Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wirismath (talk | contribs) at 15:49, 8 December 2010 (→‎WIRIS). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Note: This page is NOT for challenging the outcome of deletion discussions nor to address the pending deletion of any page.
Shortcuts

Requests for undeletion is a process intended to assist users in restoring pages that were uncontroversially deleted via proposed deletion, under certain speedy deletion criteria (such as CSD G6), or in articles for deletion debates with little or no participation other than the nominator. This page is also intended to serve as a central location to request that deleted content be userfied or emailed to you so the content can be improved upon prior to re-insertion into the mainspace, or used elsewhere (you may also make a request directly to one of the administrators listed here). This means that content deleted after discussion—at articles for deletion, categories for discussion, or miscellany for deletion among other XfD processes—may in some cases be provided to you, but such controversial page deletions will not be overturned through this process.

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

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

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

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

Caitlin Rose

I can provide references for the facts that are stated -Scottcampbell14 (talk) 15:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)— Scottcampbell14 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Assuming you are talking about Caitlin Rose: she might actually be notable. Please create a new, clean article that doesn't read like a press release: free of peacock words like "megastar", contains no blather about "represents the future of country music", and contains references to actual articles in actual reliable sources. The version that was deleted was clearly written by somebody in an advertising-related profession. Maybe we can get an article created before those cigarettes kill her. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
She is notable, I've created a sourced stub. Fences&Windows 00:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not an advertisement. Information relevant to the SAT test was presented regarding calculator programs permitted for use during the mathematics sections of the SAT test. -24.101.36.21 (talk) 22:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - a deleted page with this name does not appear to exist. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Er, if you follow the link in the title you can see it was deleted via prod... so I've restored it. Fences&Windows 22:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

bitcoin

its more relevant than 90% of th crap articles on here -24.47.43.189 (talk) 11:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done You obviously came here to attempt to make a disruptive point rather than make a legitimate request and are well aware that this was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitcoin and will not be acted upon, so I'll dispense with the standard response to users who make such requests in good faith.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:24, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are acting uncivil by responding to him this way. You should NOT jump to accusations of bad faith WP:AOBF. The user is simply upset and unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies. While long-time Wikipedians know that his argument is not one accepted, "most of the articles here are crap" is a common public conception. Rather than respond to an inappropriate request with an inappropriate retort, you should calmly and politely inform the user of how things work around here 67.174.39.160 (talk) 06:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong, wrong and wrong. Unfortunately, it's hard to gauge knowledge and skill level from anonymous editors, and the message in the statement was pure bad faith - it could be read no other way. If one thinks that articles are crap you do one of two things: go away, or fix them. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:58, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The message is antagonistic on its face. We do not assume good faith in the presence of contrary evidence.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bitcoin is a legitimate open-source project with growing support. Judging by the number of companies collaborating (http://www.bitcoin.org/trade), I'd say it's quite a bit more notable than some things that slip under the radar here. Plus, the concept and internal workings are very interesting in my opinion, being an excellent example of a unique use of public-key encryption. If the article cannot be undeleted as is, perhaps Bitcoin could still receive a subsection in the proof of work system article? EDIT: Further poof of insignificance: $22485 US dollars change hand via bitcoin every day (http://www.bitcoinwatch.com/). 174.68.103.235 (talk) 23:09, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As clearly explained at the top of this page, this project is not for undeletion of articles deleted at any deletion discussion, as this one was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitcoin. It is only for undeletion of articles that were deleted uncontroversially. Accordingly, Even if you wrote the most compelling reasons imaginable for undeletion it would not be acted upon. The only places where a deletion discussion can legitimately be asked to be undeleted is at the talk page of the administrator who deleted the article (here though, this cannot work because the user is no longer an administrator), or at Wikipedia:Deletion review. A separate path is to create the article anew. However, that recreated content must address the reasons for deletion (here the lack of significant coverage in independent, third party, reliable sources; see WP:N). If it does not it will just be speedily deleted under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See the entry immediately below this. The way to get get Bitcoin restored is via WP:Deletion review; it has been rejected there twice, most recently at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 September 26. Don't try to create the article afresh: there is already a draft article at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Bitcoin. If that can be improved with enough reliable, independent sources to demonstrate notability, it can be taken to Deletion Review again, but there is no point repeatedly coming here. JohnCD (talk) 10:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

bitcoin, again

I want to know more about it and it is not illegal. -222.154.234.89 (talk) 02:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted by consensus at AfD and salted by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), meaning there is nothing we can do on this page. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is not illegal, but despite two deletion reviews, nobody has yet produced evidence that it is notable enough to have an article. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 September 26. There is a draft article at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Bitcoin. JohnCD (talk) 10:53, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Afterjesus.jpg

I'm not necessarily requesting undeletion, I'm just trying to discover what happened to it. There was a photo of King of Kings (statue) at this filename, used in the article, showing the appearance of this sculpture following a fire. The photo isn't there any more, and there doesn't seem to be any deletion log or note that it was deleted for whatever reason, at least not that I can find. If it was moved, there's no redirect, and the article that pointed to it wasn't updated. A search isn't turning up any deletion discussion, so if it was deleted, it was probably speedy or prodded. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 10:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC) -cmadler (talk) 10:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure the photo was not at Commons? I see no history under that filename at all. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The file was deleted at Commons, as shown here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! For some reason it didn't occur to me to check Commons. cmadler (talk) 18:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pragmatic Buddhism

The current search for Pragmatic Buddhism leads to the Center of Pragmatic Buddhism -Adartsug (talk) 12:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have a clue on why the page was deleted. The article had contributions from many people.

It was not deleted. The title, along with its entire editing history was moved to the new title (the prior title is now a redirect). What may have confused you is that, as can be seen in that edit history, the page was vastly shortened at about the same time, on the stated basis: "starting to fix the many problems with this article, which is arguably OR/Synthesis in its entirety" ("OR" is an abbreviation used here for original research; see Wikipedia:No original research).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I, Adartsug, originally wrote the item on Pragmatic Buddhism. I do not belong to any school or branch of Religious Buddhism; I have never been in a Buddhist temple or pagoda. I consider that there is a strong stream today toward Pragmatic Buddhism (or secular, or non-religious, or even agnostic) and Wikipedia should have an article on that trend. You should have not removed the whole entry but I agree that the self-promoting links should not be there.

I have no connection with either the Center of Pragmatic Buddhism or the Unfettered Mind organization. They included their links by their own initiative; I added the section “Organizations” to make room for the first group.

Buddhism is referred as pragmatic by scholars and writers¬ such as Edward Conze, Richard P. Hayes and Stephen Batchelor, and atheistic or agnostic by André Comte-Sponville. As a notion, Pragmatic Buddhism is as “cloudy” as agnosticism or pragmatism; the schools on these “philosophies” appeared much later than the words.

Lateral to the central issue and even stranger than your deletion of the article in question is the book I just found in Amazon.com PRAGMATIC BUDDHISM, the summary of which I copy next: “High Quality Content by WIKIPEDIA articles! Pragmatic Buddhism is a subset of the Buddhist doctrine which leaves aside metaphysical beliefs and rituals of any kind and advocates the continuous practice of the Buddha's Teachings (Dhamma in Pali, Dharma in Sanskrit) with the primary purpose of eliminating suffering and bringing about inner peace and harmony. In the broadest sense of the word, Buddhism is a religion and a philosophical system originally proposed by Siddhattha Gotama (in Pali; Siddhartha Gautama in Sanskrit), the Buddha, in northeastern India in the sixth century B.C. As a religion, the fourth largest in the world, it has three main schools (Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana) and dozens of derivate branches. For the strong emphasis it places in introspection and mind states, numerous scholars also consider Buddhism a system of psychology rather than (or in addition to) a religious creed or a school of philosophy.” Are people actually taken material from Wikipedia to produce books? Adartsug, November 30, 2010

There are several issues here. First, there is no plural 'you'. As you created the artcile on one hand it was unilaterally first moved and then converted by one user, Sylvain1972 (talk · contribs), as also mentioned here.[1] Second, it is still there in the history! If you disagree, you can simply undo the title move and restore the original content to allow for a wider discussion of its merits. That would also be the place to discuss the third issue regarding the source listed at amazon. (It seems to me they pasted a generic description.) If necessary, I could help you with the technicalities. Let me know here or on my talk page. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PadovaniML/Dennis_Nackord

It was originally deemed to be self-promoting, but I changed it to remove what I thought to be offending material. -PadovaniML (talk) 21:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Nothing to undelete anymore. Please contact the admin who userfied it for you, Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), on a possible move back to mainspace. --Tikiwont (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caitlin Rose again

Because I have supplied the article with links which back up via evidence what the actual article says -Scottcampbell14 (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Musulin, Stella von

Nowhere on the internet contains the information I have submitted on the writer Stella von Musulin. Yet it has been unfairly deleted. Here friendship with W H Auden would be enough to include her under 'noteable' but added to this is her important publications, her role in MI6 etc, yet it was seen fit to delete this article. This is utterly beyond all reasonable editing criteria and without justification. I request that the article be reinstated in the interests of scholarship. -Natsyw (talk) 10:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done Well, I searched for various versions of the article, and have yet to find anything. That said, "a friendship with" does not allow someone to inherit notability. Although we don't require all references to be available on the internet, there must be some valid reliable sources that you can help point us to - with millions of editors, someone must have access to a printed copy. We also don't do things "in the interest of scholarship" - this is an encylopedia of knowledge, not a compendium of scholarship. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bwilkins, if you'd checked his deleted contributions you'd have seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/MUSULIN,_STELLA_von (also see User:Natsyw). I would restore it, but for Coren Searchbot flagging a potential copyvio before speedy deletion (though I can't confirm this flagging). I don't think that A7 applied, as being a biographer of Auden and a published author on Austria is a "credible claim of importance" (notability is another question entirely). A new, sourced and demonstratively non-plagiarised bio on Stella Musulin should not be speedily deletable, but I do doubt that she's notable from what I could find. Fences&Windows 22:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried to help this user out, as they bungled some text into one of my watched articles. But, how ever well you shine the stuff that is on their own stub page, I can't find any suitable references in English or German that would enable this person to presently pass WP:NOTAB Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 02:41, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Södermalm.JPG

Poor transwiki, please restore the file description temporarily, I will correct the transfer and tag it for speedydeletion when finished. Thanks, -Martin H. (talk) 13:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Tikiwont (talk) 18:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smart Distributed System

Really? Honeywell is not a notable company? I am new to this, so I'm not suprised. But to call Honeywell not a notable company is to call a farce a process. -KazooOfTheNorth (talk) 17:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I see you've meanwhile contacted the deleting admin. If you need futher help let me know.--Tikiwont (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
... and on top of that, nobody said that Honeywell or even Siemens are non-notable companies. However, the product that had a poorly-referenced article shows absolutely zero signs of being considered as notable. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meld (software)

Meld is one of the most popular open source visual diff and merge tool. It is not clear why its article has been deleted while similar articles describing less known tools (like tkdiff or Araxis Merge) exist. -134.83.1.241 (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Courcelles 10:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Euan McIver

I have been notified that this page, created by a Scottish Variety Club Member, has been deleted - one reason being - it seemed I only appeared in amateur productions - more than ten years with a national star (Stanley Baxter)and two national industry awards from the USA as listed, should convey the message that this is not the case, and while I undergo further treatment for the illness also mentioned in the article I am concentrating on assisting community theatre projects. It seems the administrator does not know the facts and is applying his own opinions. Please reconsider this deletion. -86.170.153.227 (talk) 13:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - As also announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euan S McIver, it cannot be undeleted through this process. As you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Courcelles (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.--Tikiwont (talk) 13:45, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basware

Hi, my companies Wikipedia page has been deleted by Airplaneman. A couple of times we have had our site edited with our competitor inserting their own company names into our page. I have always considered Wikipedia to be impartial and so I do not believe this is the readers interest. We do not use Wikipedia for promoting our business but rather as a point of reference. We are Basware, this is what we do. Anything beyond that as far as I am concerned is Marketing talk and not of interest to Wikipedia readers nor myself. Despite taking this approach I am still surprised that our pages are being marked as advertising. We are more than willing to rewrite content to make it useful to readers but it seems to be slowly eroded with and tampered by competitors. I hope that we can be undeleted and am happy to receive any comments or recommendations that you might have. Thanks and regards -Zmte055 (talk) 14:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that people like you are editing the article, removing information (such as who you compete against) in order to keep the article the way you want it. As a result, the article was so promotional (full of peacock words like "leading" and laden with promotional fluff) that it was deleted as an advertisement. Such is the consequence of conflict of interest editing. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AGN International

Hi, an article that i created AGN International was deleted in October by Transporterman under section A7, I did put the 'hangon' quote on top of the page so that we can amend and change details so that the article no longer fell under A7 any longer. Unfortunately this article was then deleted. I contacted transporterman but have had no response from him. I also can not put this article back up with the amended changes, please can you advise how this can be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyGNorris (talk • contribs) 15:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Amy, Transporterman responded to you within an hour, and left a message on your talk page informing you. You can see the response in the history of his/her talk page at [2]. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Valeri "Tiger" Lilov

Dear Wikipedia contributors,

I am a chess fan and small contibutor to Wikipedia. A few months ago I made a major update to an article about a chess master and teacher who is very famous in my country, but because of different reasons, his Wikipedia page didn't exist and it has been deleted repeteadly. I was provided with a copy of the article in question which I reformatted and submitted for review. After that, the article was approved by Wikipedia contributors and put live on Wikipedia. Now, a few months later I received a message saying that since the article was previously deleted, it has been deleted again. My question is: Is there any way for this article to go Live again and who I may turn to, in order to request the article to be reviewed and reforematted even more if needed. Here is the link for the article in question - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeri_%22Tiger%22_Lilov. Thank you for your assistance!

Sincerely,

Dejan Stoynov -Chesszorro (talk) 16:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Karma:_A_Very_Twisted_Love_Story

No reasoning given. -24.90.232.208 (talk) 16:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Prince_Mohammed_bin_Faisal_I_bin_Al_Hussein_El-Hashemite_(deleted_01_Aug_2008_at_23:59)

Deletion was groundless and without a justification or solid evidence to the claim. The information in the article is all true and correct and documents to verify this information can be requested upon request -109.105.236.170 (talk) 18:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - As announced prominently at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Mohammed bin Faisal I bin Al Hussein El-Hashemite, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user DGG (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. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gail_edwards_headshot_rdmedia.jpg

I guess I didn’t select the ‘appropriate license’ when I uploaded the picture. I didn't realize there was a problem until I visited the page and found it had been removed. I tried to reload the picture but received this warning: “A file identical to this file (File: Gail edwards headshot rdmedia.jpg) has previously been deleted. You should check that file's deletion history before proceeding to re-upload it.” I contacted http://webchat.freenode.net to help me with this and they said,"The easiest thing to do may be to ask an administrator if they would be willing to undelete the file so you can put the appropriate license on it." Can you help? Thanks, Robert -RustyWard (talk) 19:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done File was deleted at Commons. You'd need to speak to the Commons admin who deleted it there. There's nothing we can do here, this is a different website. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etherealization

Can someone please userfy this page for me? I'm really curious what it said. -AaronSw (talk) 20:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Frontier

The article was removed due to non-notability. I don't know the original contents of the old page, but I have created new content based on notable information, with proper sources as you can see on my page: User:WizTheDoc. -WizTheDoc (talk) 20:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done, seems reasonable and appears good enough to avoid speedy deletion, so moved to mainspace (article was salted). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:53, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Supersmile

The Wikipedia page was detelete after we tried to update it. Supersmile is a popular at-home whitening line created by Dr. Irwin Smigel -72.248.75.120 (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion G11. If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who implemented the deletion request, user NawlinWiki (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

harmless harvest

reasoning -Dothewildthing (talk) 23:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Please see our company info online www.harmlessharvest.com

I intend only to display our scientific research on wikipedia as we are on the breaking edge of the sustainable wild food and agricultural movement. I can't seem to find 5 minutes to edit this information in my user profile because it keeps getting flagged or deleted and I am honestly just trying to get the research and our references out there. I thought I could edit the page and submit it to wikipedia for approval within my user space. I am terribly confused and have been working on this for hours.

We have many legitimate affiliates and proven data to back up all the information I wish to post. If you can allow me to edit in my user space please let me know. I promise that we are honest people, enthusiastic about making positive changes in the way we eat and live as humans while learning to save our earth's vital ecosystems through diligent research. The information we have is unbiased and should be shared.

Not only do we have a scientific research but are about to launch a cultural initiative project with extremely well known performance and installation artists who are well affiliated worldwide.

Please advise on how to share our findings with your website? If I am to add research to a general search for the likes of CAMU CAMU or CUPUACU or Coconut Water for instance I need people to know I am a credible source and how can I do that if I am not given the time to even provide a 5 minute company history online?

Not done and will not be done The article was a blatant advert. You can try drafting a neutral version, but please read this and this first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tank Johnson Drummer

because it's me, and I need to know how why it was deleted, and how I can fix it. -Gsmythe (talk) 05:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

paul bradley

-85.210.44.12 (talk) 14:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elan (IIT Hyderabad)

Whatever was written in the article was true. I'm myself a student of IIT Hyderabad and a core member of the fest team. I request you to please undelete the page, or at least provide us with the text that was there in it. We will make sure that it adheres to WikiPedia standards. -Abrambk (talk) 18:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flight Training Europe

No reasoning given. -212.145.130.186 (talk) 22:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flight Training Europe

This article was deleted on the basis that the company was not noteworthy, the page lacked reliable third party sources and hadn't been updated recently. I don't believe that the first (and chief) of these reasons is valid. Flight Training Europe (now FTEJerez) is a major player in the Aviation Industry. The first pilots to complete the new MPL licence trained at FTE ([http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/03/03/221953/mpl-crews-prove-themselves-on-the-line.html citation]) and went on to work for Flybe (who has strong ties with the school). It also trains pilots directly for Qatar and Emirates as well as having graduates leave to start with most major European carriers (mostly Ryanair, Flybe and recently 4 graduates to BA CityFlyer), GAPAN Scholarship students are sent to FTEJerez to complete their ATPL. It owns and operates 29 aircraft and 2 simulators, including an advanced 737-800 simulator. The Company has appeared regularly in industry news: ([http://www.flighttrainingnews.co.uk/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28:fte-named-as-flybes-mpl-training-partner&catid=1:news&Itemid=2 link])([http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/07/02/215296/europes-air-transport-boom-is-great-news-for-pilots.html link]). The company also has a rich history as a BAE systems Flight Training School, which used to train BA Scholarship students at Prestwick. It was BAE that moved the operation to Jerez. Independent Sources for all of this are being sought by myself. I ask that the article is restored and allowed to be updated. If this is unacceptable, I ask that the article is restored to my userspace where I will edit and amend as necessary to get the article to an acceptable standard for Wikipedia. -212.145.130.186 (talk) 23:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The majority of your response tells me you haven't carefully looked at what this page is for and what can and cannot be undeleted through it (nor carefully read the response you received immediately above). Articles deleted at a deletion discussions on the merits, as this one was, are never undeleted through this process. Accordingly, even if you wrote the most compelling reasons imaginable for undeletion, it would not be acted upon. This page is only for undeletion of articles deleted uncontroversially. Please read the boldfaced message at the top of this page, expanded upon in explanatory text below that message. If you want to seek undeletion, the only places you can ask for it are at the talk page of the admin who deleted it, or at WP:DRV, as explained by JohnCD above.

However, you do ask at the end of your post for the content to be userfied so that you can work on it—that can be done through this page and I will gladly provide this content to you if you create an account. We do not userfy content to IP talk pages. Please see Wikipedia:Userfication#What cannot be userfied. Creating an account takes literally moments. Once you have done so, give a ping here and I or someone else will userfy the content. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of Western Sahara.png

needed for article, keeps being deleted because users remove this as the political entity's status is controversial. Any way we can protect it from being deleted a fifth time? -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:04, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not done I'm afraid this process here is only for uncontroversial stuff. As far as I see it is not even clear which or if any flag / coat of arms should be there. Then it has been deleted per Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_July_15#File:Coat_of_arms_of_Western_Sahara.png which you may want to evaluate, but which we we cannot simply overturn here anyways. Eventually, I'd start from raising once more the issue at the article itself.--Tikiwont (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing me to the deletion discussion, it wasn't even listed on the many deletes. Now I know where to start.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 17:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Berger (theologian)

needed for article, keeps being deleted because users remove this as the theologian entity's status is controversial. The article is relevant because author wrote more than five books and he was a professor in Rome at university. The article has references and enough text for a good article.Frank Marco (talk) 14:00, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • There appears to be an assertion of the subject's importance, so I'm inclined to undelete it. However I am a bit worried that the most notable thing he seems to have done is very recently accused 20-40% of the catholic clergy of being gay. the rest of the article seems to be a bit of a WP:COATRACK for that claim. Also, teaching at a university for 7 years then leaving is not at all uncommon and it isn't particularly distinguishing (unless religious tenure arrangements are very different from tenure at secular schools). can you provide any more reason why the subject might be notable apart from the claims he has made about the church? Protonk (talk) 06:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lectonar speeddeleted for two times a good, relevant biography of German catholic author and professor David Berger. Berger wrote several books . In 2010 he wrote in his new book, that 20 to 40 percentage of catholic clergy is homosexual. So this controversial biography should be kept.

Nope, neither evidence nor assertion of actual notability. Also: is User:Frank Marco the same person as User:Marco Frank? Both have created articles on this fellow. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:38, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

stella von musulin

MUSULIN, STELLA von · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Stella on Musulin

I am at a total loss as to why this article has been deleted. I have provided references, citations etc. What exactly is required? Here is a distinguished writer and historian being ignored by you. Take a look a the piece of personal puff and crap on Pablo Ganguli (who?) There is a vast piece of self-serving rubbish on this nobody who was deported from Morocco by the Moroccan authorities. the site should be renamed Wikicrap.Natsyw (talk) 23:09, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Dmitri1999

reasoning -http://www.dmitrimarkine.com (talk) 04:28, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dmitri1999

Was deleted for "advertising". This is my own little space and the only people who see this page is ME. There was no valid reason behind the deletion. I am extremely pissed right now to the point I am considering deleting all the contributions I've made. It's just bad how some can just come in to your own little page(not an article for god's sake) and just completely delete it!

  • I've restored the page and blanked it. Notwithstanding the fact that it is your talk page, you may not use any wikipedia page as a personal advertisement. Wikipedia is not the place to host your cv. I can see in the history that you have added that material several times. Please don't. I'm also going to remind you that when you made contributions to wikipedia you irrevocably released them to the GFDL--you can't come back later and unilaterally delete them. so please don't try that either. Protonk (talk) 05:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tipper tapper

This is the name of the drum stick used to beat the Irish drum called the Bodhran. It is also used as the common polite name for the human penis in Western Ireland -Joetherob (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done and will not be done Even if that was common, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:14, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wesley Ngo Baheng

Footballer whose page was deleted numerous times as he failed WP:ATHLETE; now passes it. He played in the FA Cup for Aldershot Town (see [3]). I Did ask Skomorokh, a previous deleter of the article, to undelete, but they cannot as they are not an admin! This is totally uncontroversial. Thanks. -—Half Price 17:06, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a draft (with sources) at User:Half price/Wesley Ngo Baheng. —Half Price 17:38, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, go ahead - he has got over the bar. JohnCD (talk) 22:27, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Restored. Protonk (talk) 07:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Najibahmed

The page was deleted because it was an Unsourced BLP; the only link provided came up 404) i have now fixed the problem can ypu pleasee restore it so i can update thank you-Northwood123 (talk) 19:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done and will not be done. You've just been warned by the deleting admin not to recreate this a fourth time. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indian web talk show - On the Jogging Trail w/

-Hindtoday (talk) 21:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC) [reply]

These are professionally produced talk shows by "HIND TODAY", a name duly approved by Government of India [ https://rni.nic.in/letter2.asp?tcode=ORIENG00957 HINDTODAY ]

Talk shows are copyrighted contents and will eventually make it to Television channels of India. In addition to this, we are also producing two more shows 1) State of the Nation w/host <host name> 2) State of the State w/host <host name>

where <host name> would be replaced with a popular talk show host or popular blogger.

Please note that - India doesn't allow FM or AM channels to air conservative talk shows like in USA. The television channels in India are dominated by news. There is no equivalent of Fox and MSNBC in India and hence 'HIND TODAY', a duly approved Government of India media is creating contents by providing training and eventually will share contents with interested Television channels of India.

Indian web talk show - On the Jogging Trail w/Dr. Manmohan Singh Indian web talk show - On the Jogging Trail w/Dr. Naveen Patnaik Indian web talk show - On the Jogging Trail w/<any political leader/public official> are extremely popular, educating and thought provoking shows and the hosts are extremely popular.

I request you to please restore this page reasoning

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who implemented the deletion request, user TomStar81 (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review.

Elizabeth McCarthy

biography was quoted from IMDB.COM -Lizflicks (talk) 19:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - that's the trouble, it was deleted as a copyright violation because it was copied from IMDb. You must write it in your own words, but check out WP:Notability (people) first, especially the sectionWP:ENTERTAINER. JohnCD (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Raja Liaqat Ali

The information I provided is 100 percent true but wikipedia is giving warnings for deletion.I want my article not to delete.Please find some way out for me for your policy is very complicated -Cj.Raja (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article hs not been deleted: it is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raja Liaqat Ali and that is where you should state your case. It is not enough to be true; subjects for Wikipedia articles must also be notable as explained at WP:Notability (people). JohnCD (talk) 20:32, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marianela Salazar Guillén

The article don't have the references so i add the references in the article before the november 29 day of delection -Evanex (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have doubts about two of the sources but one might be good, I'll drop the deleting admin a note.--Tikiwont (talk) 20:36, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done, after some research it seems that Ellas Virtual is a supplement of La Prensa, so should fit the bill.--Tikiwont (talk) 21:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hana movie poster.jpg

not my image, needed for article, I will fix tagging yada... cheers -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Courcelles 04:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thank you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reann Ballslee

misunderstanding/significant -129.174.97.34 (talk) 15:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I don't understand why this page has been deleted. The user comment for deletion states that they don't understand the significance of a cisgendered male being elected Homecoming queen of a university. It is very significant as Reann Ballslee is a drag queen and was elected by the entire student body to be homecoming queen. It made international news, and she is an important figure for the LGBTQ community in Northern Virginia, and the country (USA). She has won awards in this area from the drag and LGBTQ community. She's a public figure that should not be deleted by Wikipedia. Thank you for your time.

This page is NOT for challenging the outcome of deletion discussions such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reann Ballslee. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:41, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:bewbews.jpg

i would like you to un-delete file:bewbews.jpg please there is nothing wrong with it it is free from flickr full license! --RCSprinter123 (talk) 18:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC) (moved here from Wikipedia talk:Requests for undeletion/Current requests)[reply]

David Berger (theologian) again

Could you restore a copy of David Berger (theologian) to my user space?

Say, for example, to User:Kevinkor2/David Berger (theologian)?

The article disappeared so fast that I didn't have time to see if I could improve the sourcing and notability.

Thank you! -Kevinkor2 (talk) 09:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, but in view of the remarks above and in the deletion log, you had better check with Lectonar (talk) before moving this back to the main space. JohnCD (talk) 10:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Swift

Original reason "an announcer on a radio station with a <5% share of a market of 300,000. Roughly the equivalent of an accountant who wins an industry award." This station doesn't actually measure audience or share as they are a non-commercial station, and do not participate in audeience surveys. Therefore there are no statistics to backup this reason for deletion. This host could have 0% share or 100% share - no-one can ever know. -119.224.22.211 (talk) 10:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. The share argument is not really relevant here. The article needs better references though.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Waipoua Forest Trust

21:26, 5 December 2010 HJ Mitchell (talk -119.224.22.211 (talk) 10:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user L.tak (talk), who proposed it for deletion, in case they wishes to take it to Articles for deletion. The article's problem is that it is referenced only to the Trust's own website: to meet Wikipedia's criterion of notability it needs references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." JohnCD (talk) 10:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LORC

LORC is a business fund with the goal of making renewable offshore energy cheaper via research and cooperation between academia and businesses. We have no commercial goal. -LORC2 (talk) 11:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Wikipedia is not a listing directory, and the article gave no indication that the organization is notable enough to have an encyclopedia article. The notability requirement applies also to non-commercial organizations. In writing about your own organization, you have a conflict of interest - see the WP:FAQ/Organizations for advice. JohnCD (talk) 11:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Fox

I don't know if it's the same guy, if it is, his recent obit seems to be notable http://www.freep.com/article/20101206/NEWS08/101206063/1320/Concert-promoter-Bob-Fox-dies-at-62 -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Not the same - the deleted one was "the founder of Speed Stacks, The fast-paced sport where you stack up 12 specially designed plastic cups in 3 different ways." JohnCD (talk) 11:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, that sounds like more fun than vandalizing Wikipedia! I'm gonna run right out and... no, wait, look, a penguin! Where was I? :) --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:GreatPumpkin.jpg

Many of these images that are in use are being deleted when they could just as easily be properly tagged and saved -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Restored - just remember that it's got to get back in the article space with a FuR. Gracias. Skier Dude (talk 07:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As always, and thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Gowdie

I was planning to add much more detail to this article -Sozclarkey (talk) 17:10, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done There was no article; just a URL to a photo album on somebody's blog. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Ardin

Obviously, not a hoax. Reliable source: http://www.counterpunch.org/shamir09142010.html -Elvey (talk) 23:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BLP policy needs to be respected, however.

 Not done There is nothing to restore - just a redirect. Skier Dude (talk 07:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bigger_digger/Ebiquity

This article was originally deleted under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. The user who deleted it kindly moved it to their user space so I could edit it as they felt it could be turned into a good article. The main problem was that I used the companies website for a lot of the sourcing and not enough independent sources. I’ve rewritten this article after taking another look at the Wikipedia notes. It now has an extensive list of independent, well know and reliable sources. -Wwjx0p (talk) 11:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WIRIS

The article contains valid information for a software widely used in many European countries and references to the pages of the several ministries of education who are using it. It has been deleted by user Lectonar twice for being publicity, but he never replied to any of my two requests of reasons for deletion, and he blocked recreation now. -Wirismath (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=401265605"