Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 309

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Archive 305 ← Archive 307 Archive 308 Archive 309 Archive 310 Archive 311 → Archive 315

Draft:FreeCEN

I, DenCol, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. DenCol (talk) 08:45, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I hadn't finished working on it, and didn't reralise it would be deleted after 6 months of not working on it. Sorry! —DenCol (talk) 08:47, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:51, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 3522

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun. It satisfies GNG with coverage in 67 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 09:14, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Now you can see it would have been less effort to rewrite the page than request its undeletion! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 3192

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 23 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 30 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 09:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Now you can see it would have been less effort to rewrite the page than request its undeletion! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Module:Cite DNV/sandbox

Work-in-progress module. If this is the module I'm thinking of, work had started in the sandbox but hadn't yet created the main template. —Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 05:11, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Kilo G

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Codo2411 (talk) 00:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC) The previously deleted article contained copyrighted martial if restored any copyrighted content will be removed.

Admins will not restore copyright violations, end of story. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:24, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
  Not done. I have re-deleted it in accordance with WP:G4. Notwithstanding the copyvio, we won't restore articles that have been previously deleted on the basis of a deletion discussion. You have to talk to the deleting admin about that, not request restoration here. And due to repeated disruptive recreations, the article is now protected from recreation except by extended-confirmed editors. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

An Yuexi and others

I'm a new page patroller and remember patrolling a number of articles created by Loveo2ofan. It turns out the editor is a sockpuppet of the blocked User:Boyhoodjams and all their articles have now been deleted per G5. IIRC, virtually all articles created by the user are about notable Chinese actors and decently referenced, and I feel it's a loss to Wikipedia to delete them indiscriminately. Please restore them or at least move them to draft space so they can be vetted again. The list of deleted articles is at [1]. —Zanhe (talk) 18:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

You need to talk to the deleting admin(s) about those rather than request restoration here. I must say, restoring them simply by request sort of defeats the purpose of G5. For good material to be kept, it must be created by editors who aren't socks. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:38, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
@Anachronist: Thanks. This is the first time I've encountered a situation like this and wasn't sure how to handle it. Will talk to the deleting admin. -Zanhe (talk) 18:43, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

LP 658-2

Also known as Gliese 223.2, it's starting to seem a bit repetitive to undo the militant nearby-star deleting. Just see Gliese 3991's request. —exoplanetaryscience (talk) 19:47, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_An

Performer Page. Had no notifications for why it was deleted —Hdigg (talk) 10:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Graeme Bartlett, before you blame me here, note that I notified the page's creator which is what I'm supposed to do. Obviously I can't access the article's history but I don't know what Hdigg's involvment with the page is. Pichpich (talk) 16:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
All Hdigg did was add, then remove, an image from the article, with a net effect of zero. I wouldn't have seen the need to notify that user either. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
So there's no reason for Hdigg to be notified. Pichpich is right, there is no obligation to inform Hdigg. I should not have implied that notification was required for the requester here) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:30, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Chris Dorsey

I, Iha777, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Iha777 (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

  Already done by RHaworth. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Celeris

Please restore Celeris (presently a redirect to one of the company's notable products) as it existed at the close of the AfD, to User:SMcCandlish/Incubator/Celeris. The only reason it was AfDed (barely) is because of lack of paper sourcing; the vast majority of material on old videogame companies is offline, in hardcopy gaming-related magazines of the era. It definitely does have possibilities. If probably 1–2 more sources had been present and had not been entirely Virtual Pool-specific, the article would have been kept. I asked the deleting admin to restore it, and the response (which may have something to do with a long series of unpleasant encounters between myself and that editor) was just "Sorry, I'm not interested unless you can provide sources indicating it has at least a chance of being kept if restored.", which utterly misses the point. If I already had them, I could simply re-create the article without bothering to ask, since it would already be substantially improved and would survive AfD. If I keep this in my userspace, for the time being, it'll periodically jog my memory to go digging again. I have no connection to the company or its products (other than I've used one of briefly). William A. Spinks (almost entirely my work) is a GA now, after a long period of development – including stalled development – that required off-line work to do, like contacting the local history desk at the public library in late-life home area for leads on whether he was the same William A. Spinks who was involved in the early oil industry in California (he was, and I sourced it). I know what I'm doing. — — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:51, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

  • @SMcCandlish: at the time of deletion the article was two sentences long, and only said that they were known for making the Virtual Pool series and that they'd developed a version of it for tablets/smartphones as well. The only source cited was the company's website. I don't think it's going to be of any use in a rewrite whatsoever. Hut 8.5 22:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
    Hmm. Was there a larger version? Maybe all the sources were coughed up in the AfD itself, along with the other notable game they developed (we have an article on it), etc.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:44, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
    Not really. It did once have a couple of sentences quoting a developer about why there hadn't been much progress on Virtual Pool 3 Gold, but that was removed in 2015 as outdated and it didn't cite any independent sources. It was never significantly larger than it was when it was deleted. Hut 8.5 22:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

John Humphrey (drummer)

@Explicit:, this was an expired PROD. Please userfy, as he is a member of at least two notable bands, and his name should at least be redirected to one of them. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:37, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Helena Basilova

I, 81.64.166.127, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 81.64.166.127 (talk) 23:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

LP 993-115

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 23 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 14 sources in the SIMBAD database which I looked at yesterday. The fact the proposer was unaware of all but one Xarchiv source is cause for concern. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed the nearest stars as they likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 04:45, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:30, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 3378

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 25 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 51 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 05:26, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

@James500: Because it has a lot of malformed tags, I restored it to Draft:GJ 3378. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:34, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 1151

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 25 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 49 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 05:43, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

@James500: same as above. Please clean up the error messages that appear. Restored to Draft:GJ 1151. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:35, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 514

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 25 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 170 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I suggest you expand the article a little though - in its current state it might be better as a redirect. Hut 8.5 16:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 4274

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 24 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 59 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 13:53, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I suggest you expand the article a little though - in its current state it might be better as a redirect. Hut 8.5 16:11, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 4053

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 24 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 57 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 14:12, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. @James500: can you fix the obsolete templates used by the restored version. Hut 8.5 16:13, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 1286

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 24 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 53 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 14:26, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 4063

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 24 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 40 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 15:51, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

GJ 4248

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 25 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 37 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. The Gliese catalogue is a catalogue of note. —James500 (talk) 16:07, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Game Of Quatrainment

I, Prakhar19, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Prakhar19 (talk) 09:43, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 16:21, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

George Linder

State office holder —FloridaArmy (talk) 15:33, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  • @FloridaArmy: the deleted article was about the producer of The Running Man (1987 film) so I assume you're thinking of someone else. It said nothing about him other than that he's produced that film and cited no sources other than IMDB. Hut 8.5 16:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
    • The George Linder who produced that film does have some coverage in GBooks: [2] [3], including a biography in a book published by Verlag Filmarchiv Austria. James500 (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2018 (UTC) I should point out the PROD rationale was plainly invalid and discloses a total failure to look for sources. James500 (talk) 17:52, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
      • Honestly the one sentence sub-stub in the deleted version isn't going to be much help to you if you want to write an article about the guy. Hut 8.5 18:37, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Okay. That's good enough for me. I couldn't see what was there. Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 19:04, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Huang Quan (painter)

Definitely a notable painter and I have references for an article, I just want to know what was already written about him. —Timmyshin (talk) 06:03, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

@Timmyshin: I think you are better off just creating a new page, as the deleted version consisted of one short sentence only (a painter from the Five Dynasties). Alex Shih (talk) 06:41, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

LSPM J2146+3813

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 22 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 13 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed the nearest stars as they likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 07:00, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

SCR J0740−4257

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 24 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 13 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed the nearest stars as they likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 07:23, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 701

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 26 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 165 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. This one is also included in the Henry Draper catalogue, which means it is amongst the earliest discovered. —James500 (talk) 09:53, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Untitled Loki novel

I, PanagiotisZois, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 10:08, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I, Abyssal, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Abyssal (talk) 01:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 10:10, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:William J. Morris

I, Abyssal, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Abyssal (talk) 01:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 10:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I, Abyssal, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Abyssal (talk) 01:23, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 10:13, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

G 141-36

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 24 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 17 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed the nearest stars as they likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 05:15, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 382

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 26 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 166 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 10:06, 24 June 2018 (UTC)


Guardian Bikes

Please restore Guardian Bikes to Draft Space for improvement, discussion or conversion to redirect retaining attributions. See also User talk:Sandstein#Guardian Bikes. Confirm I am not trying to circumvent AfD in this. Thankyou —Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  • This page was very promotional and I'm not going to restore it for that reason, but I won't object if someone else wants to. Hut 8.5 10:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I respect your opinion however I am requesting restore to draft space. I would also point out the reviewer (albeit promotionally) at AfC regarded it as not promotional and there are alternative ways of developing content. I am hoping someone else will take this up. We are talking draft space remember. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • You have got a bit more leeway in draft space but promotional pages in draft space can still be deleted under WP:CSD#G11. I think this article was certainly heading that way. Hut 8.5 17:00, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the heads up. And no amount of editing can change the notability. I'll take a different approach to try to dumb down the possibly by a good faith attempt to 1:1 rework against another article I have in mind .... though we are currently missing a quality reference to do that. In the meanwhile I have one or two articles in draft I might develop and might tun out to be a suitable redirect target. Will appreciate the restore. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk)

Draft:Supergirl (season 1)

I, Brojam, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Brojam (talk) 18:17, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 18:29, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emercoin

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —194.12.97.17 (talk) 18:30, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Not done see the duplicate request above. Hut 8.5 18:33, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

File:AvengersInfinityWar logo.jpg

File is ready to be used at List of box office records set by Avengers: Infinity War —Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

If someone could undo this edit when the file is restored that would be appreciated. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 48

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 27 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 106 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 07:45, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 686

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 27 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 127 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 07:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:50, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 831

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 26 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 132 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 07:05, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 793

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 27 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 103 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 07:17, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Gliese 450

This article was deleted as an expired PROD. As such it must be restored on request. This is one of the nearest stars to the sun, being less than 29 light years away. It satisfies GNG with significant coverage in 124 sources in the SIMBAD database. As a general rule, PRODs should not be placed on stars in the Gliese catalogue, because these are the nearest and therefore likely to be notable. —James500 (talk) 08:25, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@James500:-Stop carving out new threads for every deleted article and ask for a batch-restore. ∯WBGconverse 08:34, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I didn't realise that was possible. Okay, in that case, I would like the following stars restored, all of which are less than 30 light years away, to be restored: Gliese 424 (144 sources in SIMBAD), Gliese 480.1 (39 sources), Gliese 300 (63 sources), Gliese 257 (56 sources), Gliese 493.1 (93 sources), Gliese 618 (system with two objects; one of them has 48 sources, the other has 22 sources), Gliese 486 (83 sources), Gliese 232 (61 sources), Gliese 867 (two objects: one has 236 sources, the other has 125), and L 745-46 plus the redirect at Gliese 283 (173 sources). They seem to have generally been the victims of a deletion spree in March 2015. I haven't examined the rest of the victims yet. James500 (talk) 09:34, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:48, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Rest   Done too. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Samesi Market

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Kunal Maurya 10:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Not done, no article found at Samesi Market. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

To make necessary corrections —TheRains94 (talk) 16:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Not done for a number of reasons:
  • There is no article by that name. You probably mean Tunde & Adisa Legal Practitioners.
  • The article Tunde & Adisa Legal Practitioners has been deleted in accordance with WP:G11, recreated by you, and then deleted again. You should create articles in draft space, especially when you have a conflict of interest.
  • You have not complied with mandatory paid editing disclosure. See WP:PAID for more details.
If you comply with that last point I would be willing to restore the article to draft space for you to submit for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Fizztvlogo.jpg

File was deleted under "F7: Violates non-free use policy" however the logo has remained in the article for a good 8-10 years without any problem so IMHO the file should've been taken to FFD, Thanks, —–Davey2010Talk 17:30, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Forgot to add but JJMC89 removed the logo "because a template was missing" and then proceeded to tag it for deletion - If undeleted I'd be more than happy to add this template, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:33, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
I think you'll have to take this to the deleting admin's talk page or WP:DRV, this page is only for uncontroversial restoration requests and I don't think this one qualifies. Hut 8.5 17:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Okie dokie thanks Hut 8.5 I'll ask the admin, Many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Module talk:Flaglist/size

This module talk page seems to have been accidentally deleted as WP:G8 during cleanup from a module move I made. It should be restored and moved to Module talk:Flaglist (the new module name) — {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 11:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@Pppery:   Done. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Khris249

Hello. this is Khris249. Can I cancel the delete on the User: Khris249 page ?. Because I want to create my page on [id.wikipedia.org idwiki] [en.wikipedia.org enwiki] [simple.wikipedia.org simplewiki] [ms.wikipedia.org mswiki] [su.wikipedia.org] [jv.wikipedia .org]. —Khris249talk 06:24, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Pals for Life

There was previously a non-redirect talk page at this title that was mistakenly deleted. —GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:20, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

WİKİPEDİA

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_September_20#WİKİPEDİA —51.253.114.30 (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

This says no. The redirect was deleted after a later debate. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 10:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
  Not done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:42, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Syed Safdar Bukhari

I, Bilalsarfrazaca, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Bilalsarfrazaca (talk) 13:36, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Have restored User:Bilalsarfrazaca/sandbox which I believe is what the above was getting at. Hut 8.5 20:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:The BOMA Project

The draft was deleted because it was abandoned by someone and I would like to have it undeleted because I want to upload my own entry for this page. —Icealpaca (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 20:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Christian James Hand

I, Cinemasianx, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Cinemasianx (talk) 17:29, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hut 8.5 20:37, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Jordan Yale Levine

I, KevinBahr8, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. KevinBahr8 (talk) 17:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Thomas Harte (Irish Republican)

(This user used the preload form for G13 undeletion, but did not specify the name of the Draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Palisades1 18:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Thomas Harte (Irish Republican)

  • @Palisades1: can you provide some details of changes you want to make to the draft, sources you want to add, etc? Last time restoration of this draft was requested here nothing happened after it was restored. Hut 8.5 20:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Emile Laloge

Recipient of Distinguished Conduct Medal (DCO) at the Battle of Walcheren Causeway and Military Medal (MM) —184.71.101.50 (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Not done please specify the correct title you want restored. That page has never existed and searches for "Emile" and "Laloge" in deleted page titles don't find anything. Hut 8.5 20:42, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
    Likewise, a Google search for "Emile Laloge Wikipedia" turns up nothing from any sister project. This could be a new user who can't create a new article and thus is mistaking this page for WP:Requested pages. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:59, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Comparison of web browser engines (typography support)

The deletion log refers to two people's assertions which are inaccurate:

"…half of the info already covered in the large CSS comparison article…"

How about the other half? The information I have referred to this page for across many years certainly is not present in another article. I looked.

"…haven't had a meaningful update in over 7 years."

Web typography has not changed significantly in many years, so why would information referring to it need to.

"…this one is also redundant…"

Again, the information in the article is not present in any other, and is therefore not redundant.

  —Excelsiorsbanjo (talk) 16:08, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree that neither is a valid delete reason, but the real reason this was deleted was WP:NOTDIR ("non-encyclopedic articles about technical details") and that stands. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:16, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Not that it matters, I guess, per Hut 8.5, but the information was not a directory, and even if it was we have myriad such comparison pages, including the one the people who considered this page redundant to but nevertheless did not seek the deletion of. Excelsiorsbanjo (talk) 23:18, 26 June 2018 (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/Comparison of web browser engines (typography support), 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 Sandstein (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. Hut 8.5 20:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, will do. (& apologies, this process is hard to follow [for example: I don't see two people saying something is redundant to be controversial, I don't see what they did as much of a discussion, I don't really care about a consensus between two people when probably hundreds edited the article in question, etc.]) Excelsiorsbanjo (talk) 23:14, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Induction-induction

completely rewritten text , move the new page 

 Draft:Induction-induction   to the old page   Induction-induction —Mozert1 (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
    • This page is. NOt deleted or proposed for deletion. Just wait for a review. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Mark Mizruchi

I, 202.34.12.6, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 202.34.12.6 (talk) 02:23, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:39, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Example

(This user used the preload form for G13 undeletion, but did not specify the name of the Draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Emeraldfrogs (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:22, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

cleartax

Fintech company based out of Bangalore with 400+ employees. Page deleted by mistake —182.74.149.54 (talk) 10:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)


Page deleted by mistake —182.74.149.54 (talk) 10:37, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Josefinas

I, MaryfefiJosies, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. MaryfefiJosies (talk) 11:03, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

it's a shoe brand that shold have not been deleted "Publish changes" button below —MaryfefiJosies (talk) 11:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Emercoin

True information about the existing project —Lariden (talk) 18:00, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Please restore Emercoin page. It's real project. It was created about 5 years ago. And it exists now. Moreover it's growing. So no manipulation. People need trusted info. And wiki is one of the way how to get trusted info. —89.103.97.94 (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —46.211.127.137 (talk) 18:14, 24 June 2018 (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/Emercoin, 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 Enigmaman (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. Hut 8.5 18:23, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Note as three people made the same request within a short time frame (plus another one on the deleting admin's talk page) I suspect this is external canvassing. Hut 8.5 18:30, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Bear in mind that cryptocurrency- and blockchain-related pages are under sanctions. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Karmina Silec

I, Kebataola, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Kebataola (talk) 17:52, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:29, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Foodora-logo-pink2.jpg

{{Deleted on Commons}} —(t) Josve05a (c) 01:45, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

@Josve05a: How would this be used? The version on Wikipedia is a logo (white on a mauve background) similar to the logo that's already in the Foodora article. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I believed that the file on Commons was used on enwp, when it seems to have not been. Please disregard. (t) Josve05a (c) 08:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Paul Pluta

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —2001:8003:75B2:FB00:28C0:3EF:E9F0:1372 (talk) 06:46, 29 June 2018 (UTC) This page is very newsworthy. This page is about a person who was charged by the CCC. Civil libertarians have spoken at lengths about this case. This case was featured on ABC news and ABC radio.

  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/Paul Pluta, 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 Spartaz (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Semisimple representation

G13 (related to semisimple module but the topic is important enough for a standalone-article treatment) —- Taku (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:14, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Dmitry Yu. Bardin

I, No mosquitos, request the undeletion of this draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. No mosquitos (talk) 07:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:17, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Journal of Combinatorial Algebra

G13 —Taku (talk) 18:21, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:18, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Gradient controller

G13 —Taku (talk) 18:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:26, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:State transition algorithm

G13 —Taku (talk) 18:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:56, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:PR1ME Mathematics Teaching Programme

G13 (seems like a real stuff; no apparent need for deletion) —Taku (talk) 18:25, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:58, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Temporary undeletion

Could you restore Draft:Sri Ram Sinha as well as Draft:Jeffrey H. Lynford, momentarily? Because I cannot see the deleted contents, I cannot tell whether they are worth preserved. —- Taku (talk) 18:32, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:02, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_309&oldid=849315086"