Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

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

Shortcuts

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

This page is only for requesting undeletion of articles or files which have already been deleted. If the article you are concerned about is still visible, but has a warning message (template) at the top, please do not post here, but follow the instructions 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 discuss but are unable to resolve the issue on their talk page, it should be raised at Wikipedia:Deletion review, rather than here.

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

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180
181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200
201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210
211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220
221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230
231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240
241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250
251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260
261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270
271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280
281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290
291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300
301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310
311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320
321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330
331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340
341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350
351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360
361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370
371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380
381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390
391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Series by Sashkina

Since these are all on commons, we cannot help you hewe as this is the English Wikipedia. For OTRS permission we would await the OTRS volunteer to confirm the permission and ask for the restore. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a note at Commons:COM:ON. Nyttend (talk) 19:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Da-Wen Sun

Da-Wen Sun · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

It is not self-promoting as contents are from reliable sources with detailed references provided -2001:250:3000:4B13:2CCD:C7FC:CC09:A0B9 (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Language like "research conducted by Sun and his research team is an important component in Food Process Engineering. The research has attracted the attention of quality publications including the prestigious New Scientist" made this such an odious exercise in promotion that it was deleted out of hand. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As this can be fixed easily, I do not understand it must be deleted. By the way, this entry has been edited by many experienced Wiki Editors over the years2001:250:3000:4B13:21B7:C716:D328:74A4 (talk) 06:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Not done The article was deleted according to WP:CSD#G11. That is outside the remit of this page. Challenges to speedy deletions like that belong at WP:DRV. Be advised that Orangemike's quote from the article indicates that the speedy delete seems proper, and I do not fancy the chances of a DRV nomination for this article succeeding.. Sjakkalle (Check!) 21:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disability - vehicle adaptations

PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -Dbridge276 (talk) 09:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi admins, I am new to Wikipedia editing & contributions so please excuse me if this is in wrong area.

Today I added a sub topic onto the disability pages titled "vehicle adaptations".

I contributed this as a father of a severely disabled son who drives a heavily adapted vehicle.

Maybe I put tidiness the wrong area and maybe it should be a new subject article units own right with a link on the disability page, I am not sure and would like some guidance from you guys.

Other edits on the page have remained e.g. Updating the EFD name and inclusion of a paragraph in disability hate crimes.

So I am looking for guidance on why the Veh adaptations part was cut so i can make the correct contribution to help those who need to know about adaptations.

Regards & happy we yer David

Hi, there was no actual "deletion" here, only a "revert". I have added some more guidance on your talkpage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 19:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done because of what Sjakkalle says. Adding this template to ensure that this section be archived — will the bot archive a section with no template? Nyttend (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Tembra Neal

PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -166.137.209.24 (talk) 02:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis tembra neal. i was trying to edit capitolization in the title...this is my autobiography...not a hoax...I just wanted to fix the title.

No such article. See also WP:AUTOBIO. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bravo TV.svg

File:Bravo TV.svg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This image is too simple, even with talk bubble shape, so it is ineligible for copyright. -George Ho (talk) 05:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question: file has not been deleted - what action are you requesting? JohnCD (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of prior versions; they may have higher resolution than current one. --George Ho (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — ξ ^xplicit 01:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

lower level design

Lower level design · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

reasoning -203.99.193.60 (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done This page has not yet been deleted. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jarnail Singh (journalist)

Jarnail Singh (journalist) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

reasoning -194.138.248.79 (talk) 11:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Deletion REview team, The action taken by the Journalist is well recon in among the journalist comunity and sikh community. The act associates to a hisrtorical event in 1984 about sikh massacare. The journilst is doing great work to fight against the attack on comunities on the name of culture/ethinicity/sect/religion and appriciated world around. i wou;ld like to see the page on the Journalist.

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jarnail Singh (journalist), 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 Phantomsteve (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) 16:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gracious!

This page should never have been removed, as Gracious! were an important 70s prog rock band who were an influence on many other acts. The page was used by many researchers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.133.37.146 (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the ends not near its here

PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -98.249.139.78 (talk) 04:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed Request - please use {{subst:refund|pageName|reasoning}} (replacing pagename with the name of the page you wish to have restored and reasoning with the reason for your request). Note that the page The End's Not Near, It's Here has not been deleted. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mobileye

Mobileye · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -109.64.232.56 (talk) 11:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to wIki and have never edited a page prior to this one. I work for mobileye and wanted to update the page as some of the info on it was old and wrong. when I was on teh page editor there was a notice message on the top which said that the page was lacking links to confirm the info, at least that's what I understood, and so I added links to the company youtube videos, I figured it was allowed as the page is about the company Mobileye. I then received a message stating that my page was going to be deleted as I infringed on WIKI laws and I proceeded to contact the administrator on his talk page, I tried my best to explain that it was an innocent ,mistake and I was not trying to do SEO of any sort. I just didn't want wrong information showing, taht was my main goal, the links I only added as a misunderstanding. I can see how it looks but that's the truth. I would very much appreciate it if the page was restored and I of-course wont add links like taht again.

Thank you.

Daniel

Not done Although this is a WP:PROD, there's more than one issue at play here, and I will not be undeleting this "article". First, due to conflict of interest, you should not be creating this article. Second, the article was wholly promotional - Wikipedia is not a business directory, it's an encyclopedia. Third, the business itself does not appear to be sufficiently notable for inclusion (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dragan Milović

PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -Dragan888 (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Becouse it is a real article. And don't delete it becouse I want to improve the article about Dragan Milović. Let me improve it before you delete it. I know now how to improve and use refrences in wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragan888 (talk • contribs)

If you want to write an article about Dragan Milović, and you are not yourself Dragan Milović, then create it in a sandbox with a name like User:Dragan888/Dragan Milović. And in the meantime, don't vandalize other users' userpages. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the page Dragan Milović has been salted — in other words, only administrators can create it. If you write an article in a sandbox, like Orange Mike suggested, you'll have to ask administrators to un-salt the page. Nyttend (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mobileye part 2

Mobileye · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -109.64.232.56 (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Not sure if this is how I am supposed to reply to your answer? I understand your point, however:

1. this page was created a long time ago,not by me. I only tried to edit it, I don't understand how a page can be deleted based on one editors mistakes, when I am not even the creator of the article? if I had edited the page of a different company would you delete those as well? I mean no offence I really am trying to understand how it works. 2. the page was not meant as promotional, it was mostly facts about the company, just like many other pages I have seen, such as "Nike". I do agree that by adding links to our YouTube videos that may bee seen as promotional, but it was unintentional and done by me, not the original creator. 3. as far as the companies notability, it was founded in 1999 and is very well known in its industry. it may not be as popular as other companies but it is very well known in the collision avoidance industry. If you wish to revoke my personal editing rights , this I could understand , but ?I feel it is unjust to remove the whole page just because I didn't know what I was doing.

I would greatly appreciate it if you would take this to heart and return the article as you see fit. I will not edit it again.

Thank you

Not done and will not be done Nobody said the article does not belong on Wikipedia simply because you edited it - it simply does not meet the criteria for notability. Suggesting that your company is even remotely as notable as Nike is rather disingenuous. If you disagree, you may take this to deletion review, but you will want to read WP:DELETE and other related policies first - the WP:COI one will be extremely important (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply

I never said it was as notable as "Nike" , I said it was as notible in its own industry. if you go to Wiki search and write "mobileye", you will see for yourself many pages with our company mentioned on them, its a huge company... If I ahve to go through the other process I will, but I hope you will look and realize that Mobileye belongs on Wiki. Im not asking for much, just search for Mobileye in Wiki and if you still think the same, I will go try the other way you mentioned

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.64.232.56 (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Pearson (basketball)

PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -92.41.174.215 (talk) 12:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. 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 people 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. Without further justification as to how this individual meets the notability requirements for athletes, this almost 2 year old PROD cannot be restored (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Abney Park (album)

Abney Park (album) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning - I was looking at the Abney Park page and noticed that their first (self-titled) ablum was redmarked and, thinking it had somehow been missed being set up, decided I'd give it a try. Imagine my surprise to fin that it had not be missed but had been deleted. At first I thought there'd been a problem with the page move that had been done from the original page "Abney Park (Abney Park album)' since the page noted it was deleted as a redirect to an empty page, but instead someone did a PROD with no explanation as to why. If there are issues with this page, please put it back and enumerate them so they can be fixed. Thank you Blackfyr (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done as a contested proposed deletion. But the article is very stub-by. Sjakkalle (Check!) 18:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Charles Honig

Barry Charles Honig · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd | afd2 ) · [revisions]

The article's first AfD discussion resulted in a keep result with several participants in the discussion. The article's second AfD discussion resulted in delete after a nomination with only one !vote and two relistings. I'd like to examine this article. Requesting userfication as a subpage to my user page. -Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Northamerica1000/Barry Charles Honig. --Tikiwont (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the userfication. Northamerica1000^(talk) 10:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Woolrich

Woolrich · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Improper Speedy Deletion of a stub by User:Arthur Rubin, who cited "notability" which is specifically excluded from Speedy Deletion criteria. At the request of User:Arthur Rubin, I am asking for this speedy delete to be reverted by another admin who is neither me nor Mr. Rubin. -Davodd (talk) 10:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done The initial referencing to gift blogs was poor but the interwikilinks and the later added facts and sources clearly indicate sufficient importance in my eyes. Nevertheless this board here is for uncontroversial stuff and while we on occasion simply revert deletions, it is not really the place for disputed decisions (DRV is) and definitely not for situations where one administrator already improperly restored an article where they are involved as creator and another then improperly reinstated the initial deletion that he already tagged (ANI and ARBCOM are). --Tikiwont (talk) 23:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Palmerston Shopping Centre

Palmerston Shopping Centre · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I want to edit the page to make it fit the rules -Tomdingdong (talk) 05:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. please add references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Da-Wen Sun

Da-Wen Sun · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

As Orangemike's advice, I have carefully removed promotion quotes. Thanks for considering -Mayonglan (talk) 13:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC) Mayonglan (talk) 13:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]