Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48

File:Microsoft Management Console.png

Deleted because of not having fair-use ratioanle. Although I am not the uploader, I had seen this image before. I believe I can supply a valid fair use rationale, if it is undeleted. -Fleet Command (talk) 22:41, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Microsoft WSUS Admin 2.png

Deleted because of not having fair-use ratioanle. Although I am not the uploader, I have seen this image before. I believe I can supply a valid fair use rationale, if it is undeleted. -Fleet Command (talk) 22:44, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Center Parcs Longleat Forest

This article represents a Center Parcs Holiday Village (Longleat Forest) and I am not sure why it was deleted in 2008 due to false advertising. If/When this page is undeleted, it will be edited with real information on Longleat and will not contain any reason for deletion. I was in no way involved in the deletion of this article - I would like it undeleted so I can work on it. Thanks -Chris6273 (talk) 23:47, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Not deleted for false advertising, but for normal advertising and copyright infringement. It would be better to continue writing what is there. I have declined the speedy delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Mary Ellen Mazey

The article was deleted because of copyright issue. Permission received. See ticket:2011081910013399. -t m yan OMG 05:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. JohnCD (talk) 14:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

beaulieu house

This is an historic home on the cliff walk. It was designed in part, by Calvert Vaux. It is of great interest to anyone who studies the Astors: the brothers lived side by side on Fifth Avenue and on Newport before William Waldorf Astor moved to England. Beechwood is world famous-and this home has a strong connection to it. To call it non-notable is really insane. The Vanderbilt connection is in itself notable--Grace Vanderbilt's venue. I never saw the article, but it should be restored and built upon. -Peter Alsen (talk) 12:37, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Any sourced information you can add, and any references you can add to verify what the article says, will help. JohnCD (talk) 14:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Christian-New Age dialogue

please restore to userspace so I can work upon concerns about piece as per "What to do about it" item 6. Thank you. -Christian-New Age Dialogue (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done to User:Christian-New Age Dialogue/Christian-New Age dialogue. Before returning it to the main encyclopedia, you should seek permission from user Joe Decker (talk), the administrator who closed the deletion discussion; if he does not agree, you can go to WP:Deletion review.
Before you put much effort into this, I urge you to read, carefully, WP:No original research and WP:NOTESSAY, and to reflect on the fact that at the deletion debate the unanimous opinion of ten Wikipedians was that this was not suitable, in terms of Wikipedia policies, for an encyclopedia, while the voices for keeping it were all single-purpose accounts using arguments like "well-written, neutral, and dealing effectively with the difficulties of dialogue", "encouraging a (possibly lively) discussion between folks interesting in both Christian and New Age dialogues", and "Wikipedia should be a forum for dialogue" which showed a lack of understanding of what the purpose of an encyclopedia is. There are many websites which would be happy to host a forum for your dialogue, but that is not what Wikipedia is here for, and I must advise you that in my opinion there is so large a gap between what you and your followers want to do and what Wikipedia is here for, that any effort you put into trying to get this posted here by rewriting it is likely to be wasted. JohnCD (talk) 21:16, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Friends Match Me

Friends Match Me free dating site/facebook app should be added here. It is the only dating site where members can find out if they have mutual friends or similar Facebook Likes with other members. It is increasing rapidly in popularity and should not be removed from this list, especially as it is the only totally free app here. -Designw (talk) 19:44, 20 August 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. JohnCD (talk) 08:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Bio+Green Crystals

This was my first article for Wikipedia. Although I did see the PROD notice on the top of the page, I didn't know that I was supposed to respond to it. I had no idea that the article had been deleted until this morning when I went to check my contributions count and saw that over half of mine (those involved in the creation of the Bio+Green Crystals article) were gone.

I realized in the writing of the article that I had to be careful that the finished page did not sound like an advertisement. I feel I accomplished that. Bio+Green Crystals is a revolutionary product which is referenced in numerous places on the web, so much so that I felt a Wikipedia page was warranted. I am currently working on an article on the company that produces B+G C, National Bio+Green Sciences. Because of the advances they have made in "green" technology NBGS has garnered a great deal of attention in the industry. Once again - enough to warrant a page.

I feel that this page on NBGS will justify the undeletion of the B+G C article, if for no other reason than the NBGS article will link directly with it.

I thank you for taking the time to consider my reasoning, and look forward to a favorable resolution -Jmasiulewicz (talk) 22:43, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Pigsonthewing (talk), who proposed it, in case s/he wishes to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days to which you could contribute. Despite your efforts, I'm afraid this still comes across as though written by the company's PR department: "Based upon a unique crystal particle technology, Bio+Green Crystals are hypoallergenic, doctor endorsed, and non-toxic to humans and pets" is pure ad-speak, there are "peacock terms" like "unique" (three times) and "innovative", and the references all read like press releases rather than the independent comment needed to establish notability. JohnCD (talk) 08:37, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Manchester Director Area

Article deletion unfair supposed to be a consensus 3 people objected, how can that be a consensus of the millions of wikipedia users around the world? Links to the original sources were removed by another editor. Generla atmoshpere of petty small mindedness, "how dare you presume to write on our wikipedia" -Villaged13 (talk) 13:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester Director Area, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Spartaz (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. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)


The entries for the article(HispanTV-Spanish) exist in English and Persian. -Farzadparsayi (talk) 13:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

--Farzadparsayi (talk) 13:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

The page has not been deleted. If your problem is that it has been deleted on the Spanish Wikipedia, we can do nothing here, and you must take it up with them - each Wikipedia is separate and has its own standards and procedures. JohnCD (talk) 15:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I have significant information and publications I wish to share on Wikipedia. I am a professor with 63 publications I want to share which includes books, media and other items. -Aggiebulldog (talk) 16:54, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

While I have temporarily blocked this account for persistent spammy addition of CVs, I must protest that this is a matter of WP:COI, not autobiography; this editor was apparently tasked with creating articles about all the faculty at her (his?) campus. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:10, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, but he started with himself - see User talk:JohnCD#Stacey D. Lyle. JohnCD (talk) 21:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

RE: I Am Equal Photo Documentary images

File deleted for improper license by Zzyzx11 but I hold that this page should not be speedy deleted because... Fair Use: Image is from the publicly accessible project photo gallery ( and a free version can not be created due to logo and photographic trademarks held by Jason Beckett, Matt Spencer, and the I AM EQUAL Foundation. Images from the gallery have been freely used in newspapers, blogs, social media, and TV news reports across the US. -Steinway1701 (talk) 05:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)Steinway1701 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • This file was deleted per CSD # F3 - Improper license because the uploader originally claimed in the file description that it was a "for non-commercial use only" image. The user is however free to re-upload it again, claiming fair use, by adhering to the guidelines of Wikipedia:Non-free content. I am in no position to restore it myself because one of the requirements of the non-free content guideline is to include a sufficient fair use rationale, which should be written by the uploader. Without it, the file will immediately move back into the speedy deletion queue. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
  • When I attempt to re-upload the files I get a message telling me that the file has already be marked for deletion. The option to ignore the warning takes me to a a server error page. I'd like to reload them using the Fair Use reasoning used above. Suggestions would be appreciated. Should I just use a completely different name on the upload? Steinway1701 (talk) 06:53, 22 August 2011 (UTC)Steinway1701 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
    • If these are non-free photographs, then I'm afraid you are trying to use far too many of them. I am currently not quite convinced even the subject of the article is notable enough for an article in the first place, but even if it is, there is no reason to have more than one image for illustration, and you'd need to spell out a more explicit rationale about why you need even as much as that. Fut.Perf. 07:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
  • You will note from the original article that the I Am Equal Photo Documentary is a unique art project from photographer Matt Spencer. Each image is unique and can not be duplicated. References to celebrities, corporations, and groups that have participated is noteworthy in itself and thus justify supportive materials (such as images). When Chelsea Handler participates, shares a personal story with the project, posts about it on her Facebook page, and on the front page of her website, that would lead me to believe it's important to her as a celebrity. Adding her image to her article to backup the information about her participation seems only natural. I hold the same is true for any of the noteworthy project participants. If they are important enough to warrant an article in Wikipedia, and have made a personal effort to get involved in this art project, then it stands to reason that supporting their involvement with additions to their articles and the photo itself is completely in alignment with the purpose of the site. (I.E. If an individual is noted to have stood on the deck of the Titanic AND there is a picture to prove it, it only stands to reason that the supporting image would be included with the reference.) These images are specifically supportive of the fact that these individuals did chose to participate in the I Am Equal photo documentary and that information being included in the articles about the individuals is completely legitimate. Thus, I feel the images should be allowed and Fut.Perf. should return all references to the project back to the article from whence they were removed. Steinway1701 (talk) 18:21, 22 August 2011 (UTC)Steinway1701 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


the aviation criteria were clearly stated. this is the only image found of the crashed aircraft. this is a standard and accepted usage of the wiki aviation project -Flyinglawyer83 (talk) 08:33, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Nathan Shepherd

played two games for Morton last season, who are fully professional -Salty1984 (talk) 18:50, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. January (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Charybdis (IRCd)

Please userfy the page to my userspace so I can work on it at a later time. -Kudu ~I/O~ 13:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done to User:KuduIO/Charybdis (IRCd). as this was deleted after WP:Articles for deletion/Charybdis (IRCd), you should not move it back without agreement from Cirt (talk), the closing admin. If he does not agree, you should go to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 20:20, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Roland 1x22.jpg

Non-free fair use screenshot of Roland (The X-Files), an episode of The X-Files, which was deleted uncontroversially after the previous article was upmerged due to not asserting notability. I'm requesting undeletion as the article has been re-created with more thorough coverage of the subject. -Rymatz (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done January (talk) 21:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The Chicago Corporation

Dear Sir or Madame: You have deleted the proposed page for The Chicago Corporation initially because it was a "subject of little importance", then it was because it was "purely promotion" and now because it was "spam". I respectfully disagree with all of your reasons. The Chicago Corporation is an investment banking firm; a fully licensed and registered member of FINRA and SIPC, which are the regulatory and insurance authorities for securities firms; a firm that traces its roots back to 1965; and a firm that looks like many other investment banking firms on Wikipedia including Lincoln International, Robert W. Baird & Co., William Blair & Co., Lazard. If you look at our website,, you can see that we have over 35 professionals associated with our firm and that we have done business with many household names as clients. We are not looking for any special treatment, just equal treatment to what you routinely give all of our competitors. I am sure that you receive submissions that are not legitimate ones. This is a legitimate article. We are a real firm. We deserve fair treatment. Please contact me if you have any questions. Fred Floberg. (Redacted). Thank you. -Thechicagocorporation (talk) 15:01, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


Information on the photograph was edited to include the following: Photograph by Tatjana Loh, owned by Mike Miller and used as promotional material, permission granted by Mike Miller for use and redistribution at will. This picture has been used as cover art on a CD "Save the Moon," for concert advertising, and has been previously published. The images have been reduced in size and resolution. This image falls in the category of non-free promotional use. Referred sources: Diegosf (talk) 19:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -Diegosf (talk) 19:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Referred sources added Diegosf (talk) 19:49, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The image has not yet been deleted, but if it is intended for Mike Miller (guitarist), it won't meet non-free content criteria. One of the requirements is that the image should not be replaceable with a free image, and images of living people are usually assumed replaceable as a new image could be taken of the person at any time (please see WP:Non-free content#Unacceptable use). We could accept this image only if the copyright holder is willing to release it under a free licence such as CC BY-SA 3.0; if they are, WP:Donating copyrighted materials explains how to go about confirming this. January (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Clinton Machine Company

reasoning -Copeland.James.H (talk) 00:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

This company built 11 millions small engines before it went out of business. It is not an active company. Some of these engines are still in use.

I do not know all of the details of this company.

X mark.svg Not done If the company meet WP:CORP you are free to create an article anew. The article that was created here, though, was not the proper content we need for an enccylopedic article. It's content 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.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

niki raapana

There is plenty of evidence that Niki Raapana exists as a very strong presence online and is mentioned in every article cited. - (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user JamesBWatson (talk), who proposed it, in case he wishes to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion. The first five references are to her ACL Books website (and #2, 4, 5 are deadlinks); #6 is something she wrote; #7 does not mention her name, and searching down all I find is a link back to one of the ACL Books deadlinks. To establish notability needs evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. JohnCD (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Jonas Hartmann

The article was accurate and it was being verified, please reinstate so we can verify the page - (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I Am Equal (photo documentary)

So, there are too many admins with their hands in the pot on this article. Last discussion I had was that this article was being moved somewhere I could work on it to address the concerns of G11 raised by other admins. That was less than an hour ago...and now the page is completely gone without notice. This whole wikipedia process is crazy. So many different admins with opinions and procedures and most of them seem to be working independently. I would appreciate it if I could continue to work on this article (being it's my first attempt to produce a wikipedia contribution) and then add it back to the site when it's ready. Steinway1701 (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -Steinway1701 (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I can't restore the article unilaterally, even though it isn't exactly "blatant advertising". However the tone of the article is completely inappropriate for a general interest encyclopedia. I can move a copy of the article into your userspace if you like. There you can work on it so that it can meet our core content policies of neutrality and verifiability. Protonk (talk) 20:18, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate that, but (as a newbie) I'm not totally clear what moving it to my "user space" means. I can research it and figure it out. Deleting the page outright seems extreme, but since there are so many admins involved in just about every aspect of my article, I don't even know where to begin a conversation for answers, guidance, or reasons for their actions. At this point, the only option I can see is to move it to an area where I can figure out how to please ALL the admins at the same time. At this rate, it seems like that's going to take a lot of work. I appreciate your willingness Protonk to give me a hand in getting this where it can be work shopped for the site. Thanks Steinway1701 (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
That's ok. I'm sorry for not elaborating. Your userspace is a page where you can work on drafts without worry that someone is going to delete a work in progress. For example User:Protonk/BTM is not really at a point where it could be an article but I can work on it at my leisure because it is not in the "encyclopedia" space. I agree that the deletion was hasty, however I don't think it was so egregious that I am empowered to immediately overturn it. If you want to contest the deletion you can make a post at deletion review--a process where a user can ask for consensus to overturn deletion. By contrast this page is for requests that can be performed unilaterally. I understand this is probably confusing, but if you want I can help you through the process. But before you make that decision take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article for some reasons as to why your submission may have received the attention it did. Protonk (talk) 20:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
The article and all past revisions are now at User:Steinway1701/I Am Equal (photo documentary). You can work on the article there. The issue is less "pleasing all the admins" and more toning down the prose to ensure Wikipedia presents a neutral picture of the subject and finding reliable sources to ensure it meets our guidelines for inclusion. Protonk (talk) 20:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Protonk for getting that moved over. I'll work to get the article up to Wikipedia standards. I have more than 40 news articles I pulled to build this page and I'm happy to go back and work on my referencing model. I was under the false impression that I should only use an article once (or twice) as a citation, but now I know better. The reality is, the news coverage is all very much the same because the project is pretty easy to grasp. I felt that repeating the same information in 6 citations was strange, so I deleted them, but I'll be sure to put them back now. Steinway1701 (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
The other big issue was the over-enthusiastic addition of this project to articles on famous people, just because they had their picture taken. We have a rule about adding undue emphasis to an article; and face it, having your picture taken is not exactly a major portion of the life even of a Chelsea Handler, much less a more significant human being. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
  • I get what you're saying Orange Mike and would agree, except that (at least in the case of Chelsea Handler) some of these individuals have gone out of their way on their websites and social networks to emphasize their involvement with the project (which is how I got introduced to it in the first place). It would seem that if it's important enough for a celebrity to get involved, use their photo as a catalyst for conversations about their charity work, post it on their social network, and have the image printed and placed in their office, it would constitute at least a mention in their article (or at least that was my reasoning behind adding the references in the first place. That and responding the the admin that added the ORPHAN template to the page implying that I needed to create those references. I don't think I would have gone down that road if not for that Orphan template on the page.). Steinway1701 (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Take a look at WP:UNDUE: just because Notable X blogs or tweets about a topic, does not mean that it constitutes a significant event in their lifetime career; and WP:NOTCONTAGIOUS: just because Notable Y interacts with Subject Z, does not lend notability to Subject Z. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Lion Of Judah

It is indeed a music album by Paul Wilbur Please note the references given in it for further cross verification - (talk) 10:29, 24 August 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. We don't even have an article about Paul Wilbur; far less are we going to have an article about an obscure album by a non-notable musician. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Bloc Party - The Prayer.ogg

This was orphaned due to a stupid error on my part. It should be restored to the article, as it meets fair use guidelines and has critical commentary in the text. Sorry.Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 17:21, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done. I restored the file but I did not yet add it back to the page. Should have a few days to do that before a bot tags it as orphaned again. Protonk (talk) 17:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Userify request

Could I get copies of the following deleted articles I authored placed in my userspace, so I can copy them offsite?

Thanks Mathewignash (talk) 01:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mathew. Since this is such a large request, would you mind if we simply emailed the articles to you? Arbitrarily0 (talk) 12:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
That would be great! Mathewignash (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Has anyone done this? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Not yet. Anyone? I'd appreciate it. Mathewignash (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
If this is too much work, you can just undelete the first couple, and I'll request a few more in a little while, until I get them all. Thanks! Mathewignash (talk) 21:00, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Please look at the original article titles for likely search results (basically anything that doesn't end in "(Transformers)" and recreate redirects to the appropriate titles. Also I removed categories and deletion templates but I didn't check for non-free media. Try to make sure that none of the userspace articles have non-free media in them. I botched the first move (as previously deleted revisions don't move with the new page name where the page was deleted and a redirect recreated, but I think I got almost everything. There may have been 1-2 where either the link was wrong or I erred in restoring and moving the page. I would appreciate some double-checking to ensure I didn't break anything important. Protonk (talk) 21:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but you missed Steel Wind and TFCon, if you can get those it will complete the list of wants. Mathewignash (talk) 22:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
User:Mathewignash/TFcon. TFCon is just a redirect. I don't really know what happened w/ steel wind or where the original content is (apart from a redirect). Protonk (talk) 22:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

File:All She Can Movie Poster.jpg

I would like to add the correct copyright information that is now available to me. It was not available to me when I created the file. -Kapokpictures (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Note: This file was deleted because there was not sufficient copyright information for the photo. I am still trying to familiarize myself with the correct wiki protocol. Thanks!

This looks to be a non free image, how do you want to use it and why? Also it is too big for non free images. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


This image was originally nominated for speedy deletion as failing the Fair Use criteria. I provided a detailed rebuttal but got no response, either from the person proposing deletion or from anybody else. I then did further research and discovered that the image was not under copyright -- pre-1964 U.S. copyright never renewed. So, with hindsight, it should never have been proposed for deletion in the first place. It does not appear that anyone even read either of my responses, and that the image was just summarily deleted without discussion or explanation. I respectfully request that it be undeleted, or that a valid reason for deleting a public domain image be provided. Thank you. ServiceAT (talk) 03:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -ServiceAT (talk) 03:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Samuli Peltonen

It was deleted because of no referred sources. There are plenty of them available (try to google the name for example. Here is good one: -Bowsbows (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. For future reference, note that articles about living people are deleted after ten days if no reference has been supplied. This needs expanding to show that he meets WP:MUSICBIO. JohnCD (talk) 11:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


The original article was deleted on 8/5/2011 as spam. I would like to edit my company page to be more informational and remove and edit any promotional verbiage and tone -Dhouston119 (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Dr. David J. Goldberg 2011

Page was deleted for "unambiguous advertising or promotion"; however, format, content and links all resemble as the approved WIKI page of Dr. OZ. Kindly reconsider and assist in restoring the page. In good faith, I simply was attempting to upload page to preview (as searching for guidelines). Please advise what would need to be revised to ensure content fits appropriately with your guidelines.

Best. Marianna - (talk) 17:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done The difference is that Dr Oz is slightly notable. Promoting a non-notable entity is not accepted. If you create an account, I will be able to provide you with more detailed information, but start with the 5 pillars of Wikipedia (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 08:37, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Transparency Monitor

OTRS permission from domain received for CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL release of content at in ticket 2011082410013503. -– Adrignola talk 19:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


we're ready with ownership/copyright information -Chinosingson (talk) 10:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done You now have another few days to add your information. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Warren Rovetch

I didn't see the original article but it seems to have been deleted because someone couldn't find out much about him. In fact an internet search will reveal a lot including his books on Amazon, his biography at his publishers site etc etc. He has written two very amusing books on his travels (The Creaky Traveler series), which have been positively reviewed in various places, and has had a very interesting and distinguished career. It just seems very odd to me that there should not be any article on him, however brief, on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 10:41, 25 August 2011


Release by owner was supplied to Wikipedia and accepted; see OTRS ticket 2011081910011426 -Kitabparast (talk) 15:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done. I don't know which OTRS template to use so if you could add that it would be great. Protonk (talk) 17:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Robert Lawrence (folk singer)

Now have full sourcing -Davidlewis39 (talk) 16:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done. I have restored the article and removed the deletion tag. Please add the relevant sources. If you need any help on how to do so you may ask me on my talk page or here. Protonk (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


Hi, I'm a new Wikipedia user and the article was deleted before I had a change to improve it, or even before I learned that there was a problem with it. BTW: it's a really, really discouraging new user experience to have content deleted moments after it's been created with no chance to fix problems with it, or even to learn about what the problems could be! -JasperWallace (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Avraham Gileadi

I stumbled across Avraham Gileadi through a broken redirect, and looking through the history, it seemed to be a decent article until User:יום יפה hacked all the substance out of the article and then spearheaded the deletion process (for notability). Upon further investigation I began to suspect foul play when I noticed that User:יום יפה was just one of like a thousand socks run by User:אֶפְרָתָה, a user who has been blocked, but continues to make socks for the purpose of "hacking material out of articles about progressive Jewish organizations and then PRODding them" (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/אֶפְרָתָה/Archive). Also, the other user who voted for deletion was also later confirmed a sock. --- Adjwilley (talk) 17:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done. No content has been deleted. If you look at the history page you can see all old revisions. Anyone may restore the article w/ new sources provided you meet the objections of the AfD. As you say, much of the AfD decision turned on the then current revision of the article so returning it to an old revision with solid references is a good way to meet those objections. Protonk (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I will revert to the state before the user hacked everything out. -- Adjwilley (talk) 18:04, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


someone deleted the article for Detroit based Rapper "Skrapz" of which I was appointed by the artist himself to update with new information. The user who deleted cited Skrapz as a "myspace rapper" which is wrong. Skrapz has globally available commercial/retail music in various media outlets worldwide including iTunes and Amazon. Skrapz is on the brink of inking a record deal with a major American record label. Please undelete his deleted article. Thank you in advance. -Detroitstruth (talk) 00:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not done. There are a few problems here. First, it is usually inappropriate for our articles to be written by someone directly involved with the subject. I understand that many biographies for publishers and record labels are written at the direction of the artist but on wikipedia one of the chief expectations of our readers is that our articles present a neutral view of the subject. A conflict of interest between an editor and the subject imperils that neutrality. Second, the deletion summary here indicated that the article was sourced entirely to MySpace, not that the artist was a MySpace rapper. I apologize for the confusion. What the deleting administrator surely meant was that the references in the articles pointed to the artist's myspace page and not to a reliable source. Without significant coverage in reliable sources it may be impossible to meet our guidelines for inclusion. I recommend that you wait until the subject has released a major record and in due time I'm sure the publicity and coverage he receives will be more than enough for any editor to build a neutral, verifiable article. Thank you. Protonk (talk) 01:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


reasoning - (talk) 01:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I am Philip Coppens and I do not see why there is an issue of copyright infringement, as per the reason why my Wiki was deleted last year. Please restore my Wiki entry.

  • Hello Mr. Coppens. Text on wikipedia must be released via a free license where material may be altered, reused, repurposed or sold with very few restrictions. Text from your website cannot be copied into wikipedia unless the original work is released under an identical license. Whoever copied the text into wikipedia did not (unless I am mistaken) have your permission to alter, reuse, repurpose or sell your original biography. Under almost all circumstances the way we deal with this issue is to delete from our edit history all trace of the copyrighted material--hence the deletion of your article. In order for us to use the text from your website the material must be licensed under a creative commons license. There are a number of ways to do this, but I won't detail them unless you are interested. Protonk (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


See talk page, Permission apparently sent to OTRS -Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Can OTRS confirm that they have received the permission and that it is correct? JohnCD (talk) 20:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
The email exists (OTRS#ticket:2011081810014407) and does appear to be a valid release; however, image permissions are not my area, so you'd be best off double-checking whether the release is adequate with another OTRSer before restoring. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
When will this be resolved? Kitabparast (talk) 15:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done. Same file as below. Protonk (talk) 06:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

-Mission Against Corruption-

this is improtant page for our organisation plz dont delete this -Sunnylino (talk) 18:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

'Mission Against Corruption'

  • 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. If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. Protonk (talk) 18:57, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

subject is notable and additional verifiable third-party links can be added to further enhance its credibility -Encoderops (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request.

However, the sources on the article subject are spare. I don't mean the article itself but the sources I can find on the internet. I have nominated the article for deletion. Protonk (talk) 22:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Software is active development and widely used -Dimkalinux (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PunBB, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Jayjg (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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Blade Brains

The article titled Blade Brains has been deleted without any prior notice to me. The reason stated for deletion was company promotion. However, the article does not promote the company in any manner. Requesting you to undelete the article. -LnBbladebrains (talk) 10:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done. The page was indeed promotional in nature and, therefore, its deletion was warranted. Furthermore, you appear to have a serious conflict of interest; please, familiarise yourself with WP:COI. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Jayen466/Hannibal Fogg Watch

Wasn't advertising. It was related to a hoax and contained relevant info for amusement on Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia. Keeping it does no harm since it's in userspace. -Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 15:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Alla, Bhutan

Page was deleted because no publication was available showing the village existed. Page was also deleted apparently because the deletionist could not locate the settlement on Google Maps (original research). A reference for this village now exists; once restored, it should be redirected to Oola, the current spelling. See Chiwogs in Wangdue Phodrang, p. 16. -JFHJr () 19:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 19:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

08:04, 18 August 2011, American Yakuza ‎

I have the criminal records and news reports that support my facts -Mr. Kenshiro (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Article is not deleted; it's being discussed at AfD. LadyofShalott 21:29, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Yet, my info has been deleted and the wrong information remains. As a Criminal Contractor (mediator for crime syndicates)with 22 yrs. of experience I am offended that Wiki would take such an action. My policy... "Don't condemn unless you have a solution to the problem".

My solutions; bōryokudan (暴力団), literally "violence group" is WRONG! My translation and britannica encyclopedia agrees that bōryokudan is "Tough Gang" NOT "violence group". Yakuza (“good-for-nothing”), or gyangu (“gangster”) are well known facts and your source DOESN'T even have it listed!

Please, help me help you to correct these errors. The Criminal Underworld is my home. I am one of the worlds leading experts on crime. I have extensive knowledge in the following; criminal linguistics, hand to hand combat, identity theft, slide of the hand con artists, prostitution, drug addiction and distribution, counterfeiting (checks, money, documents, ID’s etc.), home invasions, criminal traffic stops, weapon chains, drug chains, human trafficking, animal trafficking, gathering and countering intelligence, tracking across international boarders, setting and breaking perimeters, arsenals (Guns (attack and defense), explosives (compositions), and cyber-gates), extractions (homes, buildings, cities and countries) and interrogations.

NOTE: My literary skills are...I would need some help with my writing. If any body that reads this has any suggestions...don't hesitate to talk to me.

Are you sure you have the correct title? American Yakuza is about a film, and that does not seem to be what you are discussing. This board is only for undeletion requests of deleted articles. LadyofShalott 23:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Looking at your contributions, I'm guessing you are talking about Yakuza. You should take your desired changes to the talk page of that article. LadyofShalott 23:13, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


Template:Content is visible and notable

reasoning Notable and verified - (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC) Hello, I appreciate the amount of time and effort you have logged in to verifying information about my company and myself. It might appear that the author is struggling a bit as he has mounted a tremendous campaign of his own. I was having a look at the exchange and there seems to be a question of notability and of course you would need to verify the source and there seems to be an ample amount of both in the way of Trademarks, Awards, memberships and key associations like Dun&Bradstreet, BBB, Etc, On the other hand I wanted to glance at our client, because I needed some of the same verifiable information your requesting, however I found it to be incomplete and not much in the way of external links or references except those from their site (some of which were no longer there). Quite a bit less than we may have provided, however they are a real company, they do exist and they are permanently recorded in your annals.

I would like to ask you if there is anything I could provide in order to help move this along because I started these companies, I still run the operations and develop new products and handle the many small business and Fortune 1000 companies we provide product and services for. Would you like me to add the 20 or so International web addresses on the main website to your external links section? We also have hundreds of written references from just about every franchise, car dealership, hotel, city, county, state, and federal institution in the country.

If your looking for a newspaper article or story, we probably have those too, however we have never been interested with interviews and have turned many down. I appreciate all you have done and let me know if I can help, if I cannot then lets both move on because the question of notability I feel questions the effort I have put into this organization to make it what it is today, and I don't want that to continue to be a question at all. In spite of all that I think your doing a great job and hope to see further commentary from you, preferably with someone else.

Mario Signorelli President/Posigrip/Ceiltech/Posishield— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

The page was userfied, not deleted; you can find it here. You can work on improving the notability assertions and, when you're ready, ask for feedback at WP:FEEDBACK. That said, you have a serious conflict of interest here; therefore, I must point you to WP:COI, which is one of Wikipedia's policies instructing you on how to best handle it. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Kirstie Alley DWTS.jpg

File:Kirstie Alley DWTS.jpg · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions] Seems important. -Plankton5165 (talk) 15:55, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done unless you can provide source and copyright licensing information - see the note on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Alan Aranoff

Article was apparently deleted for lack of source material. Here is some: Progressive Architecture April 1993, The Making of Public Buildings; Book, The Supreme Court Building - Jerusalem, 1993 Yad Hanadiv; Alan Aranoff was the architect for the KSYM Synagogue, Modiin, Israel, 2011; Alan Steven Aranoff designed and authored Ichud Hayeshivot: Seminary and Housing, UCLA Architecture thesis/dissertation, Melvyl 1984, A New Brooklyn Museum: The Master Plan Competition, with Kohn Pedersen Fox, Rizzoli, 1988; designed The Be'er Sheva regional courts building with Barchana Architects; architectural design of the new home of the Israel Ice Hockey Federation... - (talk) 19:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Transitions lenses

The original article was meant to explain how the lenses work. Is it possible to flag it instead of delete it and give users the opportunity to try to re-write it? -Millerph (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

This topic is covered at photochromic lens. Would you like the article's content emailed to you? Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

YoungPete Alexander

Article was posted before it was actually completed, YoungPete Alexander's management have now finished the content and would like to post/update the page so it doesn't get deleted. We would gladly appreciate of the article would be put back online so we can make the change and make sure the info is shared. Thank you. -Jeanfrancoiscd (talk) 05:31, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! The article has not been deleted, but merely redirected to El Pus. Please discuss the matter with Happy5214 (talk) or NawlinWiki (talk), the editors who have redirected the page. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Literary parallels in the Book of Daniel

It was charged that the article was all OR, but I believe that this article could be improved, or that parts of it could be used in other articles -CedricElijahHenry (talk) 05:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Cedric! Please consider contacting Fastily (talk), the editor who deleted the page, about this. Fastily (talk) seems to have done considerable looking-into this issue already. Regards mate, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Lady of Iloilo

I just can not see the point why it is deleted, i am writing independent based on an event which i personally witnessed. i do know the Artist and i got his speech for the purpose of using it i am not making unnecessary links i am just telling the world about the lady of Iloilo which is a great new bronze sculpture located in the philippines -Klausius (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done - this article was deleted because it was found to be "unambiguous advertising or promotion". To keep Wikipedia topics neutral and verifiable, articles need to include multiple reliable sources. Please contact the administrator who deleted the article, Jimfbleak (talk), if you believe the deletion was made in error. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)