Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 397: Line 397:
:@[[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] Can I please know the procedure I should follow [[User:Davidwarner|Davidwarner]] ([[User talk:Davidwarner|talk]]) 12:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
:@[[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] Can I please know the procedure I should follow [[User:Davidwarner|Davidwarner]] ([[User talk:Davidwarner|talk]]) 12:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
::I'm not Graeme, but since you've been unable to convince the (re)deleting administrator, your recourse is to list it on [[WP:Deletion review]]. G4 deletions aren't undeleted here; this page is only for completely uncontroversial restorations, and isn't set up to deal with cases where there's disagreement about whether an administrator acted correctly in deleting the page. —[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] 20:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
::I'm not Graeme, but since you've been unable to convince the (re)deleting administrator, your recourse is to list it on [[WP:Deletion review]]. G4 deletions aren't undeleted here; this page is only for completely uncontroversial restorations, and isn't set up to deal with cases where there's disagreement about whether an administrator acted correctly in deleting the page. —[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] 20:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' from the deleting administrator. Although the articles are not identical, I believe that the reason for the original deletion still applies. In fact, the original deleted article is in some ways better than the new one, although there are more references in the latter. These claim nothing more substantial than that the subject "will make his Bollywood debut soon" and that he has released three singles. The fact that the article creator cannot recognise when he is using promotional wording will, however, hinder him in attempting to create a fresh draft. [[User:Deb|Deb]] ([[User talk:Deb|talk]]) 21:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


=="Draft:XSEDE"==
=="Draft:XSEDE"==

Revision as of 21:55, 21 April 2019

    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
    "WP:RFU" redirects here. For requests for unblock, see Category:Requests for unblock. For requests for unprotection, see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection § Current requests for reduction in protection level.

    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 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, restored as a draft 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. Copyright violations and attack pages will not be provided at all.

    This page is only for requesting undeletion of pages and files which have already been deleted. If the page 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 in the template or on your talk page. Please do not request that pages deleted under speedy deletion criteria A7, G4, G5, G11 or G12 be undeleted here.

    Note that requests for undeletion are 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


    Triangle Factory

    I, VindevogelTaho, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. VindevogelTaho (talk) 08:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done – I won't restore a version that was deleted per WP:CSD#G11. But meanwhile, the requester has restored the draft already, perhaps from a personal copy that they had stored offline. The new one is somewhat less spammy. The revised article still might not survive WP:AFD, so I recommend you finish taking it through the WP:AFC process. EdJohnston (talk) 03:03, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Operating Systems Design and Implementation

    Article is a sister article to SOSP, and most certainly does not qualify for speedy deletion; http://web.archive.org/web/20120717150516/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USENIX_Symposium_on_Operating_Systems_Design_and_Implementation indicates it already has had all the notability references, and there are many other articles on wikipedia that use OSDI publications as references, e.g., Special:Search/Google OSDI alone returns 11 results, none of which is a false-positive (due to a random related term that limits the search greatly). —MureninC (talk) 01:10, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, wouldn't hurt to undelete USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation and Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, as per [1], as well, for completeness sake, and in case talk has something useful. MureninC (talk) 01:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Only the first was an article when deleted, the others were redirects. You can ask user talk:RHaworth to revert the speedy delete, as this administrator who deleted the page is still active. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you saying you don't suggest that the history on the redirects is restored as well? I'd prefer to have it all properly restored with original data and dates instead of being re-created anew. Is there a policy for this either way? As for contacting the administrator who erroneously speed-deleted the page, this has already been done at least once a couple years ago, and instead of fixing their mistake, they decided to make fun of the requester; see Special:Permalink/781071611#OSDI page recreation. MureninC (talk) 23:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    If I restored the article then I would restore known redirects. In this case the request looked like three articles, but was one and two redirects, that's why I commented. But I did not restore the page, so I would not then restore redirects to nowhere. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
     Done – in part. I restored the A7-deleted article at Draft:Operating Systems Design and Implementation. Will notify the original deleting administrator, User:RHaworth. Please note that the article is unlikely to survive an WP:AFD nomination in its present form. (No adequate article has yet been written). I recommend you improve the references, fix all the broken links, and then try the WP:AFC process. If the article does get accepted there and goes back to main space, it's reasonable to restore the redirects at that time. EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    User:EdJohnston, I don't think it is fair for you to be moving this to the Draft space now, whereas all the other similar conferences have wikipedia pages that are just as thin. I've fixed the reference links by copying the latest updates from its sister SOSP, plus did a few further corrections, quotes, and improvements to format, but, as per WP:REQUIRED, I do not intend to make any further edits whilst in Draft, or take any further action on this article. It is disappointing that nomination and deletion of articles is so random without the most basic fact-checking on the content being done WP:BEFORE. Please restore the rest of the redirects and move the page back out of Draft. BTW, because this conf doesn't have its own article, it keeps being unfairly removed from List of computer science conferences § Operating systems, for example, even though based on the references, it's second only to SOSP, yet several less significant conferences are listed there instead. MureninC (talk) 05:11, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @MureninC: The idea is that you improve it while it is in draft especially with independent references. Then when it looks like it is AFD-proof it can be move to article space. If it stayed as an article it would soon be deleted——unless it gets improved. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:16, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Graeme Bartlett: The article already had independent references at the time of speedy deletion; it was deleted in error. How many independent references are required? MureninC (talk) 05:49, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The independent references need to have substantial content and also be reliable. What I see there is things that just have a one line entry, not substantial. One supplied references does not even mention the conference. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:09, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Graeme Bartlett: Are you saying they're not reliable? Which exact reference doesn't mention the conference? Don't make me WP:GUESS! And can you kindly give me an example, from List of computer science conferences, as well as the percentage of other conferences that satisfies your criteria? For example, do you want to nominate SOSP for deletion as well, or move it to Draft for folks to improve? Many other ones don't have any references at all; huge number from the list doesn't even have a Reference section. Your application of requirements is not being consistent or reasonable; and your claim that one of the references doesn't mention the conference shows that you didn't even bother to do anything more than an exact search for the title. MureninC (talk) 16:41, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Try looking for references that have substantial content on the topic, say more than one paragraph. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Marlon du Toit

    Requesting undelete, as I intend to work on the article further. --Gpkp (u • t • c) 18:09, 13 April 2019 (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/Marlon du Toit, 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) 22:16, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I did have a talk (link) with AfD discussion-closing admin Sandstein, who don't userfy pages and consider it as no view one way or the other. Is the article eligible for undelete? --Gpkp (u • t • c) 17:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:List of the prehistoric life of Italy

    I, Abyssal, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Abyssal (talk) 12:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Mansha Bahl

    I, Abhi1012, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Abhi1012 (talk) 15:04, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:30, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Conglomerate (set theory)

    I object PROD deletion. The article had a reliable source. The concern "The authors don't define it as an object in a known axiomatic first order theory" is not a valid reason for deletion. —Alexei Kopylov (talk) 15:55, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • The source that @Alexei Kopylov: speaks about is reliable in the field of category theory, not in set theory, and not in foundations of mathematics, as it should be in this article. As I told to Alexey Kopylov many times, there must be serious reasons for making declarations like this

      Можно пойти дальше и рассматривать совокупности классов — конгломераты, совокупности конгломератов и так далее. (One can go further and consider sets of classes — conglomerates, sets of conglomerates, and so on.)

      and citing authors who make declarations like this

      Математика была вынуждена бесповоротно отказаться от претензий на абсолютную достоверность или значимость своих результатов. (Mathematics had to irrecoverably abandon claims for absolute certainty or significance of its results.)

      Eozhik (talk) 16:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Hustle & Soul

    'Hustle & Soul' is a very well known reality show out here. I don't understand why it was deleted in the first place. This reality show needs a wikipedia page so that people know who they're watching and so they can keep up with the ratings.—77.173.134.237 (talk) 18:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    That isn't what Wikipedia is for. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 21:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done The Hustle & Soul was deleted because the writer blanked the page. They never put in more than a broken infobox, so there was nothing usable to restore. Others are welcome to write on the topic. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:33, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Laura Crafton Gilpin

    I do not understand why a bio page of a poet and nurse was deleted, especially since she is being widely confused with Laura Gilpin, the photographer (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Gilpin) on various well-known websites including goodreads. —Jvanala (talk) 20:22, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. If the deletion reason was R2, add "Draft:" to the start of your article's title. It was draftified, not deleted. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 21:00, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Jalin Turner

    Article was nominated for deletion last year (see deletion discussion here) and closed as delete since the subject failed WP:MMATIER. Recently Turner has fought in his third UFC fight at UFC 236 which satisfied WP:NMMA. See here for proof of that. Closing admin was contacted but they recommended to come here. Inter&anthro (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC) —Inter&anthro (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't know why they would recommend coming here, unless their intent is to see the page draftified... —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 23:25, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jéské Couriano: see here. It's no big deal, I can start the article myself. Inter&anthro (talk) 23:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Well Sandstein does not undelete pages and refers people here for other admins to make a decision. SO we just have to base it on the reason provided to see if that overrides the reason for deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:11, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Herlinde_Koelbl

    I, Media-hk, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Media-hk (talk) 08:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • I suspect this may be copyvio, part of it is definitely taken from [2]. Hut 8.5 21:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Sanjay Razdan

    Subject is notable. Also deletion process was not followed correctly and no vote or reason for deletion was given. —2600:1700:7BB0:950:2C4C:D40C:9E1C:43EF (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Hut 8.5: Hi I think this is the first time we have spoke. How are you? How are you keeping? Unfortunately it will be going straight back to Afd, once I strip out all the promotion that is in it. The whole article would need a significant rewrite backed by proper references that satisfy WP:V, WP:BIO, and supposedly WP:NPROF. The very first ref which is supposed to establish bona fides in the article is on a luxury lifestyle brand site where he is selling his book and it starts there and it gets progressively worse. Not even a medical ref/site to kick it off. The first ref is Non RS. On top of that his h-index is far far too low to satisfy WP:NPROF. scope_creepTalk 22:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Pace Analytical

    I, Parker24 22, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Parker24 22 (talk) 12:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 22:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Johan Alfred Rinell

    Contributor will continue working on the article and publish it. —Lennart Holmquist (talk) 16:24, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 22:01, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Portal:Arkansas/Projects

    Deleted per WP:G6. This page is needed per the portal being restored to it's pre-automated version. Since I'm involved in working on the portal, requesting undeletion from an uninvolved admin. North America1000 17:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Eric Morse

    I, W1nless, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. W1nless (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 22:05, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Swiss Draw in Ultimate Frisbee

    I, Cschff, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Cschff (talk) 19:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Cschff: Last time I restored this, no one did anything to improve the page. What do you plan to do to make this better? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

    I request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. —206.81.201.82 (talk) 19:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:ICON Creative Studio (2)

    I'm new to Wikipedia and didn't realize my draft page had violated copyright infringement since the website it was taking the text from was created by me (www.iconcreativestudio.com/about). I'd like to undelete the Wikipedia page I created and change the section that was deemed as copyright infringement —CLoveday87 (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G12, which indicates a page copied and pasted wholesale from another source, or otherwise closely paraphrased from same. G12 deletions will not be overturned here or anywhere else. Write it from scratch without the offending text. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 21:50, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done It was also promotional. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since you say you wrote that page, you'd have to go through the formal process detailed at WP:Donating copyrighted materials in order to release it. I urge you not to bother, though, since - as Graeme says just above - it's so promotionally written that there's no chance we would use it, and no realistic chance that we would use anything even based on it. —Cryptic 11:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Dave Schulz (musician)

    I have worked on this page and related content in the past. I was unaware it was marked for deletion and would work to ensure the content is in line with Wikipedia content guidelines. Mr. Schulz is a member of a relevant American rock band and has other touring and composing credits to his name. Thank you. —99Perfectos (talk) 03:32, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done This is the wrong venue. The page was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Schulz (musician), and it contained copyright violations. I will not be restoring it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:John Rotellini

    I would like to resume working on creating the article as it was left as a draft. In addition, if anyone is willing to assist with the creation of the final article, I would be most grateful! Thank you for your time! —Jojohot1 (talk) 06:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    File:Makkalai Petra Magarasi.jpg

    I would like the revision dated 10 November 2016 to be restored since I intend to transfer it to Commons in high res. Please ping me when this revision is restored. —Kailash29792 (talk) 09:32, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kailash29792:Since this is claimed to be fair use, Commons will reject it. Do you believe that a free license can apply? If so update the file description page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    It satisfies the criteria for PD-India / URAA per this. Unfortunately, I cannot generate the text {{PD-India-URAA}} here, and it is possible only in Commons. Hence, I have written only {{PD-India}}, but can you please do something? --Kailash29792 (talk) 11:57, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The poster probably comes from 1957, but for PD-India-URAA to apply it must have been published before January 1, 1941. The discussion you linked to, says that another discussion is needed to delete or restore files. But this space here is not that suitable for discussion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:48, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, maybe I was mistaken about what comes under URAA. But is this a better discussion? Or this? Even if the URAA licensing does not apply for post-1941 Indian files, I think files like this 1951 image (which was unsuccessfully nominated for deletion) can stay on Commons with the PD-India tag only. Since the MPM file is dated 1957, it is eligible for PD-India and I would like to transfer it to Commons in high-res. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:29, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    PhotoFiltre

    Expired prod from a while back, but the topic likely passes WP:NSOFT. I usually prod stuff, instead of asking for it to be restored, but in this case, reviews exist: [3], and 1-2 book manuals [4], [5]. I also found a mini-review with a how-to-use in a reliable Polish magazine (pl:Komputer Świat, 20+ years in print): [6]. I have no prejudice against this being AfD after restoration, but I don't think a soft with a PC World review should get prod-delete. Ping User:Djm-leighpark who I think has more experience then me in rescuing such articles. —Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Pedram Babaiee

    I, Mania.pour, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mania.pour (talk) 11:39, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as an Articles for creation (AfC) submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click on the button in the AfC submission template that says Submit your draft for review!. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Aalisha panwar

    Subject matter is notable and has been nominated in several award shows, need a Wikipedia face, I request undeletion as I need to work on this article. —Redcap78 (talk) 16:04, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G11, indicating an page that was irredeemably promotional or blatant advertising. Note that G11 deletions are more an issue with the tone of the page as opposed to its sources or formatting. As articles deleted under G11 need to be rewritten from scratch, they will not be undeleted as-is here; try contacting the deleting administrator (Cyphoidbomb (talk · contribs)). Alternatively, you may request the page be restored as a draft or to have the contents of its last known revision emailed to you provided you have email enabled in your account's preferences. I will note that this title and both the correct and misspelt draft titles are salted. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 19:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is nothing to undelete at Alisha Panwar; it was just a redirect. A bigger issue is that because of excessive promotional editing, Panwar's name has been added to our title blacklist, so not even a draft article can be created at this time. Since Redcap78 has no experience editing, I think I'd like to see what they're proposing article-wise before moving anything into Draft space. I'd probably recommend they start work in their sandbox, unless another admin has a different opinion. @Redcap78: you should probably read Your First Article, and note that per WP:PAID, if you are being paid to edit an article, you have to disclose that, as well as who is paying you, who your employer is and any other relevant relationship. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:22, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The original request was for "Aalisha Panwar", which was empty. I thus defaulted to the closest title with a deletion history. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 03:07, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can you go through the draft in my sandbox about Aalisha Panwar.Check, If the Draft article is ready to move in namespace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redcap78 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Streamlabs

    I, 38.88.216.18, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 38.88.216.18 (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 21:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Pristimantis bellae

    First, this was deleted as a block evasion, this does not indicate that the subject is not notable, etc. Second, I want to add a picture to the article from Commons for a Valued Image nomination, thank you. --BoothSift 04:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC) —BoothSift 04:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion G5. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, Bbb23 (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:42, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @JJMC89: I understand, I will leave it like this, thank you. --BoothSift 04:48, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Stefan Ćertić

    I, Scallar8, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Scallar8 (talk) 09:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Taulia Page Deletion

    I'd like to ask what the necessary measures are to ensure my Taulia page is removed from deletion. The company is credible and, given it employs 200+ employees and works with some of the world's largest companies, I believe it warrants a Wikipedia page. I am able to edit the page in order to make sure it meets the Wikipedia standards. Please advise on further instructions. —Danmiddlehurst (talk) 10:46, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Being credible, having 200+ employees, and working with other notable companies are not valid claims to notability as Wikipedia defines it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 21:26, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Nadejda Marques

    I, Tatibitati, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tatibitati (talk) 13:31, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Forrest M. Holly Jr.

    I, Fogden, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Fogden (talk) 15:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Forrest M. Holly Jr.

    I'm attending a special session in honor of the deceased subject at an international conference in September. I plan to recruit others to help edit the page and convince the reviewer that (1) the subject is of note and (2) my page is not an advertisement... —Fogden (talk) 15:52, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    File:BNC Logo small.jpg

    Discussion of this logo justifies fair use —— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks. Graeme Bartlett, I didn't know what you meant by "Trademark dispute", but see User talk:Explicit#File:Bank of North Carolina logo.png. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC).[reply]

    1914 meteorology, 1907 meteorology, 1923 meteorology

    I noted that the 1914 meteorology page was missing. The log states that Fastily deleted it in 2012, it was restored by R'n'B in 2013, and then deleted again in 2018. Looking at the Category: Meteorology topics by year, it appears that 1923 and 1907 were also deleted since 1870. Entries then become more scarce between 1800-1870, and just a few notable events are listed for previous years. All of these were deleted in 2012 with the reasoning "Empty category" by Fastily, but the 2013 restoration says "4 revisions restored. No longer empty." All three of those years have corresponding entries in the "19** Atlantic hurricane season" articles, although they indicate that activity was unusually weak. Please look at these articles and determine if deletion was appropriate, if they should be retained as placeholders, or if there were actually items in those categories such that deletion was not appropriate. Thank you. —Ryan Reeder (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Well there are no pages in those categories, so they can stay deleted. You are welcome to add redlinked categories to articles and then request undeletion. It is too hard to tell where the categories were iused in the past, as the history of unknown pages has to be examined. If you know suitable pages to look at then please do that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:05, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Semba Comunicação

    This article was incorrectly labeled as advertising , where it was simply background and biographical information about a company responsible for very well known african content ( which most of these TV and film projects have their own verified wikipedia pages). Most of the text submitted was supported by third party texts from journalistic sources both national to portuguese speaking territories and international, as well as links to appropriate wikipedia pages of the company's people projects that seem to have already been reviewed with appropriate sources recognised/ revised by wikipedia. This is a popular portuguese-african media/entertainment company with projects seen all over their region and the world , many awards and they were mentioned on other articles but did not have their own wikipedia page. It´s very strange that information submitted about them, with the appropriate sources was deleted claiming its advertising, when information about similar European and American companies still has a wikipedia page and were not deleted as advertising. As someone who took the time to try to contribute information to the wikipedia community about a topic, its very discouraging to see this practice. I hope this was simply a mistake and does not denote any form of discrimination toward biographical information coming from developing countries . and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Cudcorp (talk) 21:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G11, indicating an page that was irredeemably promotional or blatant advertising. Note that G11 deletions are more an issue with the tone of the page as opposed to its sources or formatting. As articles deleted under G11 need to be rewritten from scratch, they will not be undeleted as-is here; try contacting the deleting administrator (RHaworth (talk · contribs)). Alternatively, you may request the page be restored as a draft or to have the contents of its last known revision emailed to you provided you have email enabled in your account's preferences. Pointing to sources to dispute a G11 deletion is nonsensical - the issue is with how the article is written, not the sources used. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 21:20, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion G11. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, RHaworth (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:59, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Diaspora : Mass Exodus

    (This user used the preload form for G13 undeletion, but did not specify the name of the Draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) StarReaper (talk) 23:35, 17 April 2019 (UTC) Diaspora: Mass Exodus[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:08, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:BREAUX Capital

    I, Sociologee, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Sociologee (talk) 00:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:13, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Barry Beck (entrepreneur)

    Resubmittal —69.244.229.13 (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Lisa Catara (actress/ producer)

    Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —2600:1700:9740:C540:D14E:E61D:C515:B620 (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Good morning, it was brought to my attention that my Wikipedia page has been deleted. I was unaware of this, there is no reason my Wikipedia page ought to be deleted.

    I am a public figure, a professional actress and spokesperson with over 100 credits on IMDb. This page is relevant to my line of work and Industry professionals demand I have it.

    I originally provided links to my IMDb, web page, Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.

    Please restore the page for Lisa Catara. I would like control over its content and existence.

    Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9740:c540:d14e:e61d:c515:b620 (talk • contribs)

    If industry professionals are demanding a Wikipedia page for you, then I would sever all ties with them. We are not social media; we are an encyclopaedia project, and one that is edited primarily by, and which is written for, the general public. You have no right to demand or control the content of an article about yourself and shouldn't be editing about yourself anyway, and that is assuming you are who you say you are. What's more, a Google News search for your name (string: "Lisa Catara") turns up absolutely no usable sources, so it is doubtful you are notable as Wikipedia defines it. Having 100+ credits is irrelevant, especially if they are commercial credits or bit parts. If this page is restored, I will take it to AfD, as I have no faith in this article meeting our notability threshold at this time. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 19:39, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    And consequentially sent to AfD. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 00:54, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2017-19 (Gibraltar)

    I, RaviC, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. RaviC (talk) 14:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Issey Tanaka

    I, Faure Op7 No1, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Faure Op7 No1 (talk) 16:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:19, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Next Town Down

    I, 131.179.59.91, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 131.179.59.91 (talk) 19:19, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Dreamy Jazz Bot/Task 2

    Requesting undeletion as it may be useful for editors to see what the task was when it ran. I am the bot op for this retired bot. —Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 20:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Young death (musicians)

    I, Tetsuo, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tetsuo (talk) 01:54, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:05, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Jayanta Roy

    I request undeletion of the page.Deletion was done without any warning or discussion this time and the cause of deletion of the previously deleted article no longer apply to the recreated article —Davidwarner (talk) 13:07, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes it is pretty clear that this page should not have been speedy deleted as it was quite different from the earlier deleted version. However because this is a G4 speedy delete, you should first ask the deleter user:Deb to restore it. Note that warnings and taggings of articles are optional, but I would very strongly encourage these processes as more people then get to consider whether the page should be deleted or not. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:20, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks to Graeme Bartlett for your kind opinion and suggestion.I request user:Deb to kindly reconsider and restore the page as the recreated version is quite different from the previous deleted version. The recreated page passes WP:GNG WP:SIGCOV and the artist has credit for writing lyrics and music for a notable composition WP:COMPOSER. So, its my humble request to ponder over the matter of deletion.Davidwarner (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd be prepared to restore it as a draft, but not to article space. It's clearly promotional and there remains a lack of evidence of notability. Deb (talk) 07:46, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Deb Its not a promotional article. I found significant coverages about the artist in significant newspapers like The Asian Age, The Deccan Chronicles, News18 (CNN News) that makes him pass notability.WP:GNG WP:SIGCOVDavidwarner (talk)
    Like I said, I'm willing to create a draft but you've got a lot of work to do on it. Deb (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Deb Can you please make it clear the exact reason for which the article should be deleted, so that I can work on it.Davidwarner (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:07, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    As I've said above, the primary issue is one of promotional wording, and the second is that notability is not adequately established. That's why it was deleted first time round as well. If I were you, I would read that deletion debate so that you fully understand the issues. When you've read it you can come back to me and I will put the article into draft space. Deb (talk) 09:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Deb I have read the debate. As I realised from the debate the artist was not notable as per wikipedia guideline that time. But he passes notability now. If you please go through the new article you can see the page has no notability issue. And neither the page is promotional nor any promotional word I have used nor any original research I did. The page contains what I obtained from different reliable sources.I request Graeme Bartlett if he shares his opinion too regarding it.Davidwarner (talk)
    And the recreated article is largely improved and different than the earlier one. That debate doesn't work on the recreated version. Davidwarner (talk) 10:48, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:G4 says clearly "It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies"...And this recreated page is not substantially identical to the deleted version and the reason for the deletion no longer applies. So this deletion is going against WP:G4 .This topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources (The Asian Age, News18-CNN News, The Deccan Chronicle) that are independent of the subject. So this deletion goes against WP:GNG WP:SIGCOV.'O Bandhobi'(a song composed and written by the artist) has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it WP:NALBUM.So, that song itseft passes notability and thats why he has the credit for writing lyrics and music for a notable composition. So, this deletion goes against WP:COMPOSER. Its not fair to delete something or sending something to draft when a page already obeys wikipedia guideline. Davidwarner (talk) 06:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Graeme Bartlett Can I please know the procedure I should follow Davidwarner (talk) 12:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not Graeme, but since you've been unable to convince the (re)deleting administrator, your recourse is to list it on WP:Deletion review. G4 deletions aren't undeleted here; this page is only for completely uncontroversial restorations, and isn't set up to deal with cases where there's disagreement about whether an administrator acted correctly in deleting the page. —Cryptic 20:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment from the deleting administrator. Although the articles are not identical, I believe that the reason for the original deletion still applies. In fact, the original deleted article is in some ways better than the new one, although there are more references in the latter. These claim nothing more substantial than that the subject "will make his Bollywood debut soon" and that he has released three singles. The fact that the article creator cannot recognise when he is using promotional wording will, however, hinder him in attempting to create a fresh draft. Deb (talk) 21:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    "Draft:XSEDE"

    I, 141.142.60.255, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 141.142.60.255 (talk) 15:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Shawn Steel

    Page was deleted because the primary sources were incorrect and unable to verify political party position. Shawn Steel is in fact a Republican National Committeeman of California, which can be verified through the Republican National Committee's website and through multiple other news sources such as Fox, CBS, and KABC Radio. Finally, he's written a plethora of articles lending his expertise as the Republican Party's representative of California. —Spicybrownie (talk) 21:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]Spicybrownie (talk) 21:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review or contact the administrator that closed the deletion debate instead. A request for this page was declined a little over two weeks ago, specifically because it was AfD'd. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 22:11, 19 April 2019 (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/Shawn Steel, 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, Ritchie333 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:39, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ https://gop.com/leaders/national-committeeman-shawn-steel-ca/
    2. ^ https://www.ocregister.com/author/shawn-steel/
    3. ^ http://www.foxla.com/good-day-la/319794902-video
    4. ^ https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1855953654438060
    5. ^ http://www.kabc.com/2018/12/11/shawn-steel-trump-unlikely-to-win-democrats-to-back-border-wall/

    Draft:Wendell Dayton

    I, 2606:6000:6191:5600:59AE:BD10:3A6C:9FE0, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 2606:6000:6191:5600:59AE:BD10:3A6C:9FE0 (talk) 22:56, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Portal:Cameroon subpages

    The following pages were deleted per WP:G6. These pages are needed per the portal being restored to its pre-automated version. Since I'm involved in working on the portal, requesting undeletion from an uninvolved admin. North America1000 02:47, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    2 subpages of FWTH

    Need them again. — -- Flooded w/them 100s 07:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Dhulipala Mahadeva Mani

    I, Fhurfu21, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Fhurfu21 (talk) 18:32, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:14, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Aiken drum/sandbox

    Own userspace page —Aiken D 22:29, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Portal:Austria/Intro

    Deleted per WP:G6. This page is needed to restore the portal to its pre-automated version. Since I'm involved in portal restorations, requesting undeletion from an uninvolved admin. —North America1000 02:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:S.V_Ramani

    I, 183.82.39.53, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 183.82.39.53 (talk) 07:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    the page was deleted under G13 and can be actively worked upon now —183.82.39.53 (talk) 07:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Hunter_(indie_pop_band)

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Hunter_(indie_pop_band)&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoburn946 (talk • contribs) 10:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Sakit Mammadov

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feelingsarts (talk • contribs) 19:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • (I'm just going to redact the (presumeably auto-)biography that was above and leave it for a less appalled admin to formally decline this. —Cryptic 20:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]
    Note: This page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G4, which means the page is a near-carbon-copy of a page previously deleted via deletion debate (specifically, WP:Articles for deletion/Sakit Mammadov). Pages deleted via deletion debate will not be restored here; go to WP:Deletion review or contact the administrator who closed the deletion debate instead. This is far from the first time the page has been deleted, with every deletion being under a circumstance that won't be covered here. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 21:07, 21 April 2019 (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/Sakit Mammadov, 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, MelanieN (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:20, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    TutorMe

    I, Mnh5065, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mnh5065 (talk) 20:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&oldid=893510619"