Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Administrator instructions

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 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 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 in 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


Contents

Bethesda Home for Girls[edit]

I have no idea why the page was deleted. We (the girls who survived this experience) have referred to this page on occassion and we just noticed it missing. -Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:29, 21 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilinggypsy (talkcontribs) 06:54, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done After exhausting several avenues of search on en.Wiki there appears never to have been such an article here. The website Graeme Bartlett found is almost certainly what they are referring to.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Olamuyiwa Eleyele Abdulazeez[edit]

I am suprised to see the article about a Nigerian Footballer deleted today. I received and read your earlier messages regarding providing references (at least one reference) to the article which has been provided. I removed the Biographies of Living Persons PROD after having provide the required reference (not from Linkedin). Please kindly see to the restoration of the article as it is needed. Thanks -Olamuyiwa Eleyele Abdulazeez (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

--Olamuyiwa Eleyele Abdulazeez (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

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 here or anywhere else; try contacting the deleting administrator (Bbb23 (talk · contribs)) in order to be emailed a copy of the article as it stood at time of deletion. I suggest you also read WP:Conflict of interest if you are in fact Mr. Abdulazeez. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:17, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done Deleted again today by a very clear consensus of the community at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olamuyiwa Eleyele Abdulazeez. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

UNTOUCHABLE: CHILDREN OF GOD[edit]

I am a regular writer and I do not associated with any person/crew of this Movie. The articles is written from the view of Director. I can still rewrite the article. -Ebenezergangmei (talk) 11:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Are you willing to have this back as a userspace draft or normal draft? I am not keen to have this as an article in its state prior to deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Stale
. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Kara Moana Healey[edit]

I believe page Kara Moana Healey should be undeleted. Kara Moana Healey lead a notable life and contributed to the understanding of the ecology and biology of a cold climate rainforest. Kara was also the first woman National Park Ranger in Victoria, and possibly Australia. If this page does not comply with Wikipedia policy, please explain -Stephen R (talk) 03:06, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Comment: @Kara Moana Healey: There does not seem to have ever been a page called Kara Moana Healey, I however see you have created Draft:Kara Moana Healey is it perhaps that you lost it there?- McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 03:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done. The was never a mainspace article to restore. Please see the draft article. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

TheHistoric Hill of Ave[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Alidezh1559 (talk) 12:36, 29 June 2015 (UTC) 1=The Historic Hill of Ave 2=hi,the article is actually very well translated to English and is edited carefully.It is categorized an is neat.please reconsider.

The article wasn't deleted, it was moved to Ave (hill). User:Alidezh1559 actually edited it there moments before posting this request for undeletion. --McGeddon (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Looks like Ave (hill) has since been erroneously speedied under A7 ("individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events"), despite being none of these. It is a hill. --McGeddon (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Isabella Moner[edit]

I added a citation to the article, even though it wasn't picked up/detected. Please have the article reviewed by an actual human, and not by a robot, to ensure that it doesn't get deleted again -TechnologicalTerror58 (talk) 02:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

  • TechnologicalTerror58, you added the actress's Twitter account. This is, at best, a WP:PRIMARY source and cannot be used as a reliable source or a source to counter the BLP PROD that was on the article. What you need here are things like newspaper articles about Moner. If you can show me a news article or something that would be considered a RS (which must be independent and in a place that Wikipedia considers to be reliable) then I'll restore it, although I will caution you that restoring this would not guarantee that the article would not be deleted. That would just be overturning the BLP PROD that requires that the article have a RS. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 07:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Technically X mark.svg Not done since I've created a new article. If you want the history restored then let me know, but offhand there's no true reason to restore it. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

MHPlayme1/Sandbox[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Mhplayme1 (talk) 02:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC) - My apologies -- I've been slow to edit a final version of my article for submission and let it go too many months without finishing. I would now like to make final edits and re-submit it for consideration and promise to do so quickly. Thank you very much.

  • Mhplayme1, there is no article in your sandbox history, nor is there any record of you having had any article deleted. I see that there is a draft article at Draft:Arthur Lawrence "Art" Hellyer, Jr. and some information at your userpage, but nothing really elsewhere. I will say that you should probably move the stuff in your userpage to your sandbox though, as the userpage could come across as a WP:NOTWEBHOST issue to an unaware editor. It's not immediately apparent that this is your workspace for the Hellyer draft and as such, kind of unintentionally comes across as a resume at first glance. I'm not trying to be accusatory or anything, just that this happens so much with userspaces that people tend to get a little trigger happy with anything that doesn't look like the typical userpage. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 07:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • X mark.svg Not done, nothing deleted, nothing to restore. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stanley F. Buchthal[edit]

(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.) Nomut (talk) 09:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 09:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Deep Obsession[edit]

Incorrect personal involvement assumed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franky Diamond (talkcontribs) 09:59, 30 June 2015‎

  • X mark.svg Not done Franky Diamond, this was deleted by Deb for WP:G11, Unambiguous advertising or promotion. I took a look and the page really did contain some fairly promotional tones because of phrases like "Another song available on YouTube for your listening pleasure" and "Zara's distinctive voice is captivating and with Charlie's solid support vocals this is a delicious blend." There are some parts of the history that aren't as promotional so you may be able to request that Deb restore those portions. However if it is restored then you will need to add sources to the article since the last non-blatantly promotional version of the page lacked sources to show notability. There were none on the page at all. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:05, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Strangely, the creator of the Zara Clark article has now requested deletion of that article as well. Deb (talk) 10:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It looks like there was a rash of IP edits that added the promotional content, which might have been the same person that did the Zara Clark article. It's the same writing style from what I can see. I'm not entirely sure what they're trying to accomplish since the edits only made the page worse rather than better. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Shreya Ghoshal[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Ysaurabh059 (talk) 17:03, 30 June 2015 (UTC) as the information i published was totally correct and sensible

X mark.svg Not done, nothing to do. @Ysaurabh059: why are you posting here? The page is not deleted, and isn't even being considered for deletion. If you have a dispute with another editor about the content of that article, take it up on Talk:Shreya Ghoshal. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Furthermore, the information you added was not "totally correct an sensible". It was unverifiable, unsourced, and filled with non-neutral peacock terms. In other words, not sensible at all, and completely inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion, and that's what you were doing. I have reverted the article back to the version of 29 June. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Albert Gotay[edit]

famous instructor and author of martial arts books. Passes GNG. -CrazyAces489 (talk) 19:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

He is right, I think it should be considered for mainspace and possibly moved over to AFD to prove notability. CrazyAces489 (talk) 19:25, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Rhodes_Bantam[edit]

I would like to have copy of the original article. Also, I have friends who may help to improve article. Reason for deletion by Admin Xoloz, was: deleted page Rhodes Bantam (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable subject with no citations, relies on a peacock page.)} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuvosi (talkcontribs) 00:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:John Ellis[edit]

I, BeingJohn, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. BeingJohn (talk) 01:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg 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. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:50, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Nate Christy[edit]

This was requested by Ntsianco (talk · contribs), but the request was malformed. I am merely restoring it on their behalf and have no opinion one way or another on the merits of the request.Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg 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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Ali Raza Jaffari[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Chacharaliraza (talk) 12:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Please Don't Delete my articles Ali Raza Jaffari and Haji Khan Chachar...

Please read the instructions. For Ali Raza Jaffari you can remove the prod template, but please find reliable sources. Haji Khan Chachar has no references, so you will need to find some publications that talk about this person. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Maurice Carpenter[edit]

I would like the article undeleted because I provided all the validation requested to validate my clients credentials. If not adequate, please let me know what I need to provide additionally to get it undeleted -66.176.107.91 (talk) 13:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I am placing two links below that may be used to help be "verifiable sources". Please advise as to if they are adequate.

http://www.discogs.com/artist/1505485-Maurice-Carpenter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Music_Publishing

Thank you!! Luckyleftyllc (talk) 17:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done, for two reasons:
Furthermore, because this is your "client", as you say, you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for guidance, because you clearly have a conflict of interest. I recommend you use Wikipedia:Articles for creation to create the article. If you want, the article may be moved to draft space for this purpose, but change your username first. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
(ec) @Luckyleftyllc: We do NOT accept any user-generated content website as a source, and this includes Wikipedia itself (not to mention citing Wikipedia is circular referencing, which is a major academic sin). The Discogs link you provide is also useless as it does not go in-depth on Maurice Carpenter. We require third-party sources with no connection to the subject that have written about the subject at length and which has professional editorial oversight. Finally, your username is unacceptable. Please go to this page as soon as possible and put in a request for a new one, preferably one that doesn't use a company's name or otherwise imply it's promotional or shared. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I have put in a request to have my username changed per your request. Could you please move the article to the draft space you spoke of? Also, could you assist me in the type of sources that are adequate? If not, could you point me in the right direction of someone who can? Thanks so much to you both for your assistance. Luckyleftyllc (talk) 20:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

My name change has been approved. It is being changed to ohsolucky. When can you place it in a draft so that I can update my sources? Luckyleftyllc (talk) 00:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. I've restored it to Draft:Maurice Carpenter. You will need to submit it for review via WP:AFC.
Please read Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what is expected before an article is accepted into main article space. For detailed guidance, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources.
But before you proceed, please disclose your conflict of interest on your new user page. Any paid editing must be disclosed publicly, and you agreed to do this per WMF's Terms of Use when you created your account. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Larry Craig mugshot.jpg[edit]

Deleted because "CSD I8 - Image has the same name on Wikimedia Commons".. It's gone from commons. Please restore it here for use in the Larry Craig article. It survived a DRV before that deletion, so uncontroversial. -Elvey(tc) 14:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Elvey: Yes check.svg Done, image restored. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I cleaned up the licensing and put it in use, with the needed FURs which had been removed.--Elvey(tc) 20:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chris Classic[edit]

I, 24.228.6.65, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 24.228.6.65 (talk) 16:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg 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. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Instapray[edit]

Advertising - is the reason given for the page deletion which is completely unsubstantial and irrelevant. Instapray is a microblogging technology platform, like Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr or Instagram - all of which have articles on Wikipedia. The article was explaining what the technology is all about, when it was created, who created it etc. The article is presenting only facts and statistic relevant to the technology supported by multiple articles and links. It is not a press release as claimed in the deletion reason and many Wikipedia users have contributed to it. "Save page" button below -Frycman (talk) 17:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: You can't argue for undeletion based on the presence of articles in like topic areas. All articles on Wikipedia must independently satisfy our notability policies. If the article you are using as justification itself fails this, it will likely be nominated for deletion soon. G11 speedy deletions are not undeleted here anyways. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Our coverage was "Significant" explaining in detail the technology that is used around the world by close to 1M users. Our article was "Reliable" and had multiple "Sources" and contributors. The technology has been covered by multiple international news agencies and media making the article relevant and "Presumed". The deletion of the article was claiming advertising - please point out which part of the article violates this rule and we can address this issue/ammend the article. thank you "Save page" button below -Frycman (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

First off, since you're using "we", I am going to assume you are in some way associated with Instapray, to which I must point you to our terms of use requiring you to disclose your conflict of interest if you are receiving compensation of any kind. Second, if you do have some association with Instapray, you should be going through our drafting process, as anything put in article space is under hightened scrutiny by default. Thirdly, we do not allow shared accounts, as it interferes with Wikipedia's copyright licenses. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I am a user of the platform. Not sure what a shared account is. Please address the advertsing part in my article and I am happy to modify. thank you "Save page" button below -Frycman (talk) 21:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Frycman: A G11 speedy deletion implies that the whole article was promotional, to the point where it would need to be rewritten from scratch. And a shared account is exactly what it implies: An account used by multiple people. I will revert off any further sections you add; please reply in this section by clicking the "Edit" button on the same line as this section's title. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done. Articles deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#G11 are ineligible for restoration by request on this page. There is no reason to restore an article that requires a complete re-write. That rewrite would preferably be done by an editor without a conflict of interest. Also, your association with InstaPray must be disclosed publicly, as you agreed to do per the WMF Terms of Use when you created your account.

If you do re-write the article yourself, the only viable venue for you to do this is via Wikipedia:Articles for creation, where your article can be reviewed for suitability by a neutral editor before accepting it into main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't know if this would be considered doxing or not, but Frycman, a search for your username shows that the founder of Instaspray uses the exact same handle on Twitter. It's possible that you're separate people, but this is usually unlikely. While you didn't deny being the company's founder but you also didn't disclose this up front, which is required per Wikipedia's policies for WP:COI editors. I'd like to ask that in the future that if you do have a strong conflict of interest with something, that you just disclose this up front. Now assuming that you are the founder, this does not reflect well on you as an editor. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I am "NOT" associated with the company, there is "NO" conflict of interest and I havent shared my account credentials with "ANYBODY" - this is "NOT" a shared account. The #G11 doesnt apply because the article wasnt "promotional" of any kind. Read it and you will understand that its sole purpose was "informational".

  • I posted this just after you did, but Fryman, I found evidence that suggests otherwise. Can you explain why you have the same username as the company's founder does on Twitter? Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I need to warn you straight up: if you are suspected of having a COI and we think that you are not being truthful about it, you can be blocked from editing. Not disclosing a COI and trying to hide it is actually much, much worse than having a COI and being honest about it. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Frycman, since your sole purpose seems to be to write about Instapray and you appear to have a very, very obvious conflict of interest (your username here is the same as the founder's Twitter handle), I'm going to block you from editing. While I didn't necessarily think that the Wikipedia page was over the top promotional, I can see where the concerns were coming from because of how things were phrased. I think that part of the reason that you didn't pick up on the tones was likely because you have a conflict of interest and you're simply too close to the topic to really write about it in a neutral fashion. This is part of the reason that it's so direly important to disclose COIs, since it's very easy to write in a promotional tone without realizing it - especially if you've ever worked in a position where your job is to write about a topic in a promotional manner since you're used to writing in a promotional tone and you're inured to it so you won't pick up on it as easily. Now while it is somewhat possible that you're not the founder it's pretty unlikely that this is the case. Given that it's extremely likely that you're the founder, saying that you weren't is probably the worst thing you could've done because now it comes across like you're editing in bad faith rather than good faith. (IE, that if you really didn't believe that the article was promotional and your intent here was to post a neutral Wikipedia article, why would you need to hide your affiliation?) Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Gloving[edit]

I intend to rewrite this article in an encyclopedic way that conforms to Wikiepdia's standards. This article was never meant to be promotional in nature, rather to document the existence of a huge new American subculture within the Electronic Dance Music scene. I would appreciate if you could send me the article in its most recent form prior to deletion. Thank you for your time! -18:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)99.91.222.131 (talk)

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. 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. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Since there was an addition of one possibly reliable link since the AFD, I have restored this to a draft at draft:Gloving. Please improve the page there in draft space. I cannot email to you as you are not logged in with an account with email. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:The Blue Oyster Art Project Space[edit]

Plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it. -Blueoysterartprojectspace (talk) 04:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I would suggest changing your username so that it doesn't imply a shared account. See WP:Username policy. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg 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. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I've restored it, but if you do not change your username then you will run the risk of getting blocked. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe that is page of mine is for global world,it should be like the publicity.Please don't delete this page because the is much to be post.[edit]

I've worked hard to achieve this page don't even think of deleting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.167.103.137 (talk) 05:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

  • @107.167.103.137:, which page are you talking about? I don't see any deleted pages in your history or any pages that you've edited that are in danger of being deleted. I do need to warn you though, if the page is considered to be promotional in nature to the point where it must be deleted, then it's unlikely that we would restore it at REFUND. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Tamburawa[edit]

most parts of its content was in an article called 'GADAR TAMBURAWA' so had to cut it and paste it into the appropriate page but then unfortunately it was deleted by you. Please do us a favor by restoring the article please. Thanks Alot -Hamza vip (talk) 18:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

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.Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
(Non-administrator observation) It looks like it was deleted as a copyvio of [5], which is a Wikipedia mirror of Gadar Tamburawa river - the article the text was moved from. I don't know whether there should be a separate article for the content that was moved, but it's not actually a copyvio. --bonadea contributions talk 18:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Ryan Lollis[edit]

Was just deleted in April but is now notable since he received his first Major League Baseball callup. -Yankees10 18:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg 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/Ryan Lollis, 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 Northamerica1000 (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. - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Why was there no problem then when this was requested just a few days ago:[6] The Only difference here is that the article has not been re-created yet.--Yankees10 18:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
And now the article was re-created. Requesting a history restore like what was done with Jake Brigham.--Yankees10 18:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm requesting a G4 deletion, so there's probably no need to history restore. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
But it shouldn't be deleted now as the player is clearly notable since he has received a major league callup.--Yankees10 19:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
For most sports the person actually has to play in a real game with the team to show that they should have an article here though. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

c:File:PREDATORY HEADLIGHTS COVER VER 1.jpg[edit]

I created this image entirely myself and it violates no copyrights. -Bleakinfinity (talk) 22:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Bleakinfinity, this was deleted at Wikimedia Commons by INeverCry, so it cannot be restored here. I've tagged INeverCry in this so they can see your request, though. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • @Bleakinfinity: You had the above file and 3 other LP/album cover uploads deleted on Commons. If you are in fact the copyright holder for these cover images, please contact OTRS to provide permission for their use under a free license. If the permission is confirmed, the above file, and the 3 other deleted files can be restored. INeverCry 06:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Speedy_(band)[edit]

I, JMH1963, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. JMH1963 (talk) 23:23, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

  • JMH1963, I restored this back in November and you made no edits on the page. You also requested that this be restored on June 5th, where another editor made mention of this and asked for reassurance that you would edit if we restored it a second time. I pinged you in the conversation but you made no response. Given that you've already had this restored once and you've done nothing and you've made a request a month ago - and you didn't respond to concerns there, this doesn't really make me all that confident that you'll edit the draft if we restore it this time. AfC is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • At this point if you don't respond this will become a not done by default - and it'll be even more unlikely that you'll ever have this restored. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done JMH1963 left a message on my talk page saying that they'll work on the article this time around, so I'm giving it a good faith restoration. Fair warning, if this goes without edits again it will be very unlikely that we'll restore it a second time. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Société Mondiale des Créateurs[edit]

a) The author was notified an intention to speedily delete the article for two motives (Blatant Promotion and No Claim Of Significance).

b) The author contested immediately each of the alleged motives and reviewed the article to remove all relevance to the administrator's remarks.

He also asked for Help of the appropriate wikipedia service and got a clear and positive response.

c) No answer were brought to his contestation and the article was deleted.

d) The article presented a non profit association registered in Mulhouse on 21 March 2013. It mentioned the historical tradition in which its foundation took place. It mentioned the recent change of the legal background which forms the object of its activity (a very recent decision of the Supreme Court was even mentioned in the argument notified to the administrator). The article quoted the rationale of its existence according to the statutes of the association.

The article only contained facts and did not reveal any "blatant promotion".

It represented a triple Claim of Significance: registered association, prestigious predecessors and unique international role. The latter was later omitted, though purely factual, because of the blatant promotion motive.

e) This is the reason why the author requests to the responsible administrator of Wikipedia to restore the article as a draft and to kindly advise on adding or subtracting any data he considers relevant.

Alain.souloumiac (talk) 08:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC) -Alain.souloumiac (talk) 08:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done Alain.souloumiac, We cannot restore WP:A7 deletions at REFUND and WP:G11 deletions cannot be restored at all. Now you may want to ask Jimfbleak if he will e-mail you a copy of the article. (I've pinged him in this conversation.) Offhand it isn't overwhelmingly promotional, but I can see where the concerns come from since it does somewhat read like it was taken directly from the organization's website. (If it was, please understand that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material.) Now as far as notability goes, you need to show that via independent and reliable sources that focus specifically on the organization. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by the society having an association with notable people or events. This can make it more likely that there will be coverage, but the society is not automatically notable because of this. I also have to note that someone founding a similar society years earlier does not automatically make this particular society notable. It just means that another society previously existed that covered the same topics. Now I also have to ask: what is your role in this society? I get the impression that you are someone that is involved with this society, which is likely why the article did come across as promotional. It's extremely easy for people with a close WP:COI to write about things in a promotional manner without realizing it because you're very closely involved and as such, are more likely to think about the topic in positive ways. You need to disclose this on your userpage if you are involved. I also have to warn you that your userpage also comes across as a little promotional in tone. Some material about yourself is fine, but your userpage should only be about yourself as it pertains to you editing on Wikipedia. Your userpage comes across as a mixture of a CV and a personal blog, neither of which are acceptable uses of your userpage. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • It looks like he was misdirected here, so I've left a note on his talk page pinging the person who directed him here. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 11:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Rick Maurer[edit]

I, Whitesourcerer, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Whitesourcerer (talk) 15:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Nicholas Newton[edit]

(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.) Nnewton44 (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:V.R. Prabodhachandran Nair[edit]

I, Rpnpbr, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. rpnpbr 15:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Note that you will have to have all the facts in this biography supported by references, including multiple independent references. This is looking too much like a CV to be accepted as an article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

A2Z Support[edit]

Dear Wiki team my page was tagged 16 hours ago on the basis that it is advertisement. As i was writing my first article on a publishing website. i doesn't know the wiki guidelines so i made the contents that looks more advertisement than encyclopedia and at that that time i also doesn't know about removing the hash tag put here by patrolling officer. So my page was just looked by the administrator and was deleted at once without giving me some warning to make my content right. I am so much disappointed as i have done so much efforts in writing my first article , atleast i should have been given the chance to prove my verdict. though i have putt the answer in Talk page after the tag been placed , it was also overlooked by the administrator. So it's my kind request to you to undelete my wiki page and let me edit the content again , as you can see on the A2Z Support page their are block left in which information is to be put in , so i will put the whole information from start and according to wikipedia policy guidelines. I will be please on your act of Kindness M. Asim Masoom Zubair (talk) 01:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Please note the article was deleted as a G11 and the author was directed to Deletion Review in this conversation: User_talk:NeilN#A2Z_Support_Page_Deletion. --NeilN talk to me 02:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done the article was purely promotional with just about no sentences that could be recycled. So it may as well be created from scratch as a draft. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

A2Z Support, again[edit]

I, Peter Grabitz, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G11. Please restore the page as I intend to improve & work on it. -Peter grabitz (talk) 10:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC) Peter grabitz (talk) 10:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done too promotional, see below for more. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

A2Z Support, third time[edit]

Hi there , i am Tanmay Gomal , article writer at crowdsource, i request the undeletion of this page, deleted under G 11, as i am intended to improve this -Tanmay Gomal (talk) 10:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC) Tanmay Gomal (talk) 10:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done this article was written to be heavily promotional, with a completely wrong tone for an encyclopedia article. I would suggest that you start again from scratch, perhaps writing it as a draft in Draft:A2Z Support. Also independent references are needed to show notability rather than facebook pages. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I wonder if Peter grabitz and Tanmay Gomal aren't just sockpuppets or meatpuppets of Asimbwp, as neither have any edits other than requesting this be undeleted. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
@Tanmay Gomal:: "Article writer at crowdsource" sounds as if you are a paid writer. In that case, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and note particularly that you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4), and in some jurisdictions by laws against covert advertising, to disclose your interest in any edits where you have a COI. JohnCD (talk) 17:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Now there's also Peter Lil Mayer. Looks like we may have a meat situation here. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Asimbwp. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Two of those had on their user pages "Article writer at Crowdsource" (i.e., paid editor), though one of them has blanked it. I think this is a case of paid editors rather than true sockpuppetry. I am thinking about a WP:COI/N entry. JohnCD (talk) 17:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
And the client will likely not give up hiring paid editors for this, so I have create-protected the article. If they want to work on it in draft space, that's fine. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
All four blocked as a result of the SPI, so I won't bother with COI/N. You're right to salt it, there will probably be more along in a minute. Incidentally, I see no evidence that this website, which seems to be a sort of multi-author blog, is notable. JohnCD (talk) 19:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Romano-berber states page deleted by mistake?[edit]

Hi, I was wondering why this page get deleted despite several years of work on it? It was a very serious wikipedia page, it seem that the creator that made it a long time ago was banned. -LuzLuz31 (talk) 10:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

  • You are correct in that Cresthaven, the main writer of this, was operated by user Brunodam who was banned. Most of the work was done from March to April 2014, so it was not years of work. However it was quite a substantial writing. If you can find a registered user, not connected to Brunodam, who wants to take responsibility for the page, perhaps it could be restored. If Brunodam wants to come back with a clean start, he could appeal his block. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Kent A. Philpott[edit]

I, 71.94.81.133, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 71.94.81.133 (talk) 14:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. -- GB fan 12:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Shaquille Murray-Lawrence[edit]

This page was deleted back in April. At the time of the AfD, he probably met WP:GNG anyways, but I didn't feel like arguing about it (plus, I knew he would meet WP:NGRIDIRON in a couple of months, anyways). Since that time, the player has made his professional debut in the CFL (see here), thereby meeting WP:NGRIDIRON. The admin who closed the AfD has been absent since May 14, therefore I came here believing that the undeletion would be uncontroversial. -Ejgreen77 (talk) 01:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

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. Articles deleted after a deletion discussion are considered "controversial" unless the deletion discussion ended in a speedy deletion or the XfD had little to no input from other users (in which case it's treated here as a PROD). —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Ebcwebstore.com[edit]

The article was deleted without any discussion & proper reasoning. The wiki pedia policy is to be neutral , the article was created by keeping in view the wiki policy . I do not have any personal & financial benifits which i have laready explained but more than three wiki users are after this page & deleted that with their own benefits. Thaere are other pages e.g amazon.com, ebay, flipcart and many more which is available on wiki. -Priyadarshivishal23 (talk) 05:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done This article was completely promotional, advertising for the store. Also, no independent references were provided to show notability. --NeilN talk to me 05:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:John_L._Spencer[edit]

I, Samuel.Ling.Spencers, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Samuel.Ling.Spencers (talk) 10:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. -- GB fan 11:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Idea Internet Network[edit]

IIN ad campaign has been the most talked about advertisement in India in the past six months. The word 'IIN' alone got more than half a million searches on Google in the month of May. I believe this deserves a mention on Wikipedia. I have followed and studied the apparently 'misleading' campaign. I wanted to make a page so that it would be convenient for users to know what the buzz was all about. -Rohit r m (talk) 11:46, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rohit r m: I have moved the page to Draft:Idea Internet Network where you can work on it. It needs better references to verify what it says and show notability. If it has been the most talked about in India, you should have no difficulty finding them. JohnCD (talk) 16:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Keystone Symposia[edit]

I, 173.164.44.249, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 173.164.44.249 (talk) 15:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg 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 present draft reads like the organization telling the world about itself, and is almost entirely sourced to its own site. Wikipedia requires references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish Wikipedia:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 16:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Ahmed Ibrahim Artan[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -A326 (talk) 15:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

HI I, A326, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13.,Please restore the page as I intend to work on it That person is a Somali politician and well unknown Somali writer, and his page has been deleted for 3 times which there's no reason to be deleted. I'm requesting un-deletion for that page. thanks

@A326: X mark.svg 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/Ahmed Haaji Ibrahim Artan Beeldaaje, 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 Davewild (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) 19:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Welbr dos Santos[edit]

I, OfSaints, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. OfSaints (talk) 19:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@OfSaints: Yes check.svg 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. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 19:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Compound events (natural and technological hazards)[edit]

Deleted due to 6 month timeframe. Am now in a position to address comments. I have collated additional references to demonstrate the relevance of the topic. -Michael.Leonard.Au (talk) 01:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done Michael.Leonard.Au, I'm going to decline this because there are some copyvio concerns with the article, as it was declined partially because it appeared to be a very close paraphrasing from one of the sources. That said, I will e-mail you a copy of the article so you can edit it and remove any copyvio concerns. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 07:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The Winner Twins request for undeletion[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -SciFiChronicle (talk) 02:53, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Greeting Administrator, I posted a biographical page on The Winner Twins. I saw that their initial page, which was up for years, was taken down on a speedy deletion. I reviewed that page and agreed with the editor's reasoning, that though factual it was very poorly cited. I revised the page in its entirety, and used what I believe were acceptable citations. The page was again deleted; however,it was done under speedy deletion in less than one hour. As far as I have read, this should not have occurred so quickly. I believe the editor who took it down may have been responding to the previous speedy deletion request of months earlier. I looked at his suggestion,which suggested the page seemed like an advertisement, and that it should be rewritten, and I completely disagree. It seems completely factual to me and is repeating only citations from legitimate sources. I have no bone to pick with the editor who took it down, though I am unsure why this page needed to be so hastily deleted. I am also unsure if he is or is not an administrator. If not, I humbly request that the page be reviewed by an Admin, then re-instated. Or if he was, I would prefer a second opinion, and any advice on how to put the page back up. I hope to be doing many such articles, and after reviewing dozens, I find this one I did to be one of the least contentious I've seen. I do hope you will agree. Thank you.

  • X mark.svg Not done SciFiChronicle, the page was deleted by an administrator (DESiegel) as unambiguous promotion and as such, this cannot be restored to Wikipedia. Looking at the article, I can see where the promotional concerns came from. While it doesn't scream "go here, buy buy buy", it does read as if it was written by a marketing/PR person that was paid to create the account. It doesn't look like this was tagged as a WP:G4 recreation of Winner Twins, although since it is a word-for-word recreation of the original article it would have qualified for speedy deletion under that criteria. Since it was deleted at AfD by postdlf, there is a specific route you need to go through if you want to contest the deletion. The first is that you need to contact postdlf and ask about creating a new article for the Winner Twins. If he declines, then you need to go through deletion review. However I do need to caution you that if it is recreated it will have to be completely re-written from scratch in order to deal with the promotional overtones. I also have to warn you that you will need to approach postdlf and/or DRV with a strong amount of sourcing in order to show notability, since all of the claims in the speedied article were in the article that was deleted months ago at AfD. Above all else, I'd like to ask that you not repost the content "as is" if this does get overturned anywhere, since it's likely that it will only be deleted again for promotional concerns. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:36, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Now on a side note, it looks extremely likely that you are someone who was asked to create the article and as such, you have a conflict of interest. You can still edit with a conflict of interest, but you will need to disclose this on your userpage. Also, you will need to change your username to something that doesn't conflict with username guidelines as your username gives off the impression that you're here representing this blog. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:36, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I was the admin who speedy deleted this as promotional, as the log should show. I was not then aware that this was an exact reposting of an article prevuously deleted via AfD discussion, or I would not have been so sanguine about recreation as a draft, and would have included G4 (recreation) in the deletion log. Shortly after I deleted the article, SciFiChronicle posted to my user talk page, at User talk:DESiegel#The Winner Twins. My respone is there to read, I think it is clear that I was not hostile to the subject or the poster, merely beliving that the tone of the article as it stood was not acceptable. I am myself an SF fan, and like to see good articles about SFnal subjcts on Wikipedia. I should add that while it is a good practice not to delete clearly unfinished articles too quickly, especially for things such as A7, this was posted as a clerly developed article in a single edit, and there is no reason to think that simply ignoring or tagging it would have resulted in the removal of the promotional tone. Thus speedy deletion one hour after posting was perfectly proper. In the same section of my talk page, Tokyogirl79 posted an analyis of the available sources that they was able to find; I reccomend that anyone trying to create a new version of this article should read it carefully. I don't know if this article was posted with a direct conflict of interst or just by a fan of the subject, and I don't care to speculate on the matter. But the comments above are correct on how a COI should be handled. I will not now override the decision above. If SciFiChronicle, or anyone else, wants to have an article about the Winner Twins on Wikipedia, a new vesion should be started in the Draft: namespace, carefully based on independent reliable sources and with a carefully neutral tone. When (and if) such a draft is complete, a post should be made at deletion review linking to the draft, and asking for permission to recreate the article. Such a draft should not be a reposting of the deleted version, nor anything very similar. DES (talk) 12:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, this is SciFiChronicle and I would like to post an even simpler version for approval, and follow your directions, but I cannot figure out where you would like me to place it, as there is no place I can find on wikipedia called Draft: namespace. Can you please explain where that is? And how it differs from my sandbox? Thanks

Draft:Dr. William A. Hunter[edit]

I, Willermoz, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Willermoz (talk) 04:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I made the edits and gathered the new sources that further contribute to the validation of this being a person worthy of note, but I was unsure as to how to resubmit it. Now, I discover it has been deleted. "Save page" button below -Willermoz (talk) 04:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Paolo Vineis[edit]

I, 151.68.40.124, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 151.68.40.124 (talk) 06:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:FayDay[edit]

I, JD29301, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. JD29301 (talk) 08:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The artist is very well known and relevant with a strong following. "Save page" button below -JD29301 (talk) 09:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg 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. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 09:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Nicholas Newton, again[edit]

Nnewton44 (talk) 10:34, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Nnewton44: already Yes check.svg Done: the page Draft:Nicholas Newton was restored on 4 July after your previous request and is available for you to work on. For advice, see the reviewer's comments and WP:Notability (summary); also, if you are the subject of the article, see Wikipedia:Autobiography. JohnCD (talk) 10:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ivan Djeparoski[edit]

The article Ivan Djeparoski has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. I would like to add reliable references to the article. Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by DafDz (talkcontribs) 10:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@DafDz: Yes check.svg Done. I have reset the timer, so you have seven days to add references to reliable sources. JohnCD (talk) 11:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Nnewton44/sandbox[edit]

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Nnewton44 (talk) 10:43, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Nnewton44: X mark.svg Not done - this material is now at Draft:Nicholas Newton, see two items above this, and that is where you should work on it. JohnCD (talk) 11:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:American Benefits Council[edit]

I, JessieCheerio, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. JessieCheerio (talk) 13:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@JessieCheerio: Yes check.svg 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) 13:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Toy Network Star (Season 1)[edit]

The Reason Why I Want This Page Undeleted Is Because It's Not Copyright -StaufferBuddy (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Francisco D'Agostino[edit]

Page was a soft delete without much discussion. The article was deleted by a confirmed sock-puppet abuser with a COI. The principle investigators suspected, but not could prove all the socks were a PR firm hired by various firms, entities, and persons.

In particular there has been some fishy operations around the pages for Derwick Associates and its owners, Alejandro Betancourt Lopez, Pedro Trebbau Lopez, and Francisco D'Agostino. Several of the user involved on one or more of these pages were found to be sock puppets with a similar COI. And one user, FergusM1970, openly admitted he had been paid by Derwick Associates to remove details from the page:

There are several reliable sources that state D'Agostino is indeed a founder and owner of Derwick Associates. There's plenty of news coverage and I think it merits a re-examination of the page. Righteousskills (talk) 17:36, 7 July 2015 (UTC) -Righteousskills (talk) 17:36, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Atomium 320 by 240 CCBY20 flickr Mike Cattell.jpg[edit]

This image was deleted with the edit summary "Violation of FoP". This is not correct. Per : "The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place." That does not apply exclusively to architectural works in the US...it means that creator of an architectural does not have any copyright claim to pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place. Wikipedia is only subject to the copyright laws of the US...see the content policy Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights. Freedom of Panorama is not subject covered by any IP treaty between the US & Belgium (location of the work). This image should be tagged with Template:FoP-USonly and then re-added to Atomium. -AHeneen (talk) 17:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)