Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 136

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Archive 130 ← Archive 134 Archive 135 Archive 136 Archive 137 Archive 138 → Archive 140

zapaat

The page created for 'Zapaat' was deleted by speedy deletion citing '..the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant' as the primary reason. Zapaat is an internet search engine and there are several articles on internet search engines that are listed on wikipedia. Namely, the page on 'List_of_search_engines' provide links to the listings on search engines. Example search engines that are articled on wikipedia are 'Bing', 'Blekko' DuckDuckGo', 'Qwant', 'Baidu' and 'Yandex'. Zapaat is worthy of being listed in the article as Zapaat provides a better method to search the internet than the prevalent search methods. Because articles on search engines are listed on wikipedia, and that the page on 'Zapaat' is about the search engine Zapaat, I appeal that the page be un-deleted speedily. Thank you. -Wikiinfosub (talk) 07:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  • On a side note I couldn't really find anything to show that this specific search engine is particularly noteworth. The thing about other search engines having articles is that their existence does not mean that Zapaat should have an article. Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, the other search engine may meet notability guidelines in ways that Zapaat does not (such as Bing) or they may simply have not been nominated for deletion yet. Existence does not automatically equal notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
I read your reply to my initial point that the article on Zapaat is about a search engine and that there are many search engine articles on wikipedia. The reply that I got from you is firstly, that you thought Zapaat would not be a notable search engine in your estimate. But your estimate is not really the defining point for articles listed on Wikipedia. You might have an opinion about an article or a search engine, and that opinion could be completely unique with no one else thinking so. I guess there is a mis-use of your administrator rights that comes across in this first statement. Secondly, the articles deemed to be noteworthy is defined as the ones that have been popularised; and upon checking, similar search engines have articles on them from popular media, that Zapaat does not have. Popular media is not a mandatory requirement for listing on wikipedia, as is stated in the rules section that I have read. Hence, both your points are flimsy grounds for de-listing the article on Zapaat. I have strong feeling that there is some sort of a censorship going on in wikipedia editorship that prevents articles at liberty, and seeks conformation to a particular economic or business interest. Interesting, and on a side note, I have noticed that all the search engines listed on wikipedia have some sort of a link with popular US organisations. And also on another side note, obviously, such US companies would have enough and a lot of money to easily get media coverage for their efforts; something that you deemed necessary for wikipedia listing. Should it then, not be by easy inference, that it can be deemed that as an administrator you are working to protect and promote certain such US companies, at the cost of and by supressing articles at liberty? Popularly it would seem so, and not that the ball would fall if you could not list the article. -Wikiinfosub (talk) 15:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
(Merged from new section that was created below. —Microchip08 (talk) 15:38, 28 May 2014 (UTC))
I should also, make another side note, that I was under the impression that wikipedia is a UK based online encyclopedia. But I found that it is now not so and that it is based in California. So, I guess my prior points are clearer now to me, and my surprise to you. -Wikiinfosub (talk) 16:00, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
(Merged again.) —Microchip08 (talk) 16:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
And you have some misconceptions about notability criteria here. The article wasn't deleted because of someone's personal opinion or bias. We have well defined requirements to determine what merits an article here. See Wikipedia:Golden Rule for a brief overview and WP:CORP for details about companies (including search engines). The article failed to meet the criteria. If you want to change that guideline, then this page is not the place to discuss it.
Furthermore, we also have well defined procedures for restoring articles. As you have already been informed, this article was deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#A7. It could also have been deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#G11 for being unambiguously promotional. In any case, your only recourse now is to ask the deleting administrator Shirt58 to reconsider the deletion, and if he declines to do so, then your remaining recourse is to challenge the deletion decision at Wikipedia:Deletion review. You have done neither. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Bilyaminu Yabo

Bilyaminu Yabo · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions] this is the third time my page is being deleted and I didn't know why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billyabour (talk • contribs) 17:32, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

It was deleted only twice, the most recent deletion was done in accordance with WP:CSD#A7, which you should read.
  Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion a7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user Randykitty (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Well, apparently you can't be bothered to read the instructions you have been given. You created the article yet a third time. It is deleted again as A7, and now salted to prevent re-creation. Nice going. You might want to read Wikipedia:Autobiographies if you are the subject of the article. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Marjorie Goodwin

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Henryshrigleyfeigl (talk) 18:15, 28 May 2014 (UTC) The above article was selected for speedy deletion and deleted before I could challenge it.

Marjorie Goodwin was far from insignificant or uninteresting or uninportant. She was the born Marjorie Cussons, daughter of a man called Alexander Tom Cussons, who does have an article about him on Wikipedia together with her two brothers Leslie and Alex Cussons.

The Cussons family made soap in Manchester UK turning a small family business into a multi national comglomerate. Marjorie Goodwin invented and marketed Imperial Leather Soap, a world famous brand. She was one of the very few directors of a British Public Company, she played Hockey for England and toured the world by herself in the 1920s. She is an unsung heroine in the Northwest of England and should be an inspiration for other women if they knew about her. She ended her career as President of the Cussons Group, a billion pound company.

Marjorie Goodwin was a founder member of the World Wide Fund for Nature as it is know now.(World Wildlife Fund then). She was a member of the 1001 Club, the administerative fund that runs WWF. She was invited to join this by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlanmds and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. She was a founder member, along with Prince Philip, of the Cutty Sark society, that saved and renovated the ship. She was invited by HM The Queen to the opening of the Ship and sometime later to the unveiling of Sir Winston Churchill's statue in Parliament Square in London. She sat next to Lady Churchill. Marjorie Goodwin spent the equivilent to millions of pounds in East Africa sinking boreholes for the animals to drink and paid for road building equipment to provide roads to the game parks.

This woman should be celebrated and not ignored.

  Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user WikiDan61 (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
For the record, I am not an administrator and did not delete the page in question. I nominated it for speedy deletion; it was Sphilbrick (talk · contribs) who deleted it. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Woops, you're right. I was looking at the deleted contributions (of which your nomination was most recent) instead of the deletion history. Sphilbrick is indeed the deleting administrator. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

It might well be that we should have an article about Marjorie.

A couple points:

  • The fact that her father and brother have articles is not relevant.
  • The article, at the time I deleted it, had ZERO references
  • The linkage to the WWF sounds important but WAS NOT MENTIONED in the article.

If you would like the article userfied (copied to a user subpage) so you can work on it, let me know, and I'll be happy to do it. (Will be away for a few days, so if I do not hear back in a few hours, anyone else should feel free to restore it to a user subpage.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:31, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

As I mentioned, I'll be away for a few days, so I went ahead and userfied. See it at User:Henryshrigleyfeigl/Marjorie_Goodwin. --S Philbrick(Talk) 20:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
  Done--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:50, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rich Limited

Would like to revise our submission -199.36.84.154 (talk) 23:28, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  Not done. You may as well start over, because the deleted article was irredeemably promotional and would require a complete re-write anyway. Please review WP:CORP and WP:NOTPROMOTION thoroughly before you try again. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Co-operative Socialism

92.23.79.210 (talk) 22:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done It was previously deleted and restored back in November, but nobody touched it until it was tagged for deletion yesterday. I'm sorry, but I'd really need to see some show of effort that you would edit the page if we restored it again. AfC is not a place to indefinitely host article submissions. The other big issues are that the page lacked any really true reliable sources, it didn't really show how it was separate from the big article for Cooperative, and the article wasn't written in layman's terms. While it wasn't like it was written in Greek, it was fairly jumbled and was somewhat all over the place. Mostly it's just that I can't see where the sourcing would really show that this would merit a content fork from cooperative. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David A. Greuner, M.D.

I, MedNewsNow, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. MedNewsNow (talk) 22:12, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done The problem is that the article would need to be re-written for tone, as it came across as fairly promotional in parts. Telling people to purchase a book because part of it would go to charity is a big example of what not to put in an article. I'm also concerned over your name, as it kind of gives off the impression that you're editing on behalf of a company. I'd like to request that you change your username. I'm going to block you, but this is mostly because I want to ensure that you see the namechange request. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Upcoming4.me

I, 93.139.60.163, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 93.139.60.163 (talk) 07:23, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done I can't really find anything to show that the website is all that notable. In the article the people who are saying good things about the site are also people who interact with the website in some format and as such, stand to gain something by telling people to visit the site or use it. A search doesn't really bring up anything to show that this would pass WP:ORG or WP:NWEB. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Please... reupload

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -182.185.191.158 (talk) 08:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done What page are you trying to get re-added? I don't see any deleted contributions. I'll leave you a note to ensure that you see this and I won't close this just yet, but we do need the name of the article in question. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Nicolas Shake

I, Rickluczak, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rickluczak (talk) 23:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  • I'm concerned at the promotional tone in the final paragraph. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:37, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  •   Not done I kept looking at it and I really feel that the final paragraph was just too promotional in tone. If I restored this and removed the paragraph it would pretty much remove most of the article as a whole. It'd just be better to re-write it from scratch. You used quotes, which is fine, but what pushed it was that you wrote stuff like "For Shake, the process is as much a part of the work as the end result." and "However, his work transcends mere “found art” because he immerses himself in the austerity of his environment, creating sometimes colossal creations delicately lit by artificial and natural light." These are both point of view statements and come across as promotional in tone. I don't have an issue with you making a new copy, although you will need to find a lot more coverage than you had on the article and you'll also need to show how the exhibitions he took part in were notable enough to pass notability guidelines. Here are the two sources from the article along with the ones I found. There isn't a lot out there, to be honest, and I'm not entirely sure that he will ever really pass notability guidelines as a whole, but there's enough of a doubt to where it'd be worth another try through AfC. ([1], [2], [3]) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:46, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Example

(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.) 112.135.84.97 (talk) 09:39, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done I can't find anything to undelete. We need the specific name of the article in order to check it over and see if it can be restored. I can't find anything in your deleted contributions. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Penney Retirement Community

(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.) Kathyberger (talk) 15:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done I see that it was deleted back in 2012 and restored back in November. During that time you made no edits to the page at all and the page was re-deleted. Even if we were to ignore that this is your second time requesting it and that you have made no true edits to the page since its creation back in 2012 (although you did make a sandbox version that is also now deleted), we have the additional problem that the PRC article was written in an extremely promotional manner. I also don't see where the retirement community itself necessarily passes notability guidelines. I can't see where the PRC itself has ever really gained any true in-depth coverage in sources that are independent of the subject and in reliable sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:10, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I do see where the district as a whole would be of historical note and we do have an article for the district, but that notability does not mean that the retirement community passes notability guidelines or merits an article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Gameplanets

The information relating to the Dutch tv format Gameplanets is and was totally correct, I see no reason why it was deleted from wiki. I believe it was a malicious action by an unknown person. -31.151.152.25 (talk) 10:49, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  • It wasn't deleted because it was incorrect or false, but because there was concerns over whether or not it was notable. We would need coverage in reliable sources (not things put out by the show or the channel it was on) to prove that the show is notable. As for the person who nominated it, please assume WP:GOODFAITH. I'm familiar with the editing habits of the person who nominated it and they're not the type of person who nominates things on a whim or because they're trying to be mean. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:16, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  •   Not done I tried doing a little digging to see if the name was always in English or if this was the translated title. Apparently the name was always in English and searching for the name didn't really bring up anything to prove that the show is notable. It was long running, but long running doesn't always equate to notability- we have to have coverage in reliable sources. If you want to ask for help via WP:DUTCH, I'm sure that some of the people there might be willing to help find coverage. I would just recommend that you not say that the deletion was requested by someone with malicious intent, as that will not make people more inclined to help you more. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arthur R. Bethke

I, Cab227, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Cab227 (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2014 (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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Uploads by User:Weechie

May I request the undeletino of several files verified by OTRS permission?

All verified in Ticket:2014051910008403. Thanks, --Mdann52talk to me! 14:53, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Done, images restored and tagged with OTRS permission and CC-by-SA-3.0 license as the ticket specifies. Please check to see if they need any other tags or templates. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:23, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alexander Reilly (Dublin artist)

I, Hellplex, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Hellplex (talk) 20:16, 29 May 2014 (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) 10:06, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SOURIAU

I, Unnisouriau, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Unnisouriau (talk) 05:58, 30 May 2014 (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) 10:24, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Advanced Optical Technology

I, Athoss777, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. ATh 06:01, 30 May 2014 (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) 10:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Enonic

I wish to retrieve the deleted material for improvement -Torlokken (talk) 06:19, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Gameplanets (2nd request)

Gameplanets was a pivotal production in Dutch childrens tv. The first virtual reality quiz show created in 1998 by Boldface productions for FoxTV and then for FoxKids Netherlands.Format owned at the time by The Baker & Brett Gamecompany. Afyer Netherlands the show was sold in 5 courtires under various other names.. Spielegalaxie, Cruinneas, Jogo dos Planetos etc...It is a piece of history and ran for 8 years in various territories... Please undelete the wiki Gameplanets page. -31.151.152.25 (talk) 12:03, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  Not done. See Tokyogirl79's answer to this same request above. Can you demonstrate that sources exist that provide significant coverage of this topic? ~Amatulić (talk) 13:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Alamin Sami

Do not delete my page. I will provide more info later. why are you in a hurry to delete? Please wait and let me complete my work -Shahadat7744 (talk) 14:04, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  Not done. This page is not the place to contest deletions made in accordance with WP:CSD#A7, particularly if the page hasn't been deleted yet. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

La Botella

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -RobertReichertRepDom (talk) 15:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello

this site is in process and I would like to create a undersite while its in process. Can you please help me with an undersite? --RobertReichertRepDom (talk) 15:23, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  • This area is for making a request for a deleted article to be undeleted, not for requesting help with creating a new article. For that, go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation, follow the provided instructions, and create an article that can be reviewed by other users. You can also ask a question on the Articles for Creation talk page if you want further help. Lugia2453 (talk) 15:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/East_Snake_Plain_Aquifer_dye_tracing

I, Neal2013, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Neal2013 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2014 (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) 02:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

South Sea Bubble (temporary)

Please send me the content from this deleted page. Thanks. Nearwater (talk) 00:19, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

The Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie

While I am aware that the film was taken down and redirected to the main AVGN page for not being notable enough or even finished yet at the time, I feel that the time is about right to restore the page. The film is almost done with Post-Production wrapping up and the director, James D. Rolfe, has stated on his own site that the film will be finished sometime in the summer and will be released in theaters as well in summer [1]. On top of that, some notable news outlets such as Entertainment Weekly, New York Daily and New York Times have mentioned the film by name, referenced it's production and even did some coverage on the director himself, which gives it notability.[2][3][4]

To be fair, the film isn't yet finish even though production is wrapping. But, I do feel that the page should be recovered once the film hits theaters and we can have more official coverage and reception. JoMorling (talk) 21:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://cinemassacre.com/2014/05/26/avgn-vfx-status-5-26-2014/
  2. ^ http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/youtube-star-james-rolfe-long-angry-video-game-nerd-movie-article-1.1749283
  3. ^ http://popwatch.ew.com/2013/07/01/et-videogame-landfill-new-mexico/
  4. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/us/hunting-for-an-et-castoff-in-a-most-terrestrial-place.html?_r=1&
  • It's been through two AfDs, so you'd have to go through deletion review if you want to challenge the AfD consensus. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:35, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Govinda raj.jpg

The author and publisher have given me the permission to use the file on wikipedia -Sajankumar2014 (talk) 20:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

That doesn't work. Wikipedia is the one that needs the permission, not you. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:56, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Image is not yet deleted. You should send your permission to WP:OTRS. Microchip08 (talk) 03:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Oasis Research

I, 173.13.110.129, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 173.13.110.129 (talk) 22:05, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment: There really isn't much to re-create, if you're looking to create an article about the company itself. There's a smallish paragraph about NPR's coverage of the company but not any actual information that's really about the company itself. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Coolitude

This page holds the somewhat unusual distinction of having been prodded twice. Can an admin please have a look and see if either of these articles are remotely useful (ie, mention Khal Torabully and not urban dictionary)? If so, can said admin please dump the useful version(s) in my sandbox? Thanks! -VQuakr (talk) 07:28, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  Done. Graeme Bartlett has already restored the entire revision history, for you to examine. ~Amatulić (talk) 13:37, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Sorry about the mess, I moved the target of the redirect by accident. If you want the sandbox back, that is possible. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:30, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

KingSheharyarMirza(Singer)

I, 115.42.74.163, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 115.42.74.163 (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Because its Was A greate singer in united kingdom and i request you create this article

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -115.42.74.163 (talk) 17:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Has been repeatedly deleted under various titles, as a hoax - see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King Sheharyar Mirza (singer) --bonadea contributions talk 17:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
  •   Not done and will not be done This was previously deleted at an AfD discussion, where it was deemed to be a hoax. At this point any attempts to re-create the page should go through WP:DR, but I have to say that unless you can prove that this is not a hoax you will likely be wasting your time. User:Jake Wartenberg is the admin that closed the original AfD, so you should start with him, but I don't think that he will restore the article without some serious, serious proof that this guy exists and is a notable person. Not only will you have to work to prove that something is not a hoax (a very, very difficult thing to do after an AfD has ended with several noted editors stating it was a hoax) but you'll have to show notability on top of that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:46, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Also to put it bluntly, if you are User:KingSheharyarMirza here trying to get the article restored, please be aware that this could potentially count as a block evasion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Please either userfy to User:Frieda Beamy/GovLinks or copy the significant text here for comparison with {{CongLinks}}. Copying text might work better, because if userfied I would work to merge it with CongLinks. I note significant heated discussion relating to deleting the one and trimming the other way back, and there was an attempt to restore the code for GovLinks for discussion that failed. This seems to need a much wider discussion than template talk has yielded. Thank you. -Frieda Beamy (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  Done, template code copied to your talk page. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:22, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

User:Bandukia/Prabh Gill

I, Jéské Couriano, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. (Actually posted by Bandukia (talk · contribs), but they did not close the template tag.) —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:47, 30 May 2014 (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) 00:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, will try to fix the issues pointed out, asap. and will try to gather more info. bandukia (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Partitioning minimization procedure

Was deleted due to "Has been unsourced for 18 months, appears to be substantially original research" thats because it was MY original research. Please put this back up. -Tantrum22 (talk) 10:55, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done - this is not an appropriate topic for inclusion on Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Wikipedia does not accept articles which consist of original research, or which lack any reliable sources of information. Although PROD's are usually undeleted by request, this was deleted 5 years ago, and does not meet that threshold. Wikipedia is *not* a place to publish your original research - ALL Wikipedia articles must be supported by third party sources. In addition, when you signed up, you agreed to not write about topics you had personal direct involvement in. My apologies that you're not fully-cognizant of the purpose of this online encyclopedia, but be advised that academics and other wise people also make a similar mistake the panda ₯’ 11:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Synthwave

Synthwave is a legitimate subgenre of electronica, and is a currently rising genre in the music, movie, and entertainment mainstream. The term "synthwave" is used as a search tag and genre on many popular music websites such as SoundCloud, Bandcamp, and LastFM. e.g. http://rateyourmusic.com/genre/Synthwave/ This article was improperly removed based on a "lack of reliable sources". -204.144.15.9 (talk) 14:20, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

The only "sources" cited in the article were kunfury, soundcloud, and youtube, none of which provided any significant coverage of the topic. Wikipedia has notability standards. A "currently rising" genre is not notable. Subjects don't get articles for being up-and-coming, they must have already arrived. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
  •   Already done It was restored as a contested PROD, and is currently under deletion discussion at AFD the panda ₯’ 11:12, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

The Kokoda Track Foundation

This page was deleted speedily under G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement. Alleged foundational plagiarism was of http://www.kokodatrackfoundation.org/default.aspx, http://www.kokodatrackfoundation.org/ed-pg.aspx and http://www.kokodatrackfoundation.org/cd-pg.aspx. Request for the page to be undeleted due to CC Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Australia license being found in the copyright link at the footer of each of these pages. Conflict of interest disclosure: I work for this organisation. Pending discussion of notablility with other wikipedia editors, the article may be turned into a stub or merged with existing Kokoda Track page. Firstly, the page must be restored. Thanks and all the best -Bluhdorn (talk) 06:28, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done Even though the text is given up as fair use, it is still written in a fairly promotional manner and would pretty much require an entire re-write to fit our WP:NPOV guidelines. This is one of the unsaid things about copyright violations and fair use. Most of the time the text in question was written for the organization's personal website, where they are trying to write about themselves in the best light possible. I'm not trying to say that this sort of writing is bad- it's advisable for someone to write nice things about themselves on their own website. However it's not advisable or recommended to do that on Wikipedia. I'd really recommend that you re-write the article in your own words. I'd also recommend that you work with someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies or the WP:TEAHOUSE to help avoid promotional terms. (I know this isn't a company, but notability guidelines for companies and organizations are largely the same, plus the organization WP is only semi-active and you're more likely to find an active editor in the company WP.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:20, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  • One example of a sentence that would have to be re-written or removed entirely is "Over the years, the Foundation adopted a much more holistic approach and now works across a wide range of areas to ensure that families and children are healthy, educated and able to improve their lives and futures." That comes across as pretty promotional and is also written in a somewhat casual tone. It's also a little broad and general in scope, so it would be better to phrase it like "The foundation was launched in 2003 as an organization that would award scholarships for underprivileged children in Papua New Guinea but overtime added additional support options for the children, their families, and their communities." This gets across what the organization does as well as show that they have broadened their options to encompass the entire family and community. The problem with using the term holistic is that the term can mean many different things to different people and can be seen as a buzzword or peacock term. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm also slightly concerned about the lack of coverage I'm seeing about this on the Internet. The organization does absolutely wonderful things, but it would still have to have coverage in independent and reliable sources. Much of the sources on the page are primary, seem like they're based off of a press release, or would be seen as a self-published blog-type source. I'd also recommend going through WP:RS/N, a noticeboard where you can get feedback on your sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Tokyogirl, Thanks for your time & feedback, it is much appreciated! It's wonderful that wikipedia has such an active community. The page also featured some factual inaccuracies and spelling mistakes. A work experience student volunteering with us updated these inaccuracies. Unfortunately, due to being completely new at Wikipedia we didn’t realise we were violating conflict of interest rules! It was a big faux pas which we regret and now wish to correct. We will take your advice and post to WP:RS/N regarding our sources as well as WP:TEAHOUSE to get advice about writing style to avoid promotional language. We’ll also ask friendly neutral editors to write on our behalf using these sources rather than writing ourselves to avoid conflict of interest.--Bluhdorn (talk) 00:34, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
  • We kindly ask though, if the speedy deletion decision may be reversed, as the criteria given for speedy deletion G12 was not valid. It is agreed that the page contained promotional language, however, it was was not exclusively promotional and cannot be considered under G11 either. The discussion of rewriting the parts that are promotional to be more encylopaediac should not be bypassed via speedy deletion as no criteria for speedy deletion was obviously met as per Wikipedia guidelines. The article has a practical chance of surviving with changes. Similarly, if the concern is about the notability of the organisation, then I’d ask if the speedy deletion decision be reversed and this discussion occur on the article’s talk page. This is due to notability not being a criterion for speedy deletion as per Wikipedia guidelines. Thanks and regards--Bluhdorn (talk) 00:34, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
You keep saying "we" - is this a shared account, or are you very non-objectively speaking on behalf of the business? The "article" will never be restored to articlespace - it perhaps could be userfied, but not to anyone who a) is related to the company, or b) has been asked by the company to work on it the panda ₯’ 09:17, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi The Panda, thanks for the message. I've disclosed my conflict of interest - I work for the charity this article is about. This account is not a shared account, it's my personal one. I realise now I shouldn't have spoken on the behalf of all of us at the office. I should have said 'I'. Sorry for the mistake - I'm new here so I'm making lots of them! I've learned from other wikipedia editors how to go about this the proper way, which I'm now doing. Before I/we didn't know about the conflict of interest rules so we/I tried editing it ourselves, which we regret dearly. Thanks for the info. Would you be interested in helping us write the article based off secondary objective sources?--Bluhdorn (talk) 03:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Locomotive Boiler Certificate

(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.) Cambridge Paul (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2014 (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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:32, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
  • On a side note, you might want to see if this could just be merged into one of the pre-existing articles about boilers. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:32, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freezy Mayne

I, Youyou.shady, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. thisisYouYou (talk) 13:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I want to edit my page for submission, I couldn't do it before, please set it undeleted to give me the chance to edit my page, Thank you "Save page" button below -thisisYouYou (talk) 13:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done - this page is a copyright violation. Not only did I not really see where this person would pass notability guidelines, the page seems to be a copyright violation from this page. I'm sorry, but we cannot accept copyvio and even if he gave the content up as fair use, we would still require that the page be re-written for tone. However like I said, I can't see where he would pass notability guidelines since I was unable to find anything to show that he has received coverage in independent and reliable sources to show a depth of coverage. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Leadin Oy

Page Leadin Oy was deleted within the same day it was created. This was done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, "because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia".

Please can I retrieve the material so I can improve it later. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokoskin (talk • contribs) 16:30, 1 June 2014

Have you asked the deleting administrator, Bbb23? ~Amatulić (talk) 01:39, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
  •   Not done and will not be done Not only is there a concern about coverage, but the article is very promotional in tone- which is likely because it's taken directly from one of the company's pages, which makes it a copyright violation. This would require a complete re-write to meet our requirements for neutrality, but I'm not finding all that much out there as far as coverage goes, so I'm not really convinced that this would ever pass notability guidelines even if it was re-written. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hoërskool_Delmas

There is no page or information about the school Highschool Delmas on wikipedia and will contribute to information about the schools in Mpumalanga -EbbieSwart (talk) 06:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  •   This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lucrin S.A

I, ArvindLucrin, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Arvind.tac 05:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  •   Not done I'm sorry, but the article was far too promotional in tone for me to be comfortable restoring it. It read like a press release for the company and I have a strong suspicion that it's likely copied from a press release or somewhere on the company website. Please understand that we cannot accept WP:COPYVIO and that even if the company were to give up rights to the content, the article would still need to be completely re-written to fit our guidelines per WP:NPOV. I have no issue with you re-creating it via AfC, but I think that the previous incarnation was far too promotional to restore and would only impede attempts to make the content sound less promotional. On a side note I would recommend that you read over WP:COI, as it is likely that you are editing on behalf of the company. I commend you for trying to go about article creation via AfC as this is the best way to go about doing this, but just to be safe it would be a good idea to read over our conflict of interest page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:16, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

nqobizwe elvin thabiso ngubane

I want to improve my article by putting more information to it, and also reason of writing it. I promise to follow all norms, rules you made and improve my article edition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elvinthabiso (talk • contribs) 06:40, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  • On a side note, you will need to show some sort of coverage to show that that you have done everything that you have claimed to do in the article (as I assume that you are writing about yourself due to the name of your account) and that these accomplishments are notable. The problem is that while someone can write in an article that someone has done something, we need to have something to prove that the accomplishments occurred and that they are notable enough to merit inclusion. (WP:RS, also WP:COI) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:20, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Malcolm Brogdon

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -71.113.46.177 (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC) First team athlete of major conference, frivilous deletion of existing article.

  •   Not done The article was deleted under WP:G11, as it came across as promotional in tone. Looking at the article I can see where it came across as such, as it was pretty much just a list of stats and also appears to be a copyright violation of this page. Please understand that we cannot accept copyright violations and even if the content is given up as fair use, we would still require that this article be re-written to fit our standards of WP:NPOV and to also match our style guidelines for athletes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Page Unrecognised?!!?

OI! I didn't make this page! Yep, delete it, it's spam. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2.27.41.126&diff=cur

Sort it out :P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.41.126 (talk) 12:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  Not done This is the place to request that pages are undeleted, whereas you want to get a page deleted, so you're in the wrong place. What has happened is that someone else on Orange Broadband had the IP address that has now been (temporarily) allocated to you, and the message related to the editing that that person did. I've added a {{sharedip}} to the IP user talk page which may help. BencherliteTalk 15:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Artist Mikhail Chapiro

I would like to edit the page according to your recommendations and resubmit it. Thank you! -Borisrusakov (talk) 17:33, 2 June 2014 (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. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:49, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KODA, Kids Of Deaf Adults

(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.) 142.11.74.71 (talk) 16:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


We changed email addresses during this time, and had not received this notice of deletion ..please put the site back up..we would like to copy all of our work we put into there..and try submitting again. Thanks

Unless you haven't been logging in and reading your talk page, you should have been notified. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
  Not done You were notified, here. The submission was a few paragraphs of essay-like information that duplicated material at the Child of deaf adult article, followed by a inordinately long list of external links. As the original AFC reviewer said, you're better off simply editing that article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

How can we see our work we submitted... please at least allow us access to it... how can we go there..thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.11.74.71 (talk) 17:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

If you create an account and associate an email address with it I will send you the text. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Mustafa prize

Mustafa prize is a prize to encourage Muslim scientists around the World to research and promote world science to a higher ladder. Mustafa prize is a prize with the sponsoring of Islamic universities such as Kerachi university, university of Malaya, Islamic Development Bank, university of tehran etc to encourage outstanding research about medical science and health, information and communication technology, and nano technology. Me as a person who work in the headquarter of this prize ask you to please re-back the information about Mustafa prize to help Muslim scientist to be encouraged to research and technology. -Mustafa prize (talk) 21:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  Not done The article was deleted as containing excessive advertising-like language, but more importantly, as a copyright violation since you seem to have pasted the contents of your website, which is not allowed. Also, you have a clear conflict of interest, which means you should not be creating this article directly. Instead, use the articles for creation service to have another, uninvolved volunteer review it before it is published. I'd also recommend going over the notability guidelines for inclusion, because if this does not meet them it won't be accepted anyway. And finally, you should create another account before you go any further. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 21:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_136&oldid=1138663664"