Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Viibird (talk | contribs) at 11:18, 22 November 2013 (→‎Abraham modal haplotype). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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

Requests for undeletion is a process intended to assist users in restoring pages or files that were uncontroversially deleted via proposed deletion, under certain speedy deletion criteria (such as maintenance deletions or rejected Articles for creation drafts), or in "articles for deletion" debates with little or no participation other than the nominator. This page is also intended to serve as a central location to request that deleted content be userfied or emailed to you so the content can be improved upon prior to re-insertion into the mainspace, or used elsewhere (you may also make a request diirectly 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.

Instructions for special cases
float
float
float
float
Please enter the page's title to request its undeletion:

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

Dropcam

This is the start of a new article for a company that has received over $49 million in funding which is well documented. Looking at other early company pages, like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Asana_(software)&oldid=365417809 there is not major difference and no reason this article should have been deleted. It had references to third party articles verifying information mentioned in the article. -Randomdriver (talk) 19:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done CrunchBase does not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sources, and the only other source used was Dropcam's own webstore. Since there is nothing to indicate that this company is notable, Wikipedia does not need an article about it. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jamiululoom_ambur

reasoning -117.204.30.42 (talk) 06:38, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you leave a message here while logged in to your account, I will "userfy" the article for you - move it into a sub-page in your user space where you can work on it. If you do not have an account, it is easy and free to WP:REGISTER one. JohnCD (talk) 21:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Skulpturstopp

reasoning -WesselKK (talk) 12:20, 8 November 2013 (UTC) I disagree with my article being an unambiguous promotion of this project. My aim is to inform about the fact that this project exists in Eastern Norway: sculptures by internationally renowned artists at four locations in Eastern Norway. Four more sculptures at another four locations are under planning. The sculptures are given by Sparebankstiftelsen DNB to the municipalities. The sculptures are placed in the landscape and are accessible to all at no cost. There are no commercial interests in the project.[reply]

The project is in many ways similar to Artscape Nordland. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artscape_Nordland Should I rewrite my article in the format of the Wikipedia article of Artscape Nordland?

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:WesselKK/Skulpturstopp. You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact RHaworth (talk · contribs), the administrator who deleted the page, before moving it back to the article space. Please see the criteria for speedy deletion and the relevant notability guidelines - articles that are not in compliance will be deleted. Advice on your talk page later today, or maybe tomorrow. JohnCD (talk) 18:56, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Caressa Savage

reasoning -69.254.30.60 (talk) 17:15, 8 November 2013 (UTC) Nov. 8th. A more thorough and complete bio can be written and verified on this actress. 2 AVN Awards won.[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Epbr123 (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. JohnCD (talk) 10:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Leon (Lee) Ousby - Actor

Reasoning - 16:05, 7 November 2013 Yunshui (talk | contribs) deleted page User:Leon (Lee) Ousby - Actor (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)Leon (Lee) Ousby - Actor (talk) 22:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No speedy deletion, just.deleated, when I checked the editor,s users page that was self promoting. So I don' understand.

Hello sir, you do seem like a busy man. My user page User:Leon (Lee) Ousby was deleted on the grounds of self promotion. At the top of the page I ask editors if the can contact me before editing. I am actually possibly promoting a lot of notable people and universities more so.

I would like the page restored as I have a lot more to add, am waiting for more sources and references to come through. It's also fun. All that is there is true and no kick back would come back at WikipediaLeon (Lee) Ousby - Actor (talk) 22:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. This is quite unsuitable for Wikipedia. I am sorry that nobody has yet explained to you what Wikipedia is (a project to build an encyclopedia), and more importantly what it is not. Among many other things, it is not a social-networking site, or a webhost for blogs or for people to write about themselves.
Wikipedia user pages are not like those at social-networking sites. Their use is explained at WP:NOTWEBHOST:

"Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they should be used primarily to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. Limited biographical information is allowed, but user pages should not function as personal webpages or be repositories for large amounts of material that is irrelevant to collaborating on Wikipedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your résumé, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account."

You may find some ideas at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. If you like, I will be happy to email you the contents of the page for you to post somewhere else. JohnCD (talk) 10:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Hi John. Thanks for the feedback. I had no idea about the user page aspect. I assumed that I could write true events with reliables sources/bio etc.. I would be glad if you could email the contents of the page to post elsewhere, thank you for your time. I know you're all volunteers and you have a lot to do. Best wishesLeon (Lee) Ousby - Actor (talk) 12:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - text emailed. I apologise again that we do not explain ourselves better. Personally, I would like potential users to have to read before signing up half a screen of advice about what Wikipedia is and is not for; but the general view is that no obstruction should be put in a potential user's way. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Sharif Chattar

reasoning -Wikimaniabot (talk) 06:25, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article was victim of speedy deletion on grounds of google search which itself is not reliable source. There are countries which embraced internet very late and as a result they lack in promoting important personalities, events or places to wider world. This personality is considered a legend in Azad Kashmir and he took fight againt illiteracy and militancy in educational insituituitons when Malala Yousafzai was not even born. It will be injustice against Pakistan's fight against illitercay and fundamentalism if this personality is not remembered, who has hundereds of thousands of students accross the world. When mythical characters, dacoits or infamous thieves and robbers are given place on wikipedia pages then this article should also be given chance, whicch is about a real person who took the war against illiteracy single handedly. I therefore request for republishing the article so that more references could be produced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikimaniabot (talk • contribs) 06:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - this was not a speedy deletion but a proposed deletion, so the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Nsk92 (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. Better references are essential, both to satisfy the non-optional policy Wikipedia:Verifiability: "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source" and to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 11:06, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Two Saints Way

I, 86.19.155.70, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. 86.19.155.70 (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. This page has never been submitted for review. Please edit and update it and submit as soon as convenient: "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 11:53, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Rodolfo Augusto Fiorini

79.37.190.241 (talk) 12:01, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 18:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Checking this, there is no article of his listed in Gooogle Scholar with more than 8 citations. I think the chance of meeting the WP:PROF notability standard is extremely low. DGG ( talk ) 19:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everything Engine

I'm currently working on improving the Everything2 article. Several years ago, an article on the Everything Engine (which I recreated as a redict) was deleted on notability grounds. Although I haven't seen it yet, I think some of the content of this old page might be appropriate for the Everything2#Software subsection on the Everything2 article. Can someone go back to the deleted text and copy it to my userspace so I look through this and see what is appropriate? Thank you, thank you! -—mako๛ 13:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. The first version was actually deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everything Engine. I have emailed you a copy of the text, which doesn't seem likely to be helpful to you. In fact, I rather hope it isn't because if you do want to use any of it, we shall have to do some sort of undelete/history merge to provide attribution. Let me know. JohnCD (talk) 18:43, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Doctor

solid references and facts have come to light. A new trailer shows more information about the subject that needs yo be placed in the deleted article -Mcs2050wiki (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2013 (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, only today, after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dark Doctor, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Mark Arsten (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) 17:09, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teebone

Article was deleted due to G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion, I do not believe that the content of the article reflects this decision. -CheriBomb (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done I agree that this isn't advertising, but the article makes no demonstration of his significance, i.e. it doesn't demonstrate that he's important enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia, so if I restored it, it would immediately be eligible for speedy deletion for lack of significance. You need to include content explaining why Teebone is significant enough for a general worldwide encyclopedia, and you need to include citations to reliable sources: books from reliable publishers, academic journals, government websites, etc. Please note two other things: (1) I would be happy to restore it if you would agree to have it moved to your userspace. There you could work on it at your leisure, since the lack-of-significance thing doesn't apply in userspace. (2) If you come back here and explain why he's significant, that will be sufficient, since it's something that could simply be added to the article upon its restoration. Nyttend (talk) 21:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chatterbox (1977 film)

I, Shemp Howard, Jr., request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. The page was deleted because it hadn't been updated in six month and I was a day late getting the additional information I was requested to add (on the critical reaction to the movie). I went to add the information and it had already been deleted. I did NOT see a deadline. The movie was a big hit in the Golden Age of Porn and helps illustrate the ancient myth of "vagina loquens." Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 20:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Question: I don't understand why you want the AfC submission Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chatterbox (1977 film) undeleted? There is already an article about this film in the main encyclopedia at Chatterbox (1977 film). If you have new information, add it there. JohnCD (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not done Purely because you created the article a day later, and it's still there with precisely the same content. Nyttend (talk) 21:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry -- misunderstood. I thought it was deleted from there. Will add that information. Thanks!Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 21:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Emeritus Professor Norman Maclean.jpg

OTRS 2013100110006976 raised with an offer to release copyright for the 1 files listed. I would like to see the image page for additional verification before confirming. This does not preclude speedy deleting if verification fails or if unsuitable for other (non-copyright) reasons. -Fæ (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Fæ:  Done Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:50, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ninjamock

reasoning -Pastorgluk (talk) 20:52, 10 November 2013 (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. The text of this article shows it is a brand new startup and so it is highly unlikely there exist third party sources to sustain notability and could be used to create a verifiable article. Moreover, is appears the text may have been a copyright violation of the text at the company's facebook page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:59, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nasim Basiri

Dear sir/ Madame , I just wanted to inform you that this page does not have any connection with its contributor, the thing is that I made this username just because I am a fan of Nasim Basiri and her works , I hope you will take neccessary actions not to delete this article on one of the greatest Iranian writers and feminists. Thanks -Nasimbasiri (talk) 22:55, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page has not yet been deleted. The request for speedy deletion was already declined by an administrator. —C.Fred (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Milton

I, 211.27.148.110, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. 211.27.148.110 (talk) 04:12, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Byambarinchin Bayart-Od

I, Baigalkhuu, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Baigalkhuu (talk) 05:04, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysian Students' Council of Australia

If the source code of the page could be retrieved, corrections could be done in order for the same page that adheres to Wikipedia's rules to be restored in the future -Raj28sharan (talk) 11:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this page is a copyright violation of http://www.masca.org.au/index.php/10-gantry. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GFI MAX Backup

I would like to improve my article in future. -Veronika.iaso (talk) 13:40, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore "Ted" Herrick

reasoning -Hello Tyme (talk) 14:11, 11 November 2013 (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/Theodore "Ted" Herrick , it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Mark Arsten (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.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lord zaton

Please dont delete my page i merely wanted to create a page for a character i created it means a lot to me Please dont delete it i didnt mean to break the rules -Lord zaton (talk) 16:32, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ILW.com

I, Elena149, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Elena149 (talk) 17:14, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rosewill

basic information about company, crucial for customers -204.89.152.90 (talk) 23:39, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to assert any semblance of importance and does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about companies. Beyond that, Wikipedia is not here for the benefit of your customers or your company. Wikipedia is not the place to advertise your company and its services. Toddst1 (talk) 01:54, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MEETS (cable system)

Clearly the user that deleted this is being malicious or simply doesn't understand the subject matter. There are 100's of pages like this one that document the various undersea and terrestrial cables around the globe. In many cases it's only Wikipedia that documents these systems that make up the global Internet. Thanks in advance. Martin. -Mahtin (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the chop

The article described one of only two Satirical news sites in New Zealand, and has been covered in the Press which was referenced. It's significance is in the fact that it is only one of two such sites that exist. The only other satirical site has an entry in Wikipedia, it seems unfair that The Chop does not. -Jsmuso (talk) 23:55, 11 November 2013 (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 or websites. 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. Being one of only two things, doesn't mean that either thing is notable and WP:OSE doesn't matter. Toddst1 (talk) 01:49, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bay of Bengal Gateway (cable system)

The user Toddst1 is deleting many pages regarding undersea cable systems - this is not good and he should be reported! Please restore this page. This is not the first restore I have had to do today. So sad. -Mahtin (talk) 02:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It should be noted that I did not delete that page. [1] Toddst1 (talk) 04:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
actually User:Toddst1 did not delete the page but did ask for it to be deleted. User:Toddst1 should check for other online references before nominating for deletion however. I have restored the page. Any undersea cable system or proposed system is very likely to be notable, so User:Toddst1 should cease from nominating these for deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:45, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Surmang Foundation

reasoning -220.232.132.227 (talk) 08:33, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ReSharper

I need to study the content of the article -Dmimat (talk) 13:28, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done As someone with an obvious conflict of interest in the company, I can't imagine what you need to study. The AFD was unambiguous and the WP:SPA participation less than helpful. Toddst1 (talk) 22:04, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toddst1,

Do you mean that as someone who works in the company that makes the product, I have absolutely no right to write about in in Wikipedia?

From my point of view, there is no conflict of interests as I am an active user of the product, too. I believe that it is worth being mentioned in Wikipedia.

Editing this article was my first experience in Wikipedia, but in the deletion discussion that followed, I was labeled as WP:SPA and all my attempts to make the article as neutral as possible and all my arguments were rejected. I can see why, but the article in its latest edition was perfectly neutral and containd a lot of links to unbiased external sources.

I'll explain why I need to study it.

I'm going to initiate the Deletion review, but I have no copy of the article, and before sarting the process I would like to check the content of the article against all Wikipedia rules and see how it could be improved. Dmimat (talk) 11:28, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moving discussion to User talk:Dmimat. Toddst1 (talk) 11:48, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

stayfreeindia

This page is for woman awareness for the periods , how to care in those days .Stayfree is Johnson and Johnson product .Most of the ladies are using clothes in india in the periods which is unhygineic and can ceate problem in later age . To make woman aware about the product and different range and how to cure in these days this page is created -Getdpg (talk) 15:21, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ZS Associates

I would like to view archived content from 2009 and 2013 deleted ZS Associates Wikipedia pages. Please send these archived pages to the email address associated with my account. Thank you!- Sarp14 -99.43.123.185 (talk) 20:07, 23 October 2013 (UTC) -15:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)Sarp14 (talk)

Done Yunshui 雲‍水 12:48, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Caressa Savage page

reasoning -Jinxee6966 (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2013 (UTC) This may not be the right place for this- I'm new. Sorry if true. I have a complete bio on this actress. She should be included on this site. She was in the industry 10 yrs. Working as a G/G performer. I saw the 7 day cut-off and since I don't know how to do this was afraid I might not be able to learn how to do this and get it edited in time, what do I need to do?[reply]

@Jinxee6966: The page has already been restored as a result of a previous request. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 19:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Montgomery

Article deleted as an expired Prod in April 2010 due to failing WP:ATHLETE notability guidleines (she is a footballer who was not "fully professional" and did not play at international level). But she has continued to get coverage as the co-owner/founder and manager of Glasgow City F.C. eg. [2] [3] So I'm asking if the article can be put in my userspace for me to improve and try and get it to a point where it would survive an AfD. Thanks. -Clavdia chauchat (talk) 23:15, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bassketeers

Cause it Doesn't have any mistake with it -Ahmadhadi19 (talk) 04:00, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. 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 musicians or music groups 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. —C.Fred (talk) 04:03, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Magic School Bus title credit.jpg

It should replace the DVD cover used in The Magic School Bus (TV series). -George Ho (talk) 08:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jin ho Choy

Please wait for editing -Kofst1254 (talk) 08:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done as article is not deleted. Speedy delete was declined already However you will need to add some real independent references to help this article survive. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:23, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sayyid Mohammed Hydroose

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) 112.79.40.125 (talk) 11:28, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Question: please give the exact title of the page you are asking about. Spelling and capitalization are significant. We have never had Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sayyid Mohammed Hydroose or Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sayyid mohammed hydroose or any other variation I have tried. If you received a notice about the deletion, copy the title from that. JohnCD (talk) 12:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Geo-Mod

Page unjustly removed, still contains valid information on Geo-Mod! -82.171.32.160 (talk) 15:18, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user UseTheCommandLine (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. What the article needs is references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 18:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Berkeley Hall School

Berkeley Hall School is the oldest co-ed school in Los Angeles. The school was found in 1911 (102 years ago!) which makes it a notable school. Throughout these years Berkeley Hall School has been one of the top ranked schools in Los Angeles -Azakeri (talk) 16:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. This page was converted to a redirect as a result of the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Berkeley Hall School, and that decision will not be reversed here. 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 redirected, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Mark Arsten (talk). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oreocookielogo.jpg

It was moved to Commons without verifying its qualifications to meet threshold of originality. Now that it's nominated for deletion in commons, perhaps undelete the local copy and re-tag it as non-free? -George Ho (talk) 17:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tsoi/Kobus & Associates

24.60.117.158 (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 21:55, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brian D'Ambrosio

reasoning -OklahomaCityChamp (talk) 06:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC) Brian D'Ambrosio is a professor of journalism and the author of 10 books, including a best-selling biography. I'm not sure why he has been deleted in 2008.[reply]

  • Not done I suggest that you recreate this as there was no claim of importance in the deleted article. The text was telling us he was a freelance writer. The last version was written by Briand13, perhaps the subject, and was slightly promotional. So it would be a good idea for you to write this from scratch. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:32, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Iulian Erhan

This page should be brought back because the subject person is a footballer who meets WP:FOOTYN. He has played for fully professional leagues (Russian National Football League, Belarusian Premier League, source) and has a cap for his national football team (source). -BlameRuiner (talk) 07:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CDisplayEx

This software is still maintained and widely used -Hgourvest (talk) 09:05, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am the author of this software, and I would like to activate this WP page again. I want to edit this page to add fresh informations on it.

  • 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/CDisplayEx, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user JForget (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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Reinhart Butter

I, პ, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. პ (talk) 16:02, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 16:51, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Edouard Pliner

I, Justin.chien, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Justin.chien (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. What the article needs is references to reliable sources to confirm what it says - check out WP:Verifiability. JohnCD (talk) 22:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Transition_Design_Framework.png

Permissions were emailed to OTRS team at time of placing image in 'Transition design'. A declaration of consent form was sent by me, and I also forwarded email permissions from my two coauthors -Noegid (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - I have marked it "OTRS pending". The actual OTRS ticket number needs to be added when known. JohnCD (talk) 22:45, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

KSIOlajideBT

Please undelete this article. There is no existing page on this person so I just wanted to make one. I am new to wikipedia, so I don't really know how this all works, so if someone could help me make the article better I would be very grateful. 21:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)Struwlkie98 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Struwilkie98 (talk • contribs)

 Not done. The deletion log shows that pages about this person have now been deleted six times since April, and to prevent further waste of time the title has been "salted" - protected so that it cannot be created without permission from an administrator.
You could try making an article in a sandbox and submitting it for review, but I think you would be wasting your time. Wikipedia is quite choosy about article subjects. I have looked at the deleted articles, and there is nothing in them that gives any indication that he meets Wikipedia's notability standard which is not a matter of saying so but has to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Youtube is not a "reliable source" because anyone can post anything there, and just being on Youtube is very unlikely indeed to be enough for a Wikipedia article.
My advice is, learn about Wikipedia by reading WP:Your first article and Wikipedia:A Primer for newcomers, and then think of a better subject; alternatively, write about KSIOlajideBT somewhere like Myspace. JohnCD (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysian Students' Council of Australia

If the deleted material could be recovered, amendments could be made to it for it to fit the rules and regulations stipulated for a Wikipedia page. -Raj28sharan (talk) 00:26, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To do this, find independent, reliable, and substantial references. Rewrite what they said and refer to the references. Do not try to make a promotion. Then you can recreate the article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) If you wish, I will email you the text, but it will be of no help in writing a proper article, because it was nothing like an encyclopedia article. It was the organization "telling the world" about itself, about "The fundamental ideology of MASCA", about "Our Aim... the continuous effort of accomplishing the following visions:... " etc, plus immense detail about every single activity of every branch. That is not what a global encyclopedia is for (see Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause), it is material for the organization's own website. An article is best left until someone not connected with the organization thinks it interesting enough to write about, but if you want to try there is good advice in User:Uncle G/On notability#Writing about subjects close to you:

"When writing about subjects that are close to you, don't use your own personal knowledge of the subject, and don't cite yourself, your web site, or the subject's web site. Instead, use what is written about the subject by other people, independently, as your sources. Cite those sources in your very first edit. If you don't have such sources, don't write."

That is the same advice that Graeme Bartlett gives you above. Doing that will also help to provide the evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources necessary to establish WP:Notability. More advice in WP:Your first article. JohnCD (talk) 10:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

justin zurita

reasoning -Apocalypse714 (talk) 02:41, 15 November 2013 (UTC) I wish too keep "Justin zurita" because I would like to update my report about me if I join my high school soccer team hoping to become famous I would like to show them where it started[reply]

 Done Well this is the complete text that you wrote: "Justin Zurita who goes too Rancho Buena Vista High School. He is not only a great friend but loves too play soccer and is going to try out for the high school soccer team hoping he might make it a career." If you do become famous, and an article appears here, then ask again and I will restore this page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:30, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Grandmaster Jay

would like to just review the page from October 31,2013 and changes made on November 4, 2013 for research -Evonne wayne (talk) 04:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well most of the Nov 4 version was a copyright violation caused by copying http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Grandmaster%20Jay this was followed by MadmanBot alerting about the copyright problem, followed by 198.86.248.2 removing the reference to this url, followed by Gilo1969 requesting speedy delete for A7 and G12 reasons, followed by 198.86.248.2 stripping off about 75% of the urbandictionary text, and then demoting a heading to level 5 from level 2. The October 31 version actually is dated 17 Oct 2013. Since this was deleted as a fraud later, I suggest you contact User talk:RHaworth about whether any earlier version is fraudulent. On November 3 there was a huge edit battle which was deleted later that day. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:26, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

international institute for energy conservation

would you please explain why you deleted this for the reason -61.90.14.121 (talk) 10:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

William E. Peacock

Article was deleted as a copyvio. Per OTRS ticket number 2013091910003331, the source from which the article was copied is now free, and the copyvio on the article no longer exists. Requesting undeletion of the article. (If the article is not currently appropriate for Mainspace, I'd request it be undeleted to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William E. Peacock where the user can edit it to suitable Wikipedia standards) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC) -TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Regardless of copyvio, there was nothing in the article to show notability by our usual standards, Unless the contributor knows of references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases, they might be beteer advised not to proceed with it. DGG ( talk ) 20:47, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Strawberry energy

I, TijanaM, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. TijanaM (talk) 12:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. However, see note just below: there is nothing in this 15-word "article" that gives any clue why this should be in an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a business listing directory. To be accepted, an article would need to show references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strawberry energy

I have good references for the subject and think it is appropriate for the Wikipedia. The subject is about start-up company that made the first in the world public solar charger for mobile devices Strawberry Tree, which can represent one of the milestones in solar energy industry. The article was deleted because it was not edited for more than 6 months -TijanaM (talk) 12:12, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done WP:NEXTBIGTHING articles do not belong on Wikipedia - they must meet WP:NCORP first. It may be possible to restore the draft article listed above, but not the article. If that draft ever starts to include anything that is a) promotional, or b) sourced to a non-reliable source it may be immediately deleted without further notice ES&L 12:19, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_Township_Police_%28Ohio%29

'Appears to have been deleted for political reasons, if this is common place I will no longer donate to wikipedia' -71.67.250.41 (talk) 14:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • This was a one-paragraph unreferenced article, mentioning nothing the least newsworthy or significant. We do not routinely keep country police forces, and there was nothing to indicate importance for this one. If you have references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, there is no reason not to rewrite a proper article. (by substantial we mean non-routine coverage, more than the crime-blotter "There was a burglary at C, and officers A and B responded."
I see no reason to think there was any improper motivation by either the ed. who listed it for deletion, or the admin who deleted it. Anyone editor or admin who knew what we considered to be of encyclopedic significance would have done the same. And, one of the key strengths of WP is that we are funded almost entirely by a great number of very small contributions, so no one donor can possibly influence what we do here. DGG ( talk ) 20:44, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:SarajevoRose.jpg

Years ago this file was uploaded here for the article Sarajevo Rose, then transfered to commons by me, now it got deleted there because of FoP issuses. Please undelete it, because I don't think a red resin filling after a mortar shell's explosion creates a copy right. -32X (talk) 17:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:William Johnson Galloway Vanity Fair 11 January 1906.jpg

It was deleted since it was Orphaned but it was/is in fact linked to from commons:List of Vanity Fair caricatures/1906 and would today also be used in List of Vanity Fair (British magazine) caricatures (1905–09). -Lokal_Profil 17:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gene Wu

I, WallopinWill, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Gene Wu, elected Texas State Representative, significant enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia, just like Ann Kitchen, former state representative. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. WallopinWill (talk) 19:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.. Before resubmitting, add a reference to a reliable source to confirm that he has been elected. JohnCD (talk) 22:34, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jason_Olen_Bishop

Trinity3746 (talk) 21:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 18:05, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick McKeown

improvement -sobaka_kachalova 23:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC) The reason why the page was deleted in 2008 does not longer apply. G4 was a wrong reason for speedy deletion, because Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion: "This excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies". The page of 2008 was deleted because looks like it was written by the subject himself: even though he was well known in his field, he broke the rules, so the page was deleted. Page created by me in 2013 cannot be substantially identical to the version deleted in 2008 simply because it was written and referenced by another person (the subject has provided me with materials upon request, but I have never seen the 2008 version and did not know that it even existed before I saw that old deletion discussion). The subject of the article is notable enough which is proved by references. For example, it is not less notable, than a recently restored article Laura Montgomery. Also, (I think) the subject's popularity has increased since 2008, he wrote few more books and held a recent clinical research on the topic of his studies (Buteyko Breathing Technique). If the page requires further improvement due to its look-alikeness, I'll fix it. Please restore. sobaka_kachalova 00:49, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Eddie Alderson

I beleive that he should be restored since in the past 90 days, it has been viewed 3803, kind of high for someone that ″Has one major acting role″. For that matter, what does it matter, if you are going to delete lots of biographies of an actor that has only one major acting role you can start by deleting Kristen Alderson, Kim Matula, Camila Banus, Katherine Kelly Lang, Hunter Tylo and Doug Davidson etc. - — SoapFan12 (talk, contribs) 13:06, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. The article may yet be nominated at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. You can help it by adding references to show how he meets WP:NACTOR. The argument "if you delete this you have to delete those" is not accepted - see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. JohnCD (talk) 18:20, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Holden Snyder and Lily Walsh

Pairing is one of the most-recognized supercouples in soap opera history, given their 20+ years of being together. Page can still be improved upon, and if you're going to delete such a page without warning (I did not notice any warning), then there are other supercouple articles that could be deleted before. Also, the page has been visited 928 times in the past 90 days, which shows its importance for the couple. -livelikemusic my talk page! 15:13, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user George Ho (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. The argument "there are other articles you could delete before this" is not accepted - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. JohnCD (talk) 18:26, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I intend on working on this article over time to bring it to notability guidelines. livelikemusic my talk page! 18:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Zain Shah

reasoning -Syed Zain Shah (talk) 17:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dantestacy12-the story

it was fiction -Dantestacy12 (talk) 19:31, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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. The article was correctly deleted under criterion A11 for speedy deletion. Wikipedia is not a free webhost; you may not use it as a repository for your fiction writing. —C.Fred (talk) 19:48, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Icarly-logo-2.png

This image is inferior to SVG, but Masem says not to use non-free SVG images. Since we are unsure of whether Nickelodeon used SVG originally (or BMP), I think we should use PNG instead. -George Ho (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unfortunately, this is a standard policy for handling non-free SVGs. We only use them when they come directly from the copyright owner, otherwise we are recreating something at high or better resolution than the source material, and thus violating NFCC#3a. The raster image is acceptable in place of the SVG. --MASEM (t) 20:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advance Brain Computers

reasoning -Braindo (talk) 20:03, 16 November 2013 (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. JohnCD (talk) 22:20, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Big Buck Bunny the Video Game

is is just starting and I wish people to know about this soon to be famous game. -John Roper (talk) 21:23, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:NBC Universal.svg

The NBC is ineligible for copyright in the US. This file should have hi-res revisions archived; if so, they must be undeleted. -George Ho (talk) 05:28, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

funny face drink mix

this was a national brand (from Pillsbury) of soft drink and was a competitor to Kool-Aid for almost 30 years. Extensive TV and print advertising and merchandise. This is interesting information to be available to readers and followers of pop culture. -69.3.118.227 (talk) 08:33, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done As the entire "article" was unsourced, and consisted of nothing but a single short paragraph plus a listing of flavours, there's really nothing worthy of undeleting. This may be a topic worthy of inclusion - but the version we had certainly was not worth it ES&L 10:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Appy Pie

The Article Appy Pie was deleted as its source list was considered as press releases, trivial mentions, deadlinks and blog posts, However this was not correct as the source list were from highly reputable news sources where journalists have featured mentions about the Company, As suggested by Mark Arsten (talk) I created a well sourced draft in my userspace and here is the link for your kind review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cxs107/sandbox/Appy_Pie and after reviewing the same Mark Arsten (talk) asked me to request for undeletion at deletion review for my Article Appy Pie -Cxs107 (talk) 22:25, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - sorry, this is not Deletion Review, you need to go to WP:Deletion review and follow the instructions there. JohnCD (talk) 06:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Magic Mirror Sync

reasoning -Mvkozyrev (talk) 22:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done Your own words on the AFD: "Note that a specific product or service may be notable on its own, without the company providing it being notable in its own right". The product itself wasn't notable on its own either - it exists, it does something ... doesn't make it encyclopedia-ready. As such, the "article" was promotional in nature ES&L 10:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flight Focus

company still extant and operating. Believe that company insiders deleted the page to lower profile -PeterAndrewL (talk) 09:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: It will be fairly simple to undelete, as it was a WP:PROD, however, I see no evidence that the company meets our notability requirements to be included on Wikipedia. As well, you'll be wise to remember WP:AGF - that's vital around here. Nobody related to the company deleted the page - it simply didn't show any signs of being notable. ES&L 10:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sinclair Hood

Article was not accepted due to insufficient content. Subsequently deleted due to inaction. I would like it to be retrieved as I still intend to add further information and resubmit it. -Advb (talk) 10:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Penney Retirement Community

I, Kathyberger, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Kathyberger (talk) 14:14, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 17:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chapter 6 Mastery Product

I'm a student in High School and after I read chapters from my AP Government and Politics book I have to share what I learned with the world, and I felt that making a page on Wikipedia would be the best way to share my knowledge with the world. -Jjdhr4 (talk) 14:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/James Franklin Lewis (1903-1945)

I, Hjohnso2, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. This person is worthy of a Wikipedia entry; I have just not yet been able to address the questions posed by the editors to make my case. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Hjohnso2 (talk) 15:25, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 17:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

reasoning -216.57.96.1 (talk) 22:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Process_Hacker

Project has been around five years, referenced by SANS Institute IT security courses, PCWorld reviews, Gizmodo reviews, CNET reviews, Softpedia reviews, pcauthority reviews, Neowin reviews etc etc... You can find quite an extensive history over these five years via google, the page should not have been deleted and should be restored to allow cataloging this information about the project. -106.69.18.143 (talk) 00:35, 19 November 2013 (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/Process Hacker, 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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kriss "Kajun" Johnson

reasoning -24.1.15.166 (talk) 08:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Look in the history to see earlier editing. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to be alive

I need time to develop my article page.please undelete. -Vikas.manchikatla (talk) 10:20, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Helmholtz Alliance for Astroparticle Physics

I, Astrohap, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Astrohap (talk) 12:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 12:18, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pure DOPE Magazine

I, Arialyssa, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Arialyssa (talk) 17:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. This page has never been submitted for review: please update and submit it as soon as convenient. "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Read WP:Your first article for advice, and note that references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources are required in order to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Southern Manor Country Club

I, 99.11.21.38, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. researching sources. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. 99.11.21.38 (talk) 02:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 12:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lia Tarachansky

Morgan Spurlock is also a documentary maker whose work (and conclusions) are detailed in his entry; thus, describing a documentary maker's work is not promoting a political belief, it is describing the work of a public figure. Seen in this light, the removal of Ms. Tarachansky's page is tantamount to politicized censorship. She is a Canadian documentary filmmaker whose work interests me and I would very much like to read more. -99.247.185.195 (talk) 06:47, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Although this was a PROD nomination, the deleting administrator, user DGG (talk), considered that it also qualified for speedy deletion criterion WP:CSD#G11 unambiguous advertising or promotion. Nearly all the references were clips of her work from the network she writes for, and the article seemed something of a WP:COATRACK. To establish WP:Notability in Wikipedia's sense would require references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources about Ms Tarachansky, not just about the issues she writes on. I suggest you discuss this with DGG; he might be willing to restore the article for a discussion at WP:Articles for deletion, failing which you may appeal at WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find just one article about her from any source but her own network, The Real News, I will restore the article. Of the 11 sources, not just that most of the sources are not independent--of the 11 sources, 8 are her own dispatches, 1 is an interview of her by her own network, and the other 2 general news stories about Israel that do not mention her, but relate to the events she reported on. DGG ( talk ) 18:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Elshad Nassirov

important person -Arongoldberg (talk) 06:51, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. This page was a copyright violation - a close copy of http://www.frankfurtgasforum.com. You must write in your own words - please read WP:Copy-paste and WP:Close paraphrasing. Also, it is not enough simply to state that a person is important: an article would need to show references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish WP:Notability. See also WP:Notability (people) and WP:Your first article. JohnCD (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Retro Television Network.png

This image is out-of-copyright, so hi-res deleted revisions should exist. -George Ho (talk) 08:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mitt Romney Paul Ryan logo.svg

This image is out-of-copyright, so revisions must be recovered. -George Ho (talk) 08:52, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles W. Price

I, Joselwyn, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Joselwyn (talk) 13:39, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Restored, though to show notability you will need to find some articles talking about him that are more than routine mentions, or at least reviews of his books. DGG ( talk ) 19:16, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Ray

Content should not have been deleted but added but merged to the relevant parent page, Super Powers Collection -181.50.27.166 (talk) 16:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Makara (The Dragon in Sri Lanka)

I, 61.245.163.32, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. 61.245.163.32 (talk) 16:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Warwick Economics Summit

The authors of this page acknowledge that the previous manifestation of this article was written in a heavily promotional way. I submit that the page should be undeleted so that the content can be rewritten in a way that can better be used for the benefit of Wikipedia's users. Furthermore, since last year the event has received more publicity and the statement of non-event is no longer valid. -82.30.158.147 (talk) 17:33, 20 November 2013 (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/Warwick Economics Summit, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Splash (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. My suggestion is to create a draft nextt with good independent substantial sources. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Timo Pielmeier

to restore edit history of previously deleted article -Dolovis (talk) 19:20, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AutoTURN

reasoning -Cjohnstransoft (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to Grahame Barlett,

You recently deleted a page/article called AutoTURN. We would like to request it's reinstatement, as we were in the process of adding content to enable the page to meet Wikipedia's guidelines. As I understand, we were deleted for being too promotional. We would like to point out that a competitor in our marketplace (Autodesk) has a very elaborate Wikipedia page which has numerous promotional items on the page. We are a small software company, so we don't have the huge writing staff that Autodesk has, but we do have a legitimate story to share on Wikipedia. We will write diligently to create a fact-based page that tells our story in an objective way.

A simple Google Search for AutoTURN generates multiple links for the product. There are over 30,000 users of AutoTURN in 120 countries, so we do have a following.

We respectfully request that our page be restored OR at least that we have access to the content that was stored there.

Thank you.

Chris Johns

Catherine Gross

This was deleted as the email address associated was not correct and so we didn't have an opportunity to update it. Catherine Gross has created original seminars that were the first of their kind for the BDSM leather communities. Some of her achievements are unique and historically important within the context of leather culture.Notnilla (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)notnilla -Notnilla (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tenold Peterson: Artist

I, 99.197.151.31, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. 99.197.151.31 (talk) 06:36, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tenold Peterson: Artist

reasoning -99.197.151.31 (talk) 06:37, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:CBS Television Studios.jpg

This image is copyright-ineligible. Undelete revisions? -George Ho (talk) 07:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mina Ghabel Lunde

I want to know how to improve my article so that it can be published -Lilleballerina (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Short answer: this is the English-language Wikipedia, and contributions should be in English; more importantly, in any language, Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves. More advice on your talk page soon. JohnCD (talk) 14:07, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen Peters

Appears to be notable -Candleabracadabra (talk) 15:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would an admin kindly restore the pages history (it was deleted back in 2007). Thank you. Candleabracadabra (talk) 15:19, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. Nothing worth restoring - 2007 version was not about the same person. It read "She is very rad and nice. She is married to <name>". JohnCD (talk) 15:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rousseau Metal

As discussed with Mark Arsten I updated the page with new links and references. Thank you. -Isabellelf (talk) 16:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - since this page was deleted after a deletion discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Rousseau Metal, it will not be restored here. You should first contact user Mark Arsten (talk), the closing administrator, with a link to your new draft at User:Isabellelf/Rousseau Metal. If he agrees that you have overcome the reasons for deletion at the AfD, he can give you permission to post it. If he does not agree, you can appeal at WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mr HADI AZIZI

learing to change my page -Azizifamily44 (talk) 16:18, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment:: the page Hadi Azizi (businessman) has not been deleted, but if it is to be kept it needs references (a) to meet the WP:Verifiability policy: "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source" and (b) to establish WP:Notability, which requires references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.
If you are, or are related to, Mr Azizi, please read these pages:
JohnCD (talk) 18:59, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Foster (rugby league)

reasoning -Emma Baughurst (talk) 17:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC) hello, the page was created as a template was being made about the profile of the player who is the only member of the 2014 squad not to have a profile, was being copied and pasted from a word document which I previously scripted, I saved it to save progress and come back to edit it and the page has been deleted thankyou please may you restore the page so all the correct and proper information can be added to the wiki[reply]

thanks

checkY Userfied. The article said only "Alex Foster is a British rugby league player", and had been like that for over an hour. If you want to take time over developing an article, the best way is to make a draft page in your user space by clicking Help:Userspace draft and filling in the title. That makes a draft page which you can work on until it is ready to publish.
I have "userfied" this for you to User:Emma Baughurst/Alex Foster (rugby league) where you can work on it. Advice on your talk page soon. JohnCD (talk) 19:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Golfscript

I, Destynova, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Destynova (talk) 19:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I created this article stub in good faith and it was rejected for lack of notability. This is a rather subjective guideline in general, and since there was nothing wrong with the article itself, it seems needlessly wasteful (and discouraging) to delete it. It's not like the article takes up a significant amount of storage. Destynova (talk) 19:08, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
The submission was not "rejected" in April 2012 - only declined as not yet suitable for the encyclopedia, with an invitation to do more work on it. It was only deleted after it had been left untouched for more than 18 months, so that it appeared that you had abandoned it.
WP:Notability is not a subjective criterion: it asks for evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", see also WP:Notability (summary). Rather than the subjective "do we think this important or significant?", it asks the more objective question: "Is there evidence that people not connected with this think it important or significant?" JohnCD (talk) 20:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Pearson Artist

reasoning -Lib56 (talk) 01:07, 22 November 2013 (UTC) Hi there,[reply]

I thought my article was in a draft form and had not infact, been uploaded as finished. May I please access the original piece, so that I may attach the appropriate references and links.

Kind regards,

Elizabeth Fairleigh

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Lib56/Justin Pearson (artist). You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact Jimfbleak (talk · contribs), the administrator who deleted the page, before moving it back to the article space.
Read WP:Your first article, WP:Notability and WP:ARTIST, and note that you will need to show references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Also, take care not to write promotionally - the present draft reads like a gallery's puff-piece, full of "peacock terms", rather than an encyclopedia article, which requires a neutral point of view. JohnCD (talk) 10:09, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ron Linden

I, Marilyn Nix, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Thanks. Marilyn Nix (talk) 03:48, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. This page has never been submitted for review: please update and submit it as soon as convenient. "Articles for creation" is not for indefinite hosting of draft articles. Read WP:Your first article for advice, and note that references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources are required in order to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 10:02, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham modal haplotype

I would like to request undelete since the sources were reliable being used as reference for the second artcile by Rozhadinii which makes it secondary source not primary source since the second study by Rozhadinii endorse it and speaks about the same sunject of klyosov. study. both studies are master studies according to ISOGG website and others which make the whole study (researcher, study, and journal) reliable. both articles are published in Proceedings of the russian academy of dna genealogy, which has issn and oclc but I forgot to put them thinking doi number suffice. also many articles studies referenced both articles klyosov 2009, and rozhadinii as immediately shown with googling where the study show cited by number articles. I also had a list of articles that referenced and cited the klyosov studies and also mentioned the abraham mh in their studies. Viibird (talk) 11:17, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

==

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Viibird (talk) 11:05, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=582802802"