Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 196

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 190←Archive 194Archive 195Archive 196Archive 197Archive 198→Archive 200

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VOIS

I, Harpreetrandhawa, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Harpreetrandhawa (talk) 04:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:K_Muthulakshmy

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) 14.139.158.62 (talk) 10:04, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Patty Walters

The individual is a notable musician because of his solo work on YouTube which gained him significant recognition in various articles, both printed in magazines such as Kerrang (scans of one of the three printed journal articles, which discusses Walters in-depth, that had been used as a source can be viewed here), and his work with other bands (such as Sunrise Skater Kids and As It Is). Additionally, there was not a single source in the article considered unacceptable per Wikipedia guidelines as some on the AfD page had tried to say, the majority of which were secondary sources. Also, on the AfD page for the article, five people cast a vote on whether or not the article should have been deleted with an outcome of three voting that it should be kept to two voting that it should be deleted; the majority of those who voted on the AfD page voted for the article to be kept. --Peter Dzubay (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Peter Dzubay: Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patty Walters, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Randykitty (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 15:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Romano-berber states page deleted by mistake?

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

  • You are correct in that Cresthaven, the main writer of this, was operated by user Brunodam who was banned. Most of the work was done from March to April 2014, so it was not years of work. However it was quite a substantial writing. If you can find a registered user, not connected to Brunodam, who wants to take responsibility for the page, perhaps it could be restored. If Brunodam wants to come back with a clean start, he could appeal his block. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm willing to userfy copies of his articles for any user that wants to verify and re-write the articles. The thing about Brunodam is that his work had a lot of issues with tone and verifiability. As Vituzzu and Berean Hunter wrote on my talk page, there were several good reasons to delete the page. Here's one quote by Berean Hunter about the articles Roman colonies in Berber Africa and Tingis: "After looking both of these deleted articles over, what I see is that a bibliography is provided but only one ref actually has page numbers and that ref is a broad 43 page range for sourcing a single paragraph. All other refs do not include page numbers but are vague and illusory. In short, verifiability would be a nightmare and I would go so far as saying that it was intentionally crafted that way."
I'm also pinging them here since I'd like them to stay aware of the requests for this page to be restored since there were a few requests at my talk page for these pages to be restored. I'd actually gotten pretty heavily insulted in the process and accused of WP:BADFAITH deletions, so I kind of want this to be in the records of any requests for these page restorations. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
@Tokyogirl79: if someone still is doubtful...--Vituzzu (talk) 17:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Trumpet4christ/Eugene Thamon Simpson

I, Trumpet4christ, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Trumpet4christ (talk) 20:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Trumpet4christ: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:50, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Financial life planning

I have 2 additional citations that address the editorial comments from Wiki. Please undelete so that I may add them and resubmit. -Rochellemoulton (talk) 21:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rochellemoulton: Not done for now. Please disclose your conflict of interest as required and explained by the Terms of Use you agreed to when you created an account. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 21:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

hedgespa

We are confused. We have been asking for (and waiting for) the article to be undeleted so that we can resubmit. We are novice in this process because the digital marketing person has left but we will engage a professional agency for all digital marketing matters. Please let us know whether we should submit the corrections here, before the article will be considered for undeletion. It is simply unclear to us what needs to be done in order to make the request. Thank you. -209.133.4.130 (talk) 18:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: Surely you jest! No page's ever existed under that title (or any reasonable permutation of it) in any reasonable namespace! Are you sure that the page's title is correct? Note that any user found to be using Wikipedia for marketing will be blocked even if he declares his conflict of interest as required by the Terms of Use for Wikipedia. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:15, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
The IP is talking about Draft:HedgeSPA, created by account HedgeSPA, now blocked. While technically a G13 suitable for restoration, I'm hesitant to do so now that they've told us that they're going to "engage a professional agency". §FreeRangeFrogcroak 19:28, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Help - we are extremely confused now! Our organization is funded by R&D grants awarded by leading research funding agencies and contributes a significant amount of research at top conferences including those hosted by the American Economic Association, the American Statistical Association and the Russian Academy of Science. We simply want to fairly and objectively represent our scientific contents in Wikipedia. it appears that asking our research staff to help with writing such articles does NOT meet your requirements. We ONLY want to suggest that we are serious about working on it, so that our in-house staff can focus on doing the real research to produce our often-cited research and analysis (covered by Forbes and BBC, for instance). Most top research institutions have some kind of basic press department - or do you want the articles to be 100% research oriented (which may be difficult for 99.99% of the audience to understand)? Again, the issue is that initially we had someone to work on the Wikipedia article, but then the person left so now the draft article is a bit neither here nor there. The article's title is "HedgeSPA". Please tell us what you require so that we can finish the update. We do NOT expect automatic approvals, but we simply would like a chance to submit the change so that Wikipedia can reconsider. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.133.4.130 (talk) 21:34, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment: @209.133.4.130: @HedgeSPA: This has a bit of a history behind it. The first request for restoration came back in October 2014, where it was restored and but never edited. A second request was made in May 2015 and the CEO assured us that they were going to get someone to work on it, an intern. There was some general reluctance since they did not respond for a week and because there was a concern over the COI. One of my biggest things was that they were complaining about the draft not being restored, but there was nothing stopping them from creating a new draft. Now that said, I don't entirely mind restoring a draft as long as they do the following:
  1. That they reply in a timely manner to this board posting. This will help us show that you will edit the draft if it is restored.
  2. That you (or whomever will be editing the draft) go through one of the training programs, either the one at WP:TRAINING or WP:ADVENTURE. This will not only be a good faith move on your part but it will also give the editor a general overview of the editing process. The module at ADVENTURE is sort of goofy looking (it looks like a game) but it takes about an hour to complete. I'm not sure how long the other one takes.
  3. That the editor create an account and that they disclose their COI on their userpage per WP:COI.
Mostly we just want to make sure that the COI will not be an issue and that the article will be edited. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

PLEASE UNDERSTAND - we are just a bunch of geeky scientists who do NOT understand how Wikipedia works, but would like to make our contents more accessible. When we publish in a non-refereed journal, we ALREADY consider that to be marketing. The usual etiquette is that a journal editor will bounce a draft back with comments BEFORE we work on it. We did NOT hear back when we asked for the article to be RESTORED, so we wonder if that's a summary rejection or whether it may be rude to show an editor a draft before we hear back (suggesting that we don't care about the editor's feedback). Long story short, there is a massive amount of misunderstanding here because we do not have clear guidelines. All these things may be very obvious to those who handle digital contents everyday. To us, this is all NEW. Please give us the SPECIFIC feedback from the last draft by RESTORING the post and then we will assign someone to take the course and work on it. This is VERY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD and it seems to be much more efficient if we just proceed with the process, instead of spending so much of your precious time to keep talking about it! THANK YOU! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.133.4.130 (talk • contribs)

  • The main thing we were worried about was that it would be neglected and that the COI might be too strong. Also, editing with Wikipedia is a fairly different process since it's not like writing an article for a journal - it's actually so different that I'd say that it's largely not the same thing at all, comparable to how writing a journal article is very different from writing a newspaper article. When writing an article at AfC, you don't have to let us know ahead of time. You can write an article whenever you want through AfC, the only requirement is that you try to follow policy, you don't abandon the draft for more than 6 months, and that if you have a COI, you let us know through the userpage. When it comes to restoring a draft that's somewhat different since you're asking for the deleted work back. Normally we give about 1 no-questions-asked restoration of the draft. If it's deleted without any edits we will ask for more confirmation the second time around. Now here's what I'll do: I will restore the draft BUT you will need to promise that you will edit it. If it's deleted again without any edits, that's the last time it will be restored. I understand that this is a frustrating process, but at the same time there was a reason for us wanting a bit of more reassurance that you will edit and that you'll try to follow policy. Part of it was just to make sure that you were going to keep checking the page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:51, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. We have already assigned someone to start working on the article. She is taking the courses as you have suggested.

Once again, we wish to point out that we are not "gaming" the system. We are simply hoping to focus on creating positive impact with our contents. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.133.4.130 (talk) 23:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Guce (rapper)

Guce, also known as Shavel Pope, is a Bay Area rapper with a significant following. His Wikipedia page was deleted for an unknown reason. Is it possible to be restored? -146.129.173.56 (talk) 00:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guce (rapper), it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Joe Decker (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. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:10, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Ingmar De Vos, FEI President.jpg

Please undelete; OTRS permission received: Ticket#2015070910009032 -Willy Weazley 01:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Swapni pathre

{{subst:refund|1= Swapnil Pathre |2= default value with the reason i wish to have the article undeleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swaraj King (talk • contribs) 11:43, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done. @Swaraj King: this page is only for article that have already been deleted, not for article tagged for speedy deletion. If you wish to protest the deletion, make your case at the talk page at Talk:Swapnil Pathre. However, what you should do is in conjunction is cite in the article reliable, secondary sources entirely independent of the subject that evidence he is notable, in the special sense Wikipedia means when using that term – which is is that the world has taken note of a subject by published substantive material about it. Most people in the world (including me) are not notable, and thus are not the proper subject of an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is distinctly not a social media site where anyone and everyone can indiscriminately post a "profile". See also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Autobiography to the extent relevant. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:45, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Article now deleted per WP:CSD#G7 after author/requestor blanked it. --Finngall talk 14:03, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/2013 Speedway Grand Prix of Great Britain

I, The boss 1998, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. The boss 1998 (talk) 13:37, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@The boss 1998: Before anyone decides whether to restore this, can you please tell us how the subject of this draft is not redundant with 2013 Speedway Grand Prix? It looks at first blush like the same topic. If it is the same topic, I suggest you make improvements to that existing article (citing reliable sources of course to verify your additions). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: 2013 Speedway Grand Prix is about the whole season, this was about 1 event in the season, so they are about different things. However, an article about this event already exists at 2013 Speedway Grand Prix of Great Britain, so @The boss 1998: you should edit the existing article instead. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:08, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: Aha! appreciate the clarification.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Nicola Majocchi (photographer)

I, Jacqueline C. Moorby, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jacqueline C. Moorby (talk) 22:05, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jacqueline C. Moorby: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Qwertzuiopasdfghjklyxcvbnm

I would like to request that Qwertzuiopasdfghjklyxcvbnm be undeleted because of two reasons: we already have Qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm, which links to QWERTY, for those who ever want to know what the keyboard is called, and the QWERTZ' redirect must be there for those who ever want to know what the keyboard is called. It is ironic to keep one thing but not the other. -Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:42, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

After all, it is not a bad redirect, for it uses all of the arranged letters from the QWERTZ keyboard and may help those who have ever wanted to know what the keyboard is called. There is a mistake here. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 Not doneThe redirect you ask for is not created yet. So that means you can make it, but we cannot undelete it, because it was never there. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
You picked the one which was capitalized. I was referring to the lowercased one. Sorry about that. It is already fixed. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:54, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
In this case you should talk nicely to the deleting admin. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Nonato Luiz

Recently the brazilian Guitar player Nonato Luiz page was deleted. But the page is a huge source os information. Can you restore the page, so I can fix whatever is wrong with it. The artist have a wide international career and several disc release. Nonato Luiz is a respected Brazilian violonista (acoustic guitarist) who mixes classical influences in his rootsy playing" (http://www.allmusic.com/artist/nonato-luiz-mn0000384099). Thank you for your time. -Laioviana (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

(non-admin comment) @Laioviana: This is not the place to contest controversial deletion, this article was deleted by consensus here. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:57, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nonato Luiz, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Kudpung (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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Eunisell

The page was speedly deleted for ambiguous advertising, I think it must be in the reference links, I could have easily deleted the links, thanks. -Bode fagbemi (talk) 15:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

(non-admin comment) @Bode fagbemi: This board is only for uncontroversial deletions, something deleted as a G11/ blatant advertising will not be restored here. You would need to contact the deleting admin, @NawlinWiki: about it. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:10, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
"Over the years, Eunisell has made a significant impact in the Energy sector, in March 2015, Eunisell Chemicals raised the bar in the technology for the production of motor engine oil". Not ambiguous at all. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
@NawlinWiki: Also an apparent copyvio.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:07, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gabriel Baritulem Pidomson

I wish to improve the article with new references and publications by Gabriel Baritulem Pidomson released worldwide on the 21st of May 2015 "Save page" button below -Legonor (talk) 12:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

This would make this the second time the article was restored, however since you did edit it after the last restoration and you also say that you have new sources, I've restored this and moved it to Draft:Gabriel Baritulem Pidomson. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Dunbar Rovers Football Club

I, Bdprag, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Bdprag (talk) 05:13, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Had not finished editing, will complete this week -Bdprag (talk) 05:15, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Freshly Squeezed Music

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -82.13.80.236 (talk) 07:32, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Page deleted by a moderator who has subsequently been banned and therefore is not available for discussion. Page needs edits and working, but label continues to evolve and has recently sign a joint venture with Island. Please restore so we can add/edit/modify.

  • Not done This was deleted via AfD last year. However it was also deleted as a G4 by JamesBWatson and RHaworth and I need to note that prior to AfD it was also deleted a few times by another editor. When James deleted the article it was because a blocked/banned user had created it. True, the first few admins that deleted the page have been banned, but that does not automatically mean that these deletions were necessarily incorrect. Because there is such a contentious history behind the page and the original deleting admin is no longer around, this should really go through deletion review. I have to also note that the page does have some issues with tone, enough to where I can see where this was a concern at AfD. When you bring this to deletion review you will need to show how this label would now pass notability guidelines via coverage in reliable sources. I also need to caution you - if you are someone who works for the label and/or is otherwise affiliated with them you must disclose this. If you are one of the accounts that were blocked for sockpuppetry you will also need to disclose this and try to get unblocked first. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Farhad Vladi

I, Jimmi Knopf, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jimmi Knopf (talk) 09:04, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Also, Jimmi Knopf, if you have a conflict of interest then you will need to disclose this on your userpage per WP:COI. I somewhat get the impression that you were likely asked to create the article (marketing company, employee, freelancer, etc). You can still edit, you just need to put this on your userpage. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Leger Holidays

I, Allrhodeshome, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Allrhodeshome (talk) 11:19, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Detroit Rocks

I, InfoSaw, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. InfoSaw (talk) 11:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Detroit Rocks

I was unable to continue editing this page due to having commenced school; as well, I was conducting research which has not yet been completed as of this time, but which I would like to continue to pursue. Thank you very much! :) -InfoSaw (talk) 12:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Geecon global article please do not delete

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Usingpain (talk) 05:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC) Kindly requesting you to please do not delete the page of Geecon global, i will follow all the rules & regulation regarding articles. geecon global page is not based on promotion, I have created it only a pofile of the company

  • Usingpain, this page was deleted via WP:G11 as "unambiguous promotion". A look at the page shows that it was extremely promotional which means that it is unlikely that this page would be restored on Wikipedia at all. It also looks like it was fairly liberally taken from the official website, which brings about issues of copyright. However that said, I would be willing to e-mail you a copy of the page so you can work on this. My only request is that you create this page via WP:AfC and that you go through one of Wikipedia's training modules like WP:ADVENTURE. The good thing about AfC is that if you mess up and the article is not accepted for the mainspace, you will be given a chance to fix this and resubmit it. Sometimes AfC articles will be deleted but this is somewhat rare. (Mostly pages are deleted because they are abandoned, although the next most common deletion reason is usually WP:COPYVIO.) The module would be beneficial since it would give you a good overview of policy, plus it would be a good faith gesture on your part since you are likely editing with a conflict of interest. (If you are, you need to disclose this on your userpage.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Not done per above. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:59, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This page was re-created July 16 under another user name, and has been again speedy deleted and protected against re-creation. DGG ( talk ) 15:07, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikinomics project

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Thanough (talk) 10:01, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Not done I deleted this because it was fairly promotional in tone. It also looks like it was a copyright violation of this website, which I didn't tag. This is why you should not use official material in an article. Even if you file a ticket giving WP:ORTS permission to use the material it will still be too promotional. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:05, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

This is an EU publicly funded project with results openly available. I will check the license, copyright and come back to you. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanough (talk • contribs) 10:28, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Thanough: the article was a straight copy from this page, which is marked "Copyright © 2015 Wikinomics. All Rights Reserved." It could not be accepted without a formal copyright release from the actual copyright owner.
Even if the copyright issue were resolved, this would not be acceptable, because (a) it is written to promote, with "peacock terms" like innovative and exciting, and (b) Wikipedia has an inclusion criterion called Wikipedia:Notability, which requires evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."
The fact is that copying an organization's website does not make a satisfactory encyclopedia article. For more background, see User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard. JohnCD (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Clipà.Vu Clipboard Manager

I, Wikiclipboard, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Wikiclipboard (talk) 19:04, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done @Wikiclipboard: Besides being written like an advertisement, this was a copyright violation, infringing on the content from here. Although it's possible you are the owner of that content, we could not use it here unless it was released to the world under a compatible free copyright license. However, it was unsuitable as an article's content in any event. Note also that your promotional username violates our username policy.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:27, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Fuhghettaboutit, you refused my undeletion request for Clipà.Vu Clipboard Manager page. It is my very first attempt to write a Wikipedia article ever - so please understand my situation... I acknowledge all the imperfections and I want to work on improvements. Yes, I am the creator of that software and it is not my intention to write any kind of ads but a fair base describing it. My plan is to ask the users to contribute to that article later on. I can find many similar articles on Wikipedia - on request I can put examples here. So I do not see any fair reasoning why I would not be allowed to create one too. Once again: Please give me the chance to make everything as it should be according Wikipedia rules. I switched to my personal Wikipedia account as the first step as you can see. I acknowledge the fact that I neglected the first chance of correction but I simply did not know the rules. I understand I must learn these rules now. Please correct me if I do not understand the process but I thought that unpublished articles get reviewed and the creator gets chance to correct all imperfections. Thank you very much in advance, Jan Zeman (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

We do not host copyright violations anywhere on Wikipedia, even in draft space. And bringing up other articles on similar topics doesn't help your case at all. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:11, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Walter Chatham

I, Bioeditor1, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Bioeditor1 (talk) 11:26, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done. @Bioeditor1: This page was a copyright violation and therefore will not be restored.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Portugal Confidential

I, GQuique, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. GQuique (talk) 12:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@GQuique: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 13:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

List of items with the phrase and all I got was this lousy T-shirt

If possible, could the article be restored into Draft:List of items with the phrase and all I got was this lousy T-shirt. The last comment in the AFD intrigues me - about the possibility of turning this list into a proper notable article. So I'd like to take another look and review the references and notability. Thanks. --- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 14:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Done. Hey Eclipsed. I am going to restore this as a draft, as requested, with the understanding that you are going to be using this as fodder for some topical scope change that would address the basis for the deletion, such as an article on the trend; the "phenomenon of the garment in itself". I think you quite already understand this by what you said in your request, but I'll say it just so it's clear: Keeping this in a similar form – an apparent indiscriminate list – would not meet the spirit under which I am restoring it, which is to use for another purpose than what was decided at the AfD. Since I expect it will no longer be a "list of", let's use Draft:And all I got was this lousy T-shirt. If you ultimately find you aren't going to follow through, please request speedy deletion (in this case I would expect you'd need to use {{db|reason}}). Probably a good idea to ping the deleting administrator here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, and good idea on the name of the draft. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 16:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:JAFRA Cosmetics

I, FriedButter, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. FriedButter (talk) 19:43, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Tim_and_Chris_Stamper

I feel that the page was likely deleted as people felt that the article "Rare" covered the Stamper Brothers career succinctly. Recent news shows that not only have they received "Legend" awards (proving their importance within the industry). They have also started a new company called FortuneFish and are clearly still active within the video game industry. -MrIanReynolds (talk) 13:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

 Not done, nothing to do. The revision history of the article is available to you. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Office Logic

I, 68.15.160.69, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 68.15.160.69 (talk) 22:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!"--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:43, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Be aware that I have moved the draft to Draft:Office Logic.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

eddie barbash

I have created a list of resources and elaborated on the details within the article. http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/getting-ready-to-jam-with-colbert, http://blogs.newschool.edu/news/2015/06/jazz-alum-eddie-barbash-to-join-colbert-house-band/#.VaV2Y2B-_Vo, http://nypost.com/2015/06/26/colberts-new-bandleader-used-to-be-a-subway-busker/, http://www.wsj.com/articles/jon-batiste-and-band-stay-human-play-new-york-city-1434739851, http://www.npr.org/event/music/361923160/jon-batiste-leads-a-private-street-parade-atop-a-fort -HugoAugustine (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

In order:
  • The New Yorker source is a name-drop, not significant coverage.
  • The New School source is explicitly a blog. We do not accept blogs as sources unless the blogger is a renowned expert speaking in his field of expertise.
  • The NYP source is a name-drop, not significant coverage.
  • The WSJ source is a photo gallery and is thus not significant coverage.
  • The NPR source is a name-drop, not significant coverage.
Sources must discuss the subject at some length and have professional editorial oversight. Your provided sources do not cut it. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:19, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
@HugoAugustine: Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Please improve the article in the next few days, or it will possibly be deleted again. See WP:MUSICBIO. He plays with Jon Batiste and Stay Human is not remotely enough. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:35, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Double Crossover Merging Interchange

The Proposed deletion states "This article should be deleted as its subject fails to meet the GNG. The only citation referring to DCMIs seems to be promotional and would probably fail RS. Furthermore, no interchanges of this type have been built".

There are several credible transportation industry references to this new type of interchange, such as:

1. National Academy of Science, engineering, Medicine: Transportation Research Board (TRB) Link: http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1148447

2.A paper on the Double Crossover Merging Interchange was awarded the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) "2013 Best Paper Award". ITE has 17,000 transportation engineering professionals in 60 countries. Link:http://www.ite.org/awards/2013.asp

3. The Double Crossover Merging Interchange was accepted and presented at the Transportation Research Board's (TRB) "Alternative Intersections & Interchanges Symposium", held July 20-24, 2014, Salt Lake City, Utah. See section 3C of final program link below. Link:http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/Conferences/2014/Intersections/program.pdf

The Double Crossover Merging Interchange was awarded a patent by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on February 10, 2015.

Link: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=%22DCMi+Interchange%22&OS= -Cliff Shaffer (talk) 04:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Not done Cliff Shaffer, I did a little digging and it looks like this wasn't deleted via a proposed deletion. It was actually deleted at AfD back in January 2013. The consensus there was to merge this into Diverging diamond interchange. As such, this cannot be restored through REFUND. What you need to do here is contact the administrator that closed the AfD (TBrandley, who I'm tagging in this thread) and ask if you can restore the page. If he declines you can take this up via deletion review. From what I can see the general consensus was that it was fairly redundant to the main DDI article, so when you make your case to TB or to DRV, you'll need to show how it would merit its own article. The best way to do this would be to provide additional sourcing other than the ones you've posted above, since they were already present in the article when it was up at AfD. Something you might also want to take into consideration is that if the papers were written by someone involved with the creation of the design, that would likely be considered a primary source even if the paper won an award. If the sources were written by someone involved with the design then they'll pretty much be considered WP:PRIMARY in most scenarios. Secondary coverage is the way to go for sourcing. In any case, I haven't taken that deep of a look at the sources and this is pretty much just a bit of advice. Basically, these are some common arguments people face when trying to restore an article for something relatively new, so it's something to take into consideration when arguing your points. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Tokyogirl79,

I saw the the original page was moved to the Diverging diamond interchange page, and I thought that was okay, but it has now been removed from the Diverging diamond interchange. Restoring it to the Diverging Diamond Interchange page would be fine........how do I do that (I am a Wikipedia novice). Cliff Shaffer (talk)

You're asking for help doing something that does not require an administrator for assistance. Please only use {{admin help}} for situations where you need the technical assistance of an administrator. If you need help, I suggest you try asking at the WP:TEAHOUSE or WP:HELPDESK. Mkdwtalk 03:35, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Hattarakihal Village

I, 192.222.164.47, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 192.222.164.47 (talk) 00:54, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Seeds of Death: Unveiling the Lies of GMOs page

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Mr Bill Truth (talk) 08:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

The reasons given for deleting this article are completely incorrect. This is an article that has been created for the sole purpose of sharing info the same as any other article. It has been added to an on-line encyclopaedia to expand the encyclopaedia. IT's a notable article and there is no advertising in it either intentional or unintentional. Is it policy now that certain articles are not to be included in Wikipedia because certain organizations don't want their inclusion? Honest answer please. Mr Bill Truth (talk) 08:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

It looks as though speedy deletion could be unwarranted, so I suggest you talk nicely to the deleting admin: User talk:RHaworth and ask for it to be restored. The title of the film is a bit inflammatory, and that could lead to the impression of advertising. It is very unlikely that "certain organizations" have been involved in whitewashing in this case. But if you care to check, have a look at what the nominator Winner 42 has done in their contributions. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your input Graeme Bartlett. Perhaps the title of the film is inflammatory but so are many others here in WIKIPEDIA, and some much more. But anyone who has worked their way info or been promoted to admin should and must be able to see past a title and view an article on it's merit and context. In saying that I do realize that people who are in their adult years are in what is sum of their upbringing, indoctrination and environment. They may view things in a certain way that others may not. Fair enough! You say "It is very unlikely that "certain organizations" have been involved in whitewashing in this case". Well, I haven't done an investigation into the possibilities yet. So for now I'm not going to say that this particular deletion of Seeds of Death: Unveiling the Lies of GMOs is the case. However, I know for a fact that there have been other cases where certain articles have been deleted or changed due to the requirements of certain organizations.

I say this now, there are discussions about the paid editors working on Wikipedia to make sure that certain information is not seen or known by the masses.

Graeme Bartlett, thanks again for your input. I will have a look nominator Winner 42 has done and I am prepared to give this person the benefit of the doubt. There are others though who have done a lot of edits to mask their real agenda and are editors "on call". I would like to think that the nominator is not one of them. Mr Bill Truth (talk) 08:09, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Punjab solar summit 2015

I am just publishing this article because it is enviorment freindly and not promoting it.so i plz request you not to delete the article. -PattCummins (talk) 13:13, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

  • This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Also, the reason why its deletion was requested is because it's written like an advert with lots of marketing speak ("The future belongs..." and so on) and would have to be rewritten completely to be neutral. It's currently under discussion here for the record. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles_for_creation/Lyonnais_(band)

I, Jookie212, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jookie212 (talk) 13:46, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jookie212: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Lyonnais (band). Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 14:23, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ravi Mantha

I, Rmantha, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rmantha (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rmantha: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request and is now at Draft:Ravi Mantha. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Read WP:Your first article for advice and note the need for references to reliable sources, to verify what the article says and to establish Wikipedia:Notability. If you are the subject of the article, please read Wikipedia:Autobiography. JohnCD (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

grand imperial procession

I am owner of chiahui and the website dajia-lubu.com -Dajialubu (talk) 04:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Since we do not know if this is true, or just someone pretending to be the owner, then proof should be supplied. The easiest way would be to change the copyright notice on the bottom of the dajia-lubu.com web pages to say CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL rather than all rights reserved. Let us know here if this change has been made. Otherwise you can follow the procedure at WP:PERMIT. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Kineikonic Mode

I, Tvscholar, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tvscholar (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:05, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Scott Disick

He is a notable person. Current media spectacle indicates he a notable person... 500 news items on google news in the past 24 hours. People visit wikipedia in order to know Who this person is -Tsop (talk) 19:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review or contact the administrator that closed the deletion debate instead. Google hits are NOT an indicator of notability, and this page has been deleted at AfD four times before. It will not be restored here at any point; your best hope is WP:DRV, but it will be a very long shot. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
An extremely long shot, since it was upheld at Deletion Review less than a month ago. —Cryptic 22:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
This would have to be discussed at Wikipedia:Deletion review again if the circumstances have changed. Otherwise look at, and add to Kourtney Kardashian#Personal life. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:48, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

File:WindowsME.png

Please revert this fair-use image to the previous revision. The bot tried to resize it in compliance with WP:NFCC but unfortunately destroyed the text in the image in the process. (It can be resized again, of course, as long as the text is kept readable.) -Mdrnpndr (talk) 15:44, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I've resized it manually. —Cryptic 19:09, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 Done low quality version rev-delled. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:52, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Task View (Windows)

Please don't delete my article beause i made it because Wikipedia doesnt have a "Task View (Windows) article. it is a new feature of Miccrosoft Windows Operating System on its latest version "Windows 10" and it doesn't have an article on Wikipedia. I wanted to create an article about this on Wikipedia beacause its same feature on the Apple's OS X Mission Control (OS X) already have an article here. I sorry because I'm newbie here to create an article on Wikipedia, and I'm keeping to know all of the techniques and rules and regulation of Wikipedia. Hope you would give me another time to complete this article and I will do my best just to buplished this article in a right way. Hope you would understand me " -PauloPark02 (talk) 04:25, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack Curran (broadcaster)

I, Mickeyd20, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mickeyd20 (talk) 03:15, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_196&oldid=1142568643"