, 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. JohnCD (talk) 11:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Harrison, Inventor

Ian Harrison who invented the Milli-Grip spanner wrote the biography titled Ian Harrison, Inventor. Do I have to submit proof? -Goldcrest85 (talk) 10:44, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This page has not yet been deleted. Please see Proposed deletion of biographies of living people for the instructions for responding to a proposed deletion of a biography of a living person.. Everything in Wikipedia must be verifiable from reliable sources. Also check out WP:Notability and WP:Notability (people). JohnCD (talk) 10:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Beth Mburu-Bowie

Reason for deletion stated by CapitalR is unfitting. Article was already in existence, before it was deleted but was redirected to another page. If page could stand on Wiki without any information or being deleted then page should be able to stand with real information about the subject. User CapitalR did not wait 7 days after the article was published to delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by People are (talk • contribs) 14:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

reasoning -Silvenapt (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter J. Burien Jr.

Walter J. Burien Jr. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Whomever thinks they can delete Mr Burions' bio 'cause the don't like his 100% accountability of all gov't agencies, the "Fed" etc of their financial reports because they don't want the "Truth" known about governments' "unaccountability" at all levels! The deletion is totally bogus based upon disinfo ... ad infinitum ... otherwise research it yourself. A lie only last for the day/moment, yet the truth shall last forever ... semper fi! Afortiori Duane Lee Kosmicki

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/Walter J. Burien Jr., 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, 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. --B (talk) 02:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Planet FM

The page does not seek to advertise or promote; the organisation is strictly not-for-profit and has nothing to advertise. In addition, the article is referenced and each statement/sentence can be qualified and justified by information contained within the referenced material. -210.48.82.107 (talk) 00:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sarona Reiher

She is in WWE now. -Y5nthon5a (talk) 02:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=367892391"