Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 195

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Archive 190 ← Archive 193 Archive 194 Archive 195 Archive 196 Archive 197 → Archive 200

shrimali

{{subst:refund|1= Shrimali Brahmin |2= This Page is belong to Shrimal is a place in India’s Rajasthan State . presently know as bhinmal. Shrimal is a combination of ” Shri ” and ” Mal ” . ” Shri ” is popularly interpreted as Laksmi , the goddess of wealth . ” Shri ” also means beauty and brightness , “Mal” means place . Thus Shrimal about 800 years ago was a beautiful prosperous place where along with other castes , Goldsmiths too lived , created pieces of beauty out of gold and prospered with other communities .

Unfortunately with constant invasions by foreigners on the North-Western borders of India , Shrimal broke down and thereby received the name Bhinmal . In Sanskrit language , the word Bhinna means broken or seperated and therefore Bhinmal means broken place . According to Shrimal Puran (part of Skanda Puran) due to curse of Rishi Gautam and Goddess Laksmi Shrimali Nagar decentrised and it’s prosperity and population come down. Since Shrimal Nagar suffered a lot, the people living there were forced to migrate. Most of them started migrating towards Gujarat and Marwar (Rajasthan). Therefore most of the Shrimali Brahmins presently residing in these two states, although they had moved and established presently all over the world with their traditional and modern profession too.

Scholar and specialized in Vedic culture of India, we can be better identified the “Shrimali Brahmin” in this Sanskrit Poem titled “Vayam Shrimali” means We are Shrimali. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vyaspunit2k (talk • contribs) 16:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: Not quite sure what is being requested here. Shrimali Brahmins has existed in mainspace since 2006 but was recently stubbed due to most of the material therein having been unreferenced for many years. Shrimal exists as a redirect to Bhinmal, the town's current name. And the requestor's sandbox (currently submitted to AfC) is apparently material on the Shrimali Brahmins, but entirely in Hindi. --Finngall talk 16:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Francisco D'Agostino

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

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

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

@Righteousskills:   Done - as a WP:SOFTDELETE the article is automatically restored on request, though it may be re-nominated at AfD. The more you can improve the referencing, the better. JohnCD (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Righteousskills (talk) 18:16, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Just for posterity here, the article was nominated by a now-blocked sock. The deletion was made by an administrator. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Andrew_Peterson_(author)

Copyright Violation (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.andrewpeterson.com/about-the-author/) is unnecessary due to Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) Creative Commons licensing explicitly presented on the page concerned.

(For context, the content on this page was also explicitly provided to me by the author with express permission to use in non-commercial documents.) -Justaleaf (talk) 20:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

CC-NC is not an acceptable licence on Wikipedia. Our content must be free to use even for commercial interests. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  Not done Exactly what Jeremy said. That license is not compatible with Wikipedia. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:54, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
I notified the original content author, who has revised the licensing on the page accordingly to the CC-BY 3.0. ( http://www.andrewpeterson.com/about-the-author/ ) With an attribution note and adaptation description, this is appropriate, is it not? Justaleaf (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

If the licensing conflict is no longer an issue, but the page isn't ready for approval, could we restore it to a draft so I can go about refining it for publishing? Justaleaf (talk) 00:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  Done; the CV issue seems to be cleared at this point but I'm not convinced on notability (needs better sources). Leaving it in the mainspace for now. — Earwig talk 03:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Sarakara Chakrajmal

Reason for deletion is mentioned as it was not edited for 6 month, now I will try that there are more contributions to page after it reappear -Madx62 (talk) 17:44, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
@Madx62:   Done — Earwig talk 03:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:BitShares

The majority of the article was written in my own words (Other than Technology) and I would like to attempt to submit the article again with a more neutral point of view and revised tone. -Robrigo (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Note the draft was deleted as a copyright infringement, but the user was incorrectly sent here from the Teahouse, where I later posted the correct advice, which is to contact the deleting admin @Jimfbleak:. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Robrigo, the article was also fairly promotional in tone since it contained various marketing WP:PEACOCK terms and other buzzword-y phrases. It's extremely likely that even if this was restored, you'd still have to re-write it to fit NPOV guidelines. On a side note, if you are someone that was hired or otherwise asked to create the article (ie, anything that would pose a WP:COI issue), you will need to disclose this on your userpage. I'd also recommend that you go through one of Wikipedia's training modules like WP:ADVENTURE, just so you can get an overview of the basics of Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:06, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Who s Lil Haze?

I, 70.123.172.54, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 70.123.172.54 (talk) 16:12, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  •   Not done, not only is this fairly promotional in tone but it's also WP:COPYVIO from this website. Wikipedia cannot accept articles that are taken from somewhere else, as copyright is automatically assumed and in this case, the material is far too promotional to use even if permissions were granted through a WP:ORTS ticket. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

samacharpati.com

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Journalist.pralhad (talk) 05:08, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  •   Not done This was deleted as WP:A7 and cannot be restored here. Normally you'd ask the deleting admin to restore the page (and if they decline, go through deletion review, but this was also deleted as WP:G11, unambiguous promotion, which might prevent this from being restored. Offhand I don't see where it was overwhelmingly promotional so Deb may be willing to transfer a copy to AfC for you to work on. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:EcoVadis

I, Alearca, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. We would like to restore the draft page in order to add changes to it -Alearca (talk) 08:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alearca:   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) 09:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

mackenzie & halbert

the page I simply created isn't for advertisement of the company as I have no benefit whatsoever. I think it shouldn't be deleted because the page was created simply to inform about the company, what they did do and what happened to them. I used notes to cite the information even though I am new to this yet you guys have to be this harsh, especially on newcomers. if you disagree then perhaps could you EDIT the page and take out what isn't needed even if it will leave little information behind. please reconsider. if there were problems concerning the article please highlight and change it for me this once. -Ozoneplayer (talk) 16:24, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion A7, indicating an article that did not explain or prove why the subject was notable. A7 deletions are not overturned here; try contacting the deleting administrator (Bbb23 (talk · contribs)) instead. And I suggest to you to make use of our drafting process instead of posting directly to the considerably more-scrutinised mainspace. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
@Ozoneplayer:   Not done. If you want to know why this was thought promotional, consider these unedited extracts: "our clients... known for being agreeable and congenial... we have the capacity to present them with handy arrangements... The firm offers, for instance, expert Audit and Assurance administrations... dedicated to delivering the highest level of professionalism and expertise... " That is ad-speak, and anything like that is deleted from Wikipedia at sight. Other problems were (a) you gave no indication why this defunct accountancy firm is important or significant, or any different from a thousand others, i.e. why an encyclopedia should have an article about it, (b) inconsistency - you say the firm is defunct, but still write of it in the present tense; "The firm offers... Mackenzie & Halbert are dedicated... " and (c) lack of focus - the whole second half was general chat about accountancy, not about the company.
You can try again, but you should start from clean sheet. As Jeremy suggests, you would do well to use WP:Articles for creation which will let you prepare a draft for review. I will give some more advice on your talk page when I have time, within a day or two. Meanwhile read WP:Your first article JohnCD (talk) 18:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Jem Jem Italia

I, 62.10.114.195, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 62.10.114.195 (talk) 17:17, 9 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!" Note that in order to be accepted, the article needs to show references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish Wikipedia:Notability. 18:16, 9 July 2015 (UTC)JohnCD (talk)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Multimedia Conferencing

I, Prerna2526, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Prerna2526 (talk) 18:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Prerna2526:   Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request to a new location at Draft:Multimedia Conferencing. 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. It is not clear whether the article is about the general subject or about a particular product: either way, it needs better referencing (the only external link is a dead-link) (a) to verify what it says, and (b) to establish Wikipedia:Notability, which requires references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. JohnCD (talk) 19:12, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

She is on Delhi Government official post, Should have a wiki page -NaveenJaihind (talk) 06:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here. The page was taken to DRV already and its deletion endorsed, so the only recourse left for you is to contact the admin who closed the AfD. I also suggest you change your username as soon as possible. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:12, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Teleperformance Philippines

Hi, we are trying to put up an article about our company for the sole reason of having a content online. Please note that this is not for advertising purposes. Our global counterpart already has an existing article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleperformance we would like to put up articles for each subsidiary. This will just supply as a reference in the future. -JeffreyJohnsonTP (talk) 03:12, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page isn't deleted, therefore there's no reason to undelete it. Please follow the instructions on the deletion tag in order to contest (if a speedy deletion or prod/stickyprod) or argue against (if a deletion debate) deletion. Please note that all articles must be backed up by multiple reliable sources that discuss the subject at length, with editorial oversight and no connection to the subject what-so-ever. Other articles' presence or absence is irrelevant (and I will note Teleperformance needs a severe rewrite), and I will note that saying "having a content online"[sic] is a good phraseology for getting your article to remain deleted. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Arts and Adventure/sandbox

This page does not violate the copyright rule and is only in use for my own series that is not official. I don't tend to include this page from any other franchise, series, stories, or etc. This series is my own creation and as well as everything described within this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arts and Adventure (talk • contribs) 08:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Arts and Adventure:   Not done - sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place to post original work, even in sandboxes - see Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and Wikipedia is not a web-hosting service. There are plenty of places on the Internet where you can post your work: you could try DeviantArt or Wikia, or you may get some ideas from Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. JohnCD (talk) 13:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

kadanganeri

I, Aravinthan AS, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. A.Aravinthan 12:13, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Aravinthan AS: all that has been deleted is the original draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kadanganeri. The actual page Kadanganeri has not been deleted. JohnCD (talk) 13:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Swati JaiHind

Hi The page Swati Jaihind has been deleted without giving any chance to discuss on it. A lot of unfair and unjust attempts were made last night to vandalize the page. We are in the process of improving the page but why despite all the credible sources does it seem not wiki worthy? Being lesser known does not mean having no credible importance. The person concerned is a senior government official and someone who has been an activist for almost 10 years. All works are substantiated with adequate links. I request everyone to kindly discuss first before arriving at conclusions. I respect the seniority and contributions but we all have equal rights to voice our opinion and work on Wiki. -Gautamsingh93 (talk) 03:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC) Gautamsingh93 (talk) 03:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion A7, indicating an article that did not explain or prove why the subject was notable. A7 deletions are not overturned here; try contacting the deleting administrator (NawlinWiki (talk · contribs)) instead. An A7 deletion basically says, This page does not explain why this subject is notable. Also, privately-owned websites have every right to curtail speech as they deem necessary, as you do not have a right to actually be here. (If you did, blocks and bans could not possibly exist.) —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:24, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Two points: (1) the sources cited mentioned Ms. Swati Maliwal only in passing. Neither was *about* her. The first story merely quoted her once, and the second merely said that she was leading a project. That doesn't satisfy our notability criteria, WP:BIO, or our sourcing criteria, WP:V. (2) It's interesting that both articles refer to Ms. Maliwal only by her real name, but you keep trying to post the article using her promotional nickname, "Swati JaiHind" ("Jai Hind" means "long live India"). That supports our conclusion that the article is meant to promote and publicize Ms. Maliwal. We don't allow that, see WP:SPAM. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

The Master Key System

This article seems to have disappeared. I don't know why. I have searched for some record of its deletion or merger and have found none. I think that it is a notable book and should be part of Wikipedia. I can give evidence of notability if required -Jane Taaaa (talk) 15:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jane Taaaa: You don't need undeletion for that. See The Master Key System: Revision history. It's all there. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:08, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It is possible, by an admittedly devious route, to find out what happened. When clicking on a page takes you to a different page, the first one has probably been redirected to the second. In this case, when clicking on the book's title takes you to the article about its author, scrolling to the top of the page shows, just beneath the title, a line "(Redirected from The Master Key System)". That gives a link which takes you back to the actual redirect page, and then clicking on "View history" shows you what has happened.
The page was redirected to the article about the book's author on 17 June by user Boleyn (talk) with edit summary "redirect; I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG, and neither has anyone else in the more than 7 years it's been tagged."
Boleyn's edit could simply be reverted, restoring the article, but I suggest that you discuss with her what evidence of notability for the book you can provide. "Notability" has a special sense in Wikipedia: the test is whether there has been "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." WP:GNG is the general statement, and WP:NBOOK is specifically about books. JohnCD (talk) 17:17, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

WNISEF

The page was made during wiki-training by a novice from Ukraine and experienced user from uk-wiki had no time to improve it. It did not contain copyvio but was very short. Please recreate it in my personal space so novice can improve it. Thank you. -Brunei (talk) 14:28, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Brunei:   Done to User:Brunei/WNISEF. Get your learner to check out WP:Notability and the need for references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and tell him to take care not to copy from the organization's website, which would likely be (a) copyvio and (b) too promotional in tone. Check with the deleting administrator, RHaworth (talk) before restoring it to the main space. JohnCD (talk) 18:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Nassir Navab

Full professor at Johns Hopkins University and University of Technology Munich, Germany (TUM). Significant impact in the field of computer vision and medical imaging, with over 10k citations. Fellow of the MICCAI society, the organizer of the world’s leading conference on medical image computing and computer assisted intervention. One of the founders of IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). Is associate editor or on editorial board of the two journals in the field with the highest impact factor. Won Siemens Inventor of the Year award in 2001, holding 44 granted US and over 50 international patents. -OliverZettinig (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion A7, indicating an article that did not explain or prove why the subject was notable. A7 deletions are not overturned here; try contacting the deleting administrator (RHaworth (talk · contribs)) instead. An A7 deletion doesn't mean the subject isn't notable; it means the article doesn't explain why the subject is notable. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Creation of this page is permitted. What is written above is more than what was in the article. But what was deleted is fair enough to be deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Chris Wagner

Request to restore edit history for recreated article. -Dolovis (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  •   Not done The last revision was a redirect to The Latch Brothers. The earlier version are on different people, like an NFL player and even earlier ones on likely non-notable people. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

File:JudgeThomasHardiman.pdf

Please undelete. Ticket#2015062610021489 as ccbysa3.0 -Willy Weazley 23:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Shaquille Murray-Lawrence

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

  Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review or contact the administrator that closed the deletion debate instead. Articles deleted after a deletion discussion are considered "controversial" unless the deletion discussion ended in a speedy deletion or the XfD had little to no input from other users (in which case it's treated here as a PROD). —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Josh Reiner

it is harming no one and this doesn't mean anything it's not like this person is taaking credit for anything but it akes no sense to delete it? whats your guys issue - . (talk) 02:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

  Note: The page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion A7, indicating an article that did not explain or prove why the subject was notable. A7 deletions are not overturned here; try contacting the deleting administrator (Cryptic (talk · contribs)) instead. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Request

  • [[:No.1 I believe that the notablity is already satisfied on I translate. Still as per international Citaion, I create French page giving more weightage to local news first, The User lomita deleted without any discussion. I am not trying to fight but I am not new while nor expert to. SO i request to look into this.]] · ( [[|talk]] | logs | links | [{{fullurl: No.1 I believe that the notablity is already satisfied on I translate. Still as per international Citaion, I create French page giving more weightage to local news first, The User lomita deleted without any discussion. I am not trying to fight but I am not new while nor expert to. SO i request to look into this. |action=watch}} watch] ) · [revisions]

I created a Wikipedia french(translation from spain to French) page of the person name Eric Duval(https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ric_Duval), This person has notablility - https://www.google.co.in/search?q=eric+duval&espv=2&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=fOmgVaaLNMmyuAT_qIj4AQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=923 | Page that got deleted fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Éric_Duval-Rgema (talk) 10:05, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Rgema, are you asking for us to undelete the English page or are you asking about the pages on another language Wikipedia? Either way, this cannot be done via REFUND, as the page for Eric Duval was deleted via WP:A7 back in 2009 and as for other language WPs, we cannot restore any articles on those sites at all. You must address this via that Wikipedia's undeletion processes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:41, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  •   Not done It looks like you were talking about the French Wikipedia. You will need to take this up there with User:Lomita, as the English Wikipedia's administrators do not have any control over what is or isn't on other Wikipedia sites. It also looks like the page was deleted via a discussion at fr:Discussion:Éric_Duval/Suppression (or at least the consensus there was that Duval did not pass guidelines), so if you try to go about restoring it you will need to show how Duval has received enough coverage to pass WP FR's notability guidelines. Each Wikipedia has its own guidelines for notability, so just because something has a page on the Spanish language Wikipedia does not mean that it would automatically merit a page on the French Wikipedia or on any other language's Wikipedia site. Heck, the existence of a page on the Spanish language Wikipedia might not even mean that it would pass notability guidelines there, since it might just mean that the page does fail their notability criteria but it hasn't been detected and deleted yet. (Note: I do not know what ES Wikipedia's guidelines are, so I'm falling back on what we would tell people that try to say "but this has a page" on here.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:52, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Tokyogirl79. But I do understand if a page is in spanish doesnt not qualify but other notability also are being passed. I will take care from here thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligema (talk • contribs) 11:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Again, that's something you need to take up with the French Wikipedia as each Wikipedia's notability guidelines are different. What is notable on one will not automatically be notable on another. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

UNTOUCHABLE: CHILDREN OF GOD

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

  • Are you willing to have this back as a userspace draft or normal draft? I am not keen to have this as an article in its state prior to deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  Stale
. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: I remember deleting this and I have to admit that I was pretty concerned that it might be copyvio or close copyvio from somewhere else. I'm still concerned that this might be the case, given the statement here. Also, I did try looking for sources when I came across it and found nothing to show that the film would pass notability guidelines. I'm still finding nothing. I'm not trying to be a killjoy, but I think that draftifying it anywhere would just be prolonging the inevitable since I don't see where this would ever pass notability guidelines as a whole. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Denise Milani

I, Rainbow unicorn, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 05:40, 13 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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

DeepRanaji

Deep is a web designer and also a agent of rajput youth brigade which is doing very important work for humans -DeepRanaji (talk) 06:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

  Not done and will not be done Wikipedia is not Facebook, please create your vanity page somewhere else. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 07:52, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Vicki Fraser page

(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.) 207.96.208.130 (talk) 11:29, 13 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. Draft:Vicki Fraser restored. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

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

This image was deleted with the edit summary "Violation of FoP". This is not correct. Per 17 USC §120(a): "The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place." That does not apply exclusively to architectural works in the US...it means that creator of an architectural does not have any copyright claim to pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place. Wikipedia is only subject to the copyright laws of the US...see the content policy Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights. Freedom of Panorama is not subject covered by any IP treaty between the US & Belgium (location of the work). This image should be tagged with Template:FoP-USonly and then re-added to Atomium. -AHeneen (talk) 17:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Already at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 July 5#File:Atomium 320 by 240 CCBY20 flickr Mike Cattell.jpg. —Cryptic 19:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry. I didn't see that. AHeneen (talk) 13:54, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  Done The file is now restored by RoySmith. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Johnny Terris

This article was deleted in a deletion discussion in February 2014 due to lack of notability. Recently an IP editor disrupted the archived/closed deletion discussion because they believe the article was wrongfully deleted. I'm requesting for an admin to restore the article at Draft:Johnny Terris so that we can look into this guy's notability again. I would also like for an admin to check whether the IP's concerns are true: that the article was defaced prior to the AfD to remove all signs of notability and that the voters at AfD didn't check the history and didn't look for sources themselves. I don't know if this is true but there's only one way to find out. It does appear to be true that some bloggers at Tumblr were messing with that article, I found some of their posts. -— Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:06, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jeraphine Gryphon: I'm not happy to restore this to draft on the basis of the IP's accusations, because the AfD discussion shows that people did check the history and also looked for sources without success. There was certainly some silly vandalism, I guess by his pals, but I have done some spot-checking in the history and I don't see any previous version that shows notability. I will ping Stifle, the closing admin, for his view. Mine is that if we do anything it should be a formal DRV, when the article could be temp-undeleted for checking; but I think the AfD got it right, and I am inclined to do nothing unless actual evidence of notability is produced. JohnCD (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for checking, but I'm confused now. DRV seemed like the wrong place, that's why I brought it here. And I was asking for draftification because that way it might be easier to show notability, by editing it. The IP made some claims on their talk page (User talk:104.156.228.85) about why they think Terris is notable (it sounds good but they didn't give any concrete proof), but they're also saying that they're not very Wikipedia-savvy and I, as I told them, am not volunteering to go and do any outside research on this person. So, uh. This isn't looking very good, I guess. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:15, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Actually, Jeraphine, you have a point about DRV - it wouldn't really be appropriate when the AfD result was so clear, though people do use it like that. Let us wait for Stifle's opinion - as deleting admin, it is really his call.
IP user, if you are reading this, please read WP:Notability (people), particularly the section WP:NACTOR, and WP:Notability (summary). It seems Terris was "actor, filmmaker, writer, artist, photographer and visual video editor" but even in the fullest version of the deleted article there is no claim, let alone evidence, of notable achievements in any of those fields. Can you provide links to some substantial independent comment about him and his work? JohnCD (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)


He has 21 credits dating back to 1987 on his imdb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1592202/

Was featured in ArtSlant Magazine http://www.artslant.com/global/artists/show/110855-johnny-terris Preference Magazine http://postimg.org/image/ymxq3di39/ http://postimg.org/image/pa9ykn4wj/ Was featured in The Fascinating, Famous, Unusual & Unforgettable Magazine http://postimg.org/image/it72vr89f/

Was part of and featured in The Thin Veil Art Gallery in Los Angeles http://www.artslant.com/la/events/show/74317-the-thin-veil

Was featured in multiple time and drawings of him are a permanent collection in the renowned Leslie-Lohman Gallery in NYC https://www.facebook.com/LeslieLohmanMuseum/photos/gm.1413420608965869/887830407978216/

Is an author: http://www.amazon.com/Sinister-Splendor-And-Broken-Glass/dp/1320812155

Was a well known male model: http://www.booksamillion.com/p/Articles-Canadian-Male-Models-Including/Hephaestus-Books/9781242617119

There are others... the point here is that the article was deleted due to bullying and they admitted to screwing with his wikipedia and laughed about it on tumblr, including saying that they were going to have him deleted. He is currently a lead in a television series with an Oscar winning actress (and there will be many more notable links once the show comes out next month). I think if people like Chris Crocker and youtube 'stars' can be on Wikipedia, I don't see why an actual artist with over 25 years of experience can't be?? The reason why not much is on the net about him is because his work until recently was underground film stuff and that's not popular though is VERY influential, as the links above can plainly see. Just because certain people here haven't heard of him doesn't mean he isn't notable or credible enough to be here. He was here for over a decade with zero problems. His page here on wikipedia was fine until these kids started attacking it. And then it was deleted without any checking as to see if the stuff that was said was even legitimate or not. They just took these kids words over any other explanation. It was vandalism, pure and simple and should be re-instated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.156.228.106 (talk) 20:28, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

IP, it is simply not true that the article "was deleted without any checking as to see if the stuff that was said was even legitimate or not". The whole history of a Wikipedia article is visible, and it is clear from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Terris that those who contributed looked at the history as well as the current version, and also looked outside for references. Yes, there was silly vandalism on the page, but it was reverted; also a longer version was cut back with edit summary "removed pointless references" but the material removed was just a list of activities, none of which suggested notability, and the longer version was visible in the history.
IMDb is not considered a reliable source here because people can and do edit their own entries; the Male Models book is simply reprints of Wikipedia articles; some of the other references only mention his name. The ArtSlant one is more substantial, but is much the same as material which was added to the article with edit summary "more info from bio from official website", suggesting that it was a press release.
Altogether, I am not convinced he is notable, but maybe we should let you have a go at showing that he is. If Stifle does not object, I will restore the article into a draft. That will not be till Sunday, as I am out all day tomorrow. If you are going to work on this, I suggest you register an account, which is easy and free. JohnCD (talk) 22:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

For the record, this is kind of hilarious. For one I can assure you that he did not post his own wiki. Johnny Terris really wouldn't care if he was so called notable or even if he was on this website at all. His entire work and career went against stuff like wikipedia and fame and notoriety. He would totally snub his nose at this crap and laugh his butt off that people are even arguing about his 'notability'. The man is an transgressive punk artist. He really wouldn't care about any of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.218.68.240 (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

  • I have no objection. (I switched off the ping system because it was annoying.) Stifle (talk) 09:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
  •   Done. IP user, I have restored to Draft:Johnny Terris the version which was the subject of the deletion debate. Clicking on "View history" will show the whole history of the article: you can see each previous version by clicking on the time/date link towards the left of the line. This version (from 05:02, 4 November 2013) is the fuller one I mentioned, but the additional material (a) does not seem to me to show notability, and (b) is completely unsourced. You should read the important policy WP:Verifiability, summarised as "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source". A published source is required so that, in principle, a reader can check where Wikipedia's facts come from.
If you want to improve this article, I strongly suggest registering an account, which will make communication much easier. Read WP:Your first article for advice, and WP:Notability (people) and WP:Notability (summary) to understand what is needed.
When it is ready, copying {{subst:submit}} to the top will send it for review. As it has been deleted before, it may be necessary to send a new draft to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 21:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_195&oldid=1138663962"