Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 29

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30


I am a real person and I write books and have written 6 science fiction books and many short stories and my fans wanted to know about me so I put up the information on wikipedia.

I DO NOT Appreciate at all saying I am a hoax , as it said in the description on the delete ocde and I am NOT a hoax and I am real and I hope you do not treat all Book AUTHORS like this and please undo this deletion or I will be forced to say things on my site about you and believe me I have like 16,000 fans out there and more each day.... IT WOULD NOT BE IN YOUR BEST INTEREST IF WORD GETS OUT YOU TREAT BOOK/ LITERATURE AUTHORS THIS WAY!

Please come to my site and look for your site what I have written and see that I am a real author and have written 6 online BOOKS and many short stories so far of 24 chapters average in each of the books.

CM WALTERS -Mutt43 (talk) 19:51, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

please undelete my page ...CM WALTERS

Or I will take legal action against you and also take severe steps in denouncing wikipedia to the many literature sites as I can and I am shocked and mad at the fact you called me a hoax and I am sure other authors have done through this, but to be called a hoax, is disgraceful and very maddening.

Do you really want to take a chance that someday I might get books published in hardback or paperback and come out and say that wikipedia deleted my information page and called me a hoax. I may never get to the point but with the fan base I have now in 16,000 fans of my writings, you never know and the point if an author is somewhat known or known, he had written books or short stories that had been published online or in harbook or paper book, you CAN NOT call them a hoax or delete their information page.

please contact me at and to vertify I have written 6 science fiction books and have started a new way to write science fiction called "realism science fiction", please go to this site which is where my books and short stories are..........

CM WALTERS - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutt43 (talkcontribs) 20:04, 22 January 2011

Not done. Mr Walters, our policy of WP:No legal threats means that I have blocked your account until you unequivocally withdraw the threat. I'm sorry that your article was called a hoax, but that is probably because you gave no references, searches in places like Google Books and Worldcat don't find your books, and one of Wikipedia's principles is WP:Verifiability - everything needs to be verifiable from a reliable source. However, your article would not be acceptable in any case, because to have a Wikipedia article an author, or anyone else, has to be notable, which is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." For an author, that would mean reviews of published works in mainstream publications - see WP:AUTHOR. Also, people are strongly discouraged from writing about themselves, for reasons explained at WP:Autobiography. JohnCD (talk) 20:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Christina Victoria Grimmie

reasoning -Tweenager (talk) 23:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who implemented the deletion request, user Acroterion (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The page had a total lack of reliable sources, which is now a requirement for biographies of living people. Fences&Windows 23:35, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Peacock displaying 800pix.jpg

Request temporary undeletion to fix attribution details at Commons copy. Kelly hi! 06:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

No file by that name has been deleted from Sure you got the right name? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, looks like there was a rename involved. Make that File:Peacock.displaying.800pix.jpg. Kelly hi! 06:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Could you leave a note here or on my talk page when you're done so it can be zapped again? Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:34, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Done. It can be deleted again anytime. Kelly hi! 06:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

America's Next Top Model, Cycle 16

Article has been previously deleted and can only be recreated by administrators (I'm not). Mostly recently deleted in Nov 2010. Cycle has been confirmed by the network and debut dates announced (Feb 23rd). Should qualify for an article as an upcoming, confirmed reality TV series. References are available all over the America's Next Top Model main page in regard to debut, overseas destination, etc. More can be found on the ANTM page at The CW's website and on Facebook. User Talk:apex204 18:01, 16 January 2011 (GMT)

Not done this article was a mess - it appears to have been a cut-and-paste from another season, no relevant references, and in the last versions was deleted as g3! If you'd create a user draft & then bring it here or to deletion review, an admin could review the new version and copy it over to this title. Skier Dude (talk) 04:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Roy Fisk

- (talk) 10:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done - the article contained no assertion that the subject was in any way notable; it seemed to be basically an obituary. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:22, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Tavisupleba Video Montage.jpg

This image was deleted because Kelly (talk · contribs) challenged its eligibility for public domain classification under the copyright laws of (ex-Soviet) Georgia. There was no discussion other than the original challenge and my response saying I believed the original classification was correct. I conceded I might be mistaken and requested help in determining whether a fair-use classification would be more appropriate, but no one offered to help and I was given no further opportunity to discuss the issue before the decision was made to delete. -Richwales (talk · contribs) 01:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done It wasn't deleted through a process that can be reversed here. You'd have to talk to SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and/or take it to DRV. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Brian Cooper (Australia)

I can't figure out how to contact the administrator personally. The bottom line is the website he said was identical and therefore a copyright infringement was created by me as well. I have taken that site down ( so now there is no issue of copyright infringement and I want the wikipedia page I created restored. -Miriam12345 (talk) 01:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done You would have to post on User talk:Beeblebrox. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Cinema Strange

Cinema Strange is an important band in the Goth/Death Rock music movements. It played a key role in music and continues to influence many artists. Information regarding this band should be available through Wikipedia. - (talk) 11:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning music. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning musicians or music groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Consider creating a draft in your userspace or submitting to WP:AFC. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Maxtech Consumer Products

I am disputing of the deletion of this page because it contained facts, references and external links. The page wasn't written with a bias, everything stated is factual and can be checked with either the references and other materials. This company supplies North American retailers with a lot of products, and has been important in the development of the tool industry there. They work with many international suppliers and retailers. Could someone suggest to me how to amend the article to make it appropriate for publication? Thank you -Consumer101 (talk) 18:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done. At the time of deletion the page included two references. One was a link to the company home page the other was a link to a press release. I am going to guess from the name of the account that you are associated with the business in question. If that is the case my sincere advice is that you wait for someone unrelated to the company to write an article from reliable, independent sources. That will be a much smoother ride than attempting to get ahead of the curve and write an article about your own business from company sources or privileged knowledge. There are some links at the top of this page which can help explain the issues with editing about yourself or people/things close to you as well as some advice on starting your first article. Protonk (talk) 19:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The page also included several notes that refer to press releases and articles available online, which can be confirmed. I'm not associated with the company, I chose the name as I am a consumer and would like to add information to retail and product related pages from my local area, I am interested in local commerce. Consumer101 (talk) 19:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  • In that case disregard the comments about conflicts of interest, but it still is important to remember that press releases alone are insufficient to indicate that a company is notable. I can email you the content of the article or move it to your user space if you wish to work on it without worry of immediate deletion, but I can't unilaterally overturn the speedy deletion. Protonk (talk) 19:48, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, if you could move it to my user space that would be great. I'm hoping to contribute a couple more articles in the next little while and start making changes on other pages. Thanks! Consumer101 (talk) 19:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


This page was a reference not only to the rich history of this particular land, but also as a testament to the legend and mythology of this area of Scotland. Thus, it is not a hoax and it follows the family history that has been long associated with this particular branch of the Henderson family. -DamianXIII (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done"Thousands of years ago, on a hot, lazy Saturday afternoon on the coast of Scotland, great great great great great granddaddy Lochabar... strolled into town during the annual Atlantean arm wrestling contest... decided to enter the contest, putting up his vintage 1969 Corvette Stingray as collateral. He swept through the preliminary rounds, defeating such legendary heroes as Sean Connery, Pecos Bill, Wilford Brimley, and M. Bison. As he reached the final round he found himself facing the reigning champion, five-time Emmy Award winning actor, the Loch Ness Monster. After a three day struggle against his now long time rival, he emerged triumphant from the Hyperbolic Time Chamber, holding high the sword of Conner 'The Highlander' MacLeod, which he later used to try to deflect the time bullet which was fired by, and later killed, Abraham 'Chaingun' Lincoln." Shameless and moronic hoax. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Lampropeltis triangulum elapsoides.jpg

Image was deleted per WP:CSD#I8, but I don't think "All information on the image description page is present on the Commons image description page". Why? Well, the Commons page lists the source of the image as "". Oops! -Ken_g6 (factors | composites) 06:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, let me know when it can be deleted locally again. Courcelles 06:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


This article provides information about a company that is currently in business. The page was similar in nature to other tea vendors (Teavana, Lipton, Tavalon_Tea, etc) that are currently still available. - (talk) 03:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject.. Being in business is neither necessary nor sufficient as Wikipedia isn't a business directory although many consider it it one.--Tikiwont (talk) 16:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

National Association of Sports Commissions

This article is not meant to be an advertisement or promotion for the non-profit organization. Rather, it is meant to be an educational article. Many associations have wikipedia pages, and this page is meant to fill a similar educational need that other associations use. Please advise any necessary text changes to be made to restore the content. Thank you. -Lilybeth4983 (talk) 14:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user VernoWhitney (talk), who proposed it, in case he wishes to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion. Please read the note on the article talk page, which says that several paragraphs were removed as copyright violations and must not be restored unless a proper release is made. What the article most needs is independent references: it is not clear that the organization meets Wikipedia's notability requirement, which requires showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." JohnCD (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


the page was deleted under the G12 due to Unambiguous copyright infringement of ?UNIQ6a7bc6c4739151b2-nowiki-00000000-QINU (talk) 15:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC) . 'I am unable to understand the reason. Please specify in details so that further I am able to rectify because this article means very much to all the supporters of the National Club of India- Mohun Bagan. It elaborated the history of why it became so famous and was honored as the National Club. It signifies the victory over the British team, in other words it celebrated the fight for Independence of our country India and also the partition of Bengal. I would be highly obliged if Roger W Haworth- the patrolling member who deleted my article to specify in details the why i should not write the article further as it has been protected.'— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Not done The subject may be noteworthy; but that does not license you to violate the copyright of the author of the material you cut and pasted into Wikipedia. I would suggest you create a new article in a sandbox of your own in your userspace, relying on published accounts but using your own words to convey the information (and without the breathlessly partisan fan-boy voice used so far). --Orange Mike | Talk 16:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Fin nippers

reasoning -MasterHoyt (talk) 21:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

01:52, 7 January 2009 Esanchez7587 (talk | contribs) deleted "Fin nippers" ‎ (G1: Patent nonsense, meaningless, or incomprehensible)

Please replace this article.

Or please allow me to request temporary undeletion of the file or better please email me a copy of the article as was prior to deletion. I will make the necessary edits. I believe this to be a very important page on Wikipedia and would very much like to see it replaced.

Thank you for any help!

Not done as Protonk said - there's the whole thing - 6 words... Skier Dude (talk) 02:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Ramaiah Ramesh

reasoning -R Ramesh (talk) 23:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done. This page was deleted under the speedy deletion criteria for individuals where the importance of the subject was not asserted. I see no reason to unilaterally reverse the decision. Protonk (talk) 23:43, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Note This user has been indefinitely blocked for creating inappropriate pages (vandalism-only account), vandalizing pages, and putting personal information in articles (which I'm not sure is a blockable offense but is incidentally quite creepy). This page included telephone numbers. l'aquatique[talk] 01:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Conscious Convictions

Help a band get big, and help friends get out of their poor homes -Jsarg123456789 (talk) 06:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Note, the page wasn't deleted when this request was made, I have since deleted it. To you, User:Jsarg123456789, I'm afraid wikipedia as not the place to help your band get big. When you do get big and put an album out that charts or you receive some significant press coverage then rest assured your fans will rush to make an article for your band. Until that point we can't accept an article on this subject. Protonk (talk) 06:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Joe Conway

the article was deleted as a PROD with a statement that this is a non-notable politician. However, there has recently been an election called in Ireland, and Councillor Joe Conway is a declared candidate. Thus I feel it would be fair and desirable to cause the page to become accessible again, and it would cause information to become available to the irish people about a candidate in this important election. -PopOwl (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done So? Candidates are not inherently notable; and WP:ITSUSEFUL is not an argument of any weight. Unless you can come up with more substantial evidence of actual notability, this one stays deleted. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

::You're declining an undeletion request on an article that has not been deleted? :) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

My attention has subsequently been drawn to the flaws in my argument for the article's un-deletion, and I just hoped that I might be allowed a second bit at the cherry. The Article was deleted due to the fact that the politician in question is non-notable. However, Wikipedia's guidelines on the notability of politicians mentions, as criteria of notability, "Politicians who have held ... sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature." This describes Joe Conway, who is an elected member of Tramore Town Concil and Waterford County Council, as well as many other Irish politicians without wikipedia pages. The guidelines go on to mention "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. Generally speaking, mayors of cities of at least regional importance are likely to meet this criterion, as are members of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city." Joe Conway is certainly a major political figure. The following page displays his immense popularity in his area, and the fact that he garnered the more votes than any other candidate in the 2009 local elections: Furthermore, the following page shows that Joe Conway served as mayor of Tramore in the recent past. This is a town of "at least regional importance" in the Waterford region. The guidelines also state that "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article" is key to achieving notability. The following page of search results from one of Waterford's local newspapers demonstrates the frequency and significance of Conway's press coverage. The role of Ireland's County Councils is that of the higest level of local representation in Ireland, akin to US state legislatures in terms of significance. Don't take my word for it: check out Airteagal 28A of Bunreacht na hÉireann for proof. Councillors fit the guidelines for notability provided by wikipedia, and indeed some councillors have wikipedia pages accordingly, for example John Halligan. This is why I think that Conway's page should be un-deleted, and that pages for other councillors should be allowed to be created. Any thoughts? PopOwl (talk) 22:37, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in the field of mhealth - (talk) 07:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Nothing to do here - you have removed the PROD, as you are entitled to, and the page has not been deleted. JohnCD (talk) 11:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

reasoning -DavidGekiWolf (talk) 11:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm gonna say, the article will not be deleted. Beacause Nikki hosted Convergence

Don't cry before you're hit. This page is for requesting restoration of articles which have been deleted. This one hasn't. But you need to find some independent references, because Wikipedia's notability requirement means you have to show "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." JohnCD (talk) 11:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Footnote: user blocked as a sock and article deleted WP:CSD#G5 by Prolog (talk). JohnCD (talk) 11:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
  • X mark.svg Not done Leaving this here for the bot. Protonk (talk) 18:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Vaibhav Kala

Vaibhav Kala · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

ICON Advisers, Inc.

This is the first time our company has developed a Wiki page. We are the trademark owner of ICON Advisers, Inc. and the copyright owner of any content written on behalf of ICON Advisers. Our Marketing department is still trying to figure out how to add references (the reason for our page being deleted in the first place). We are educating ourselves on using your site and feel we have a better understanding at this time. -Brookfieldj (talk) 19:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done. I'm sorry, but you have completely misunderstood what Wikipedia is. It is a collaborative project to build an encyclopedia. It is not a business listing directory like Wikicompany; it is certainly not a free notice-board for your marketing department's use. Never mind the copyright issue, your article was a blatant advertisement: "a boutique investment company offering sector-based portfolio solutions to help clients reach their financial goals" "ICON’s value-based investing model is an analytical, quantitative approach" "information about the Funds... available by visiting or calling 1-800-828-4881". Wikipedia is not for any kind of advertising or promotion, it requires a neutral point of view and to that end has strong rules against editing with a conflict of interest. See the WP:FAQ/Organizations for more information. JohnCD (talk) 23:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

HairMax LaserComb

The proposed article is different from other postings on the HairMax LaserComb. The article is factual with references and is not promotional in any way. Therefore, the proposed speedy deletion is unjustified. See Wiki article on Minoxidil and you will see that this article on the HairMax LaserComb follows the same format.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Namllits2011 (talkcontribs) Namllits2011 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

X mark.svg Not done Not being uncontroversial per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HairMax LaserComb, you'd need to contact the latest deleting admin, Ron Ritzman. -Tikiwont (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Greenbrier Mall

Page was deleted for no claim of notability. Request temporary undeletion in order to edit and provide references. -Andy.hyc (talk) 15:19, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done - none of that constitutes substantial coverage; indeed, the mall itself is not even the subject of some of those articles. If you think substantial coverage can be found, why not work on a draft in a sandbox in your userspace? --Orange Mike | Talk 15:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Again, why not undelete and treat this as an uncontested PROD? Please see the discussion on the talk page of this page. Hobit (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. If anybody wants to further contest its notability, that's what AfD is for. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Helena von Schantz

This page was deleted before I was even aware of it - let alone able to contest it or add substance to the page. (I was out of the country when it was tagged). Since she is a politician, and in the minority liberal camp, I cannot rule out that the deletion was politically motivated. I have cited her on other pages, because she is an important voice in Swedish liberal feminism, a small but vital community in a country dominated by radical feminism. Silencing her voice silences access to liberal disent in Swedish politics. Just because she failed to be elected in the last election does not diminish her place in the women's caucus of the Swedish Liberal Party. Michael Goodyear 17:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can tell there was no discussion. I would not say it "clearly" fails. Election to office is not the sole criteria by which one can judge someone's notability in political life. Discussion is obviously a lot easier when the article still exists and can be commented on. Michael Goodyear 22:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
And election to office is not the "sole" criterion used to define notability here at the wiki, however it is important. Did you read the guideline I posted? Unless you can provide evidence of significant coverage in a major media outlet, an unelected official is highly unlikely to be considered notable. If you disagree with our notability guidelines, try bringing it up at the notability discussion board. l'aquatique[talk] 00:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd say we should, in general, restore deleted PRODs here unless there is a really strong reason not to. My understanding of WP:REFUND is that was part of it's charter. If you feel strongly that this article doesn't meet notability requirements then restore and send to AfD. If anyone had objected in time, we'd not have deleted. Hobit (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I concur and have restored it, though I've sent it straight to AfD. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I wasn't sure about what our policy was regarding expired prods- I had seen people denying these requests for the same reason (non-notable) and there aren't obvious instructions anywhere here. Now I know, thanks for correcting me! l'aquatique[talk] 21:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Retired numbers in association football

the page was not already deleted, but so the most of its contents were -Fma12 (talk) 01:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I suppose the contents were deleted by mistake. Moreover, I have not seen any reason to such a big deletion.

Huh? The page hasn't been deleted. Ever. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
See [1]. 95% of the content was erased by IP's. Just needed a revert. Courcelles 01:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Regent Motors, Morecambe

Everything on this article is relvent, I have included valid sources and references. The page has not yet been finished. -Jriley95 (talk) 09:53, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Merely being listed as a business somewhere does not fit the bill. --Tikiwont (talk) 14:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

reinclusion due to high relevance for online poker in general -Xantos-Gib (talk) 10:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The article on was deleted quite some time ago, mainly because it was viewed as (a) spammy/gambling related and (b) irrelevant.
The notion of irrelevance back then was fostered by the fact that it had nearly no U.S. traffic (quantcast traffic rank citation) - which is due to the case that for legal reasons, it does not accept U.S. customers.
Internationally, though, it is very relevant - it's the most trafficked poker information site / online forum world-wide.
The overall relevance of online poker (even though morally questionable) should not be at question, and inside of online poker, the relevance of is widely considered to be second only to the two giant operators PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker.
From a content / user perspective, is a poker community and school, pretty comparable to e.g. DeucesCracked.
The page of course needs to be updated / rewritten etc. - where I would participate and hope others to do the same.

Xantos-Gib (talk) 10:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Not done You need to take this to DRV since this was deleted after a discussion at AFD. My advice would be to write up a draft in your userspace before going to DRV. Spartaz Humbug! 13:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

River Oaks Baptist School

The article was deleted on the grounds that River Oaks Baptist School is a "Primary school." This information is inaccurate. River Oaks Baptist School has students from age two through eighth grade. It has a primary school, a lower school, and a middle school. - (talk) 21:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user  (talk), who proposed it, in case they wishes to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion. The point made in the PROD was that only high schools come within the policy WP:NHS which means they are accepted as notable, whereas other schools are normally redirected to the article for the relevant education authority. JohnCD (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Amazon Falls

Copyright Problem -AlexanderMaxwellWood (talk) 23:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I submitted Amazon Falls, a Canadian feature film to the Wikipedia website. I was given the Amazon Falls movie poster by the Director Katrin Bowen and Producer Darren Reiter. They are the owners/creators of both the film and the poster. I am putting forth a request for undeletion for this page. I will resubmit the poster once I properly sort out the Wikipedia copyright requirements.

Please advise

Sincerely Alexander Maxwell Wood

  • X mark.svg Not done. Hi Alexander. Unfortunately due to our copyright license it is not sufficient for you to be in contact with the owners of the original poster/film. In order for that content to be included on wikipedia (assuming the film itself meets our guidance for inclusion) the material on the wikipedia page must be released under the GFDL or a supported Creative Commons license. In simple terms, the text needs to be in the public domain. If you wish to release the text or the image to the public domain you may follow the instructions here. If you like I can help you with releasing the material or navigating our copyright policies, just ask here or on my talk page. Protonk (talk) 23:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


Relevant for students studies or engeneers working with micros gaining information - (talk) 14:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Not done The place to have this comment is at the AFD. Please read WP:GNG and WP:AADD to understand how best to approach a deletion discussion. Spartaz Humbug! 14:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

ferret legging

As an avid ferret legger parcipitating in numourus ferret legging events i am not someone to take ferret legging as a passing joke to be mocked by unferrit legging educated wiki supervisors.

Please using as much ferret legging information tell one why my upheld ferrit legging experiance knowledge has been mealy deleted from the article of ferret legging.

To trust a ferret while legging is maybe more dangerous than discerning the false promise of trust from the involved ferret. fact. - (talk) 19:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

  • This article hasn't been deleted, nor has your content. The edits you made are freely available in the page history. If you have a content dispute about the page itself the best place to raise that dispute is the talk page for that article. Protonk (talk) 19:47, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

chakradhar bezawada

reasoning - (talk) 00:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done This article was deleted by Admrboltz because it failed to say why this person is important (see CSD A7) and looking at the deleted text I would have to agree with the deletion. This is just an ordinary person. This is not meant as an insult because I'm also just an ordinary person and I wouldn't qualify for an article either. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


Contact request: would like to discuss with Lady Shalott the deletion of DNCH, via Skype. Please contact me via username danielzpoirier - (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done That's not what this page is for. If you wish to contact a particular editor, do so on their talk page. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

DNCH (2)

I have followed every protocol available to me to openly discuss the deletion of DNCH article with The Lady Shalott (deleter of mentioned), to no avail.

Do not wish to stay up all night. Request immediate resolution.

Please advise.

Daniel Poirier DNCH Enterprise, CEO

This is not the place for you to contact other users. If you wish to have a discussion with User:LadyofShalott you may do so by clicking this link and leaving a message on her/his talk page. Note that he/she is not necessarily online and you may have to wait for a reply. It is unlikely that he/she will to want to conduct the discussion anywhere outside of the wiki (i.e. skype). l'aquatique[talk] 06:51, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


I'm not going away -Dzp111 (talk) 09:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done. Wikipedia is not for publicizing your business or yourself; it is an encyclopedia, not a notice-board or a business listing directory. Your article gives no indication why it is notable enough to meet Wikipedia's entry requirements, and in writing about it yourself you have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you are not satisfied with the deleting administrator's response, you can list it at WP:Deletion review, but first you should read:
JohnCD (talk) 10:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Suicide of Nicola Raphael

reasoning -RR1953 (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

(Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at user:pagename.) - see below

Comment: This was deleted yesterday at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suicide of Nicola Raphael (2nd nomination), for the second time in just over a month. The comment above was placed by the requester, and is not true: the article has not in fact been userfied, but this may be meant as a request to userfy. My view is that in view of the decisive AfD that would be pointless, and would only lead to yet another AfD with more news cuttings but a similar result; but as I filed the second AfD, I will leave this decision for another admin. Certainly the article should only be reintroduced via WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done Agreed. Take it to deletion review. l'aquatique[talk] 17:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

hi i was trying to ask for it to be userfied thanks but my browser crasshed and i dont think i had entered things correctly

I have offered to email emailed the text. JohnCD (talk) 22:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Ginny Weasley

reasoning - (talk) 19:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done The article was merged to another article, not deleted. Please discuss on Talk:Dumbledore's Army if you want to split the article back out, but you will need to persuade people by demonstrating significant coverage of the character in reliable sources. Fences&Windows 20:14, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Kingsley Shacklebolt

reasoning - (talk) 19:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done The article was merged to another article, not deleted. Please discuss at Talk:Order of the Phoenix (organisation) if you want to split the article out again. Again, you need to show that multiple reliable sources have discussed the character in detail to warrant a separate page. Fences&Windows 20:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Ben Tillman

Undelete own userpage that was deleted per my request. -Ben Tillman (talk) 11:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

This account was renamed last year under right to vanish. Unless you have control of the other account, no. Fences&Windows 20:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
I do. Cheers, Vanished User 0001 (talk) 22:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done Welcome back. Fences&Windows 20:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Paperless Warehousing

I intend to modify the content of this page to comply to a neutral point of view. -Mark Clinch (talk) 23:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion G11. If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who implemented the deletion request, user Athaenara (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:15, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

DMP Electronics Inc.

the page provides info. to the entry "DMP Electronics Inc." shown in the Wiki page of "List of companies of Taiwan"

 -Wei48221 (talk) 07:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who implemented the deletion request, user C.Fred (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:15, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ebony March

Requester blocked as a sockpuppet. Protonk (talk) 16:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • This writer is very well-known and has a great deal of material available online and in retail outlets. Also, I have followed (to the best of my abilities) Wiki's guidelines. I'm not sure the exact reason for deletion (perhaps somebody complained), as nothing is plagiarized or copyright-infringed. I placed a number of the subject's interview subjects on the page and I assume that this is the item in question. I can remove those items. or unhighlight them. but to delete the page of a person who is indeed noteworthy because of one infraction that hasn't been clearly explained seems to be a bit over the top--especially for Wikipedia. If you need the names of the interview subjects whittled down a bit, that's fine with me and I'm sure Ebony March would have no objections. I just modeled the format of the page after other pages in which musicians, publications and writers listed those persons with whom they've collaborated. But nobody's work has been stolen or used to create anything on this page. So it's all verifiable and from a number of sources that can be searched by Wikipedia's team if necessary. Everything was online, in the paper or at Barnes and noble when I put the page together.-NikosSimpson (talk) 03:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
  • X mark.svg Not done - this page has not yet been deleted.. The deletion is being discussed. To participate in that discussion follow the link from the template at the top of the article. Protonk (talk) 03:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

deletion nominee has been identified and determined to know the subject

This article's deletion was supported by Bluefist. Bluefist's true identity has been obstructed, but I'm aware of who this individual is. This writer raised an issue that none of the information is searchable on IMDB. But at the time of inclusion, March HAD an IMDB page on IMDB professional. That's why I added the info. The IMDB page was deleted in December 2010. There is even a link to YouTube footage of March herself appearing in a trailer opposite actor Kerr Smith on the Wikipedia page.

Also, many individuals have books that are self-published and music that is self-released ( However, more accurately, Before When We Were Libertines was published by FBTC which is owned by someone named Lissy Ainsley (which is located on the inside flap of the book). This book has an ISBN of: 978-1-4507-1077-0

Next, the formatting is correct and does NOT infringe on copyright laws nor does it plagiarize any other page. All of the information IS searchable by GOOGLING March along with the subject's name. Each interview appears, plain as day. I've found numerous other interviews that she has conducted but failed to add them for lack of space. There is also an online itinerary via Google docs. I will return with the URL that has March's instructions to attend and conduct interviews with a number of these subjects. All of this info was online when I built this page. This writer is well-known and has work that is readily available to the public. This page has also been live for months and only now does someone wish to take issue with it. Had this issue been raised when the article on Ebony March first appeared, the argument might be valid, but to take issue ONLY after the interview subjects have been added reeks of a personal vendetta, which has NO place in Wikipedia, "Bluefist". -NikosSimpson (talk) 04:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Again, if you want to leave a comment, do so at the afd, not this page. This page is for contesting deleted articles only. Protonk (talk) 04:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
The admin who closes the AFD is not going to see what you just wrote above, You need to make your argument here. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
  • X mark.svg Not done, at AfD. Protonk (talk) 16:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


I would like the article restored to my userspace so I can work on it to attempt to address the problems that led to deletion. -Wac2011 (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done - there was nothing at this title but a redirect to "We Are Cloud". JohnCD (talk) 19:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

We Are Cloud

I would like the article restored to my userspace so I can work on it to attempt to address the problems that led to deletion. -Wac2011 (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done - article "userfied" to User:Wac2011/We Are Cloud. As this was deleted after a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/We Are Cloud, you should not restore it directly to the main space, but should first approach user Cirt (talk), the administrator who closed the deletion discussion, to get his/her agreement that the issues that caused deletion have been addressed. If you are then not satisfied, you should take it to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 19:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


Artist has worked with substantial Producer in her field. - (talk) 19:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Moreover, the text seems to have been copied from her own website. It has been deleted 3 eyars ago, so if you can come up with more that just the producer name, feel free to recreate it or ask at Wikipedia:Articles for creation . --Tikiwont (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Rosa Lee

Wrongfully deleted article of a published and well known author/actress WITH multiple web references given. Deleted by user "Bearcat" when all one has to do is simply follow the links provided to see the author is real and relevant. Proof is found at -Fredtoad (talk) 19:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done. There is no doubt that Ms Lee is real and has published books, but that is not enough for a Wikipedia article. Neither your links nor the references in the article show the "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" required to demonstrate notability. See also WP:AUTHOR and WP:42. JohnCD (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

1960 (album)

This is an album by a notable band, Soul-Junk (, (, (, (, with many other album titles included undisputed on wikipedia.

It received notable reviews (, (also several sited within the article itself).

It is released on a notable label, Sounds Familyre (, (, which has released many notable albums (, with widespread distribution (, ( (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done as a contested proposed deletion. I didn't look too closely at the sources but please be aware that WP:MUSIC has some pretty specific and standardized notability guidelines and this subject may not meet them. It still could be subject to a deletion nomination. Protonk (talk) 20:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

John B. Kimble (again)

This article was evidently deleted in 2007 and then redone and replaced in 2008 and had been up ever since but was deleted by JZG for an unknown reason. I believe the moderator was overzealous and arbitrary in his decison to remove and article after it had been on Wikipedia for more than three years. His guise of removing it because it had been deleted previously seems flimsy at best. The subject is interesting and has been receiving daily views for Wikipedia and its other subject matter. Thank you. - (talk) 03:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done. This has been discussed higher up this page: the reason for removal was that the page had been deleted after a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Kimble, and the new version did nothing to address the reasons for deletion. As a comment, though it is fuller it still seems to me to show no notability apart from being a political candidate, which per WP:POLITICIAN is not enough; moreover, it reads like a campaign manifesto, and Wikipedia is specifically not for promotion of any kind. I see from his talk page that the deleting admin, user JzG (talk), has been approached but declined to restore this article; if after reading that you want to proceed, you will have to go to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 12:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Office Cleaning

The page was mistaken for an advertorial article when in fact it is not. I saw a lot of advertorial articles on Wikipedia, why not delete those instead? Thank you -Jacob cruz (talk) 06:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done The article was a "coatrack" designed to provide a link to the website of the "Execu-clean" company for which you also tried to put in a promotional article. JohnCD (talk) 11:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Corporate Care - Interior Asset Management Services

I am an exterior marketing consultant tasked with creating a Wikipedia Page for Corporate Care. I was authorized by Corporate Care Executive management to complete this task, and all information. logos, was approved by the company. I can even provide authorization of these approvals. The article was deleted due to copy written material. However, most companies in which i searched has company logos, website information, etc. I did not promote the company, or provide any opinion on it's service whatsoever. The Wiki Page simply described it's officers, history, and service offerings, in an encyclopedic manner. I am requesting that this site be re-instated, and posted if possible, as Corporate IS one of the largest commercial maintenance firms in the United States. Thank you -Jamesbuscaglio1 (talk) 06:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Comment: This user page was discussed at WP:Help desk#Keep getting advertisement message. Even if the copyvio issue can be resolved, the page still reads like an advert according to PrimeHunter’s 22:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC) post. The requester's conflict of intrest apparently prevents him from seeing the lack of neutrality. —teb728 t c 09:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Not done. You have not understood what Wikipedia is. It is a collaborative project to build an encyclopedia. It is not a free advertising notice-board for paid marketing consultants to promote their clients, and we have strong rules about editing with a WP:Conflict of interest. Copyright material cannot be accepted on the basis of assertion of permission; a formal release from the copyright holder is essential, and in any case external material is unlikely to be suitable for an encyclopedia article, because (a) it will not show the significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources necessary to demonstrate the notability required for a Wikipedia article, and (b) it will be written in promotional terms (and if you think that "successfully led the company through many positive transitions to become a leader in the industry", "personalized, local service on a nationwide basis", "select service offerings" and the like are not promotional, then I'm sorry, but you have been too long in the PR business or are too close to your subject). More advice at WP:FAQ/Organizations. JohnCD (talk) 11:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)