Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 296

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Archive 290 ← Archive 294 Archive 295 Archive 296 Archive 297 Archive 298 → Archive 300

File:Kashinath-img.jpg

This image was deleted as copyvio, but I don't know what legitimate reason is to delete the image other than being a screenshot. Is it from a news source or where else? If undeleted, this should be taken to FFD. Also, it should be reinserted to Kashinath (actor). —George Ho (talk) 06:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

see Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 January 18#File:Kashinath-img.jpg. It was uploaded by User:Ganeshprasadkp. claimed to be a screen capture. The quality is low, and it is clear it is not a photograph from the uploader. If you can see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/upload/Ganeshprasadkp every upload from this person is a copyright infringement. Unless it is a screen capture from the uploader's own photo you can expect it to be an infringement of the original pic. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

@George Ho: I'm not sure what to make of this. I observe that Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 January 18#File:Kashinath-img.jpg deleted the file as a copyright violation. The deleted image itself looks like a low-resolution screen-capture of a frame from one of the actor's films. Because it is low-res, could a fair-use argument be made for restoring it, similar to a low-res image of an album cover? ~Anachronist (talk) 06:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Oh... I didn't see the FFD. I don't know whether I want to contact that admin who has been removing or deleting images of recently deceased persons. I've contacted him before, and sometimes it wasn't pleasing. Can either of you contact that admin please? Thanks. George Ho (talk) 07:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@George Ho: What would you want to say? In this case, the uploader (currently blocked for massive copyright violations) uploaded a screencap from a video. This was a slam-dunk non-controversial speedy delete. I would have probably done the same. I don't know how contacting the deleting admin would accomplish anything here, unless you can offer an legitimate argument for restoring the image. I have no idea about the fair-use angle I suggested above. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
All right then... I'll continue my journey then to obtain free-use image until I run out. George Ho (talk) 07:28, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Ace Troubleshooter

With two albums to the band's credit, they meet notability guidelines. This was an A7 requested by an editor who has been blocked for their drive-by deletion requests. —Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
I have also restored all other pages nominated for deletion in bad faith by this user. Moral Constitution and Ace Troubleshooter (album) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

St Cuthberts Mill

(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.) Klintern (talk) 11:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

WIN-911_Software

Proposing request of the restoration of the deleted page to an improved version. The improved version at User:Techzette/WIN-911_Software has been updated with additional sources and content so that it satisfies WP:N and WP:RS. —Techzette (talk) 18:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  Note: This page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G4, which means the page is a near-carbon-copy of a page previously deleted via deletion debate. Pages deleted via deletion debate will not be restored here; go to WP:Deletion review or contact the administrator who closed the deletion debate instead. You might want to instead contact an administrator, ideally either The Bushranger (talk · contribs) or DGG (talk · contribs), about moving the draft. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:28, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Techzette, it remains a promotional article sourced entirely to press releases, the company's own sources, and a market research firm. None of these are acceptable to show the necessary references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, necessary for showing notability. (The USA today source is actually a short mention in a general article about international trade). The promotional nature is indicated by the emphasis of lists of companies using the product. There is very little chance the article would possible survive an AFD if it were moved to mainspace, and if these are the best sources available, I do not see how it would presently be possible to write an article on the company that would be acceptable. I am rather surprised that after doing good work with articles on unquestionably notable firms,you should try to write an article on this re;atoively minor company. DGG ( talk ) 20:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • DGG Understood. Let me see if I can't dig up print material quality print source material and reboot the article in my namespace. Though the company appears relatively minor, it is notable in its revenues, history, and subsequent influence on the Austin Texas tech community. Techzette (talk)

Draft:Your Weekend with Jim Brickman

WP:REFUND/G13 —Prisencolin (talk) 18:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

comment--it's already mentioned in the article of the individual. I don't think it wouldsurvive as a separate article, so it might be beter to make a redirect. DGG ( talk ) 20:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Shankar Singh

I, Somewhat Astonished, 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. Somewhat Astonished (talk) 12:39, 16 February 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) 21:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Roy Clinton (“Bud”) Johns, Jr.

(no text provided) Assistant75 (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) See also Draft:Bud Johns. --Finngall talk 16:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request.
@Reddogsix: Because you prodded this, you may want to consider AFD. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Indonesia Women Seven Summits Expedition

I, Gsarwa, 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. Gsarwa (talk) 16:05, 16 February 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) 21:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

User:ItsPugle

I wish to restore my user page, so that I may edit at will with comfort. —ItsPugle 01:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

TransitX

have recently become interested in a transportation proposal called TransitX. In December or January I came to the Wikipedia page with this title and noticed a proposed deletion notice mentioning lack of notability and commercial connection I think. I feel lack of notability is ridiculous: Google TransitX and you'll see dozens of articles in major newspapers like the Boston Globe, presentations at conferences and workshops, and minutes of government bodies etc. that indicate it is being taken seriously. IMHO it is an innovative proposal that addresses important social needs like commuting and reducing the huge waste of energy in transportation. I don't know any more about the deletion discussion since all traces of the page seem to be gone, but I would like it to be undeleted so more people can weigh in. Thanks for your consideration! Howie Goodell (talk) 06:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC) —Howie Goodell (talk) 06:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

  • You will be after Transit X · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]
  •   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/Transit X, 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. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. The deleted page is about a proposal, that is not yet realised. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:10, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Jerry Lembcke

{{subst:refund|1= Jerry Lembcke |2= I never saw the editing queries and would like to have a chance to respond to them. Jerry Lembcke is an important public intellectual because of his work exposing the myth of the spat-upon Vietnam War veteran. There should be a page for him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C2:1A00:534:6815:4306:AB8F:EDDB (talk) 00:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Gilbert Castellanos

I, Feppytoos, 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. Feppytoos (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

User:SteveStrummer/Sandbox9

Userpage previously deleted by my own (author) request via G7); now seeking restoration for further use. —SteveStrummer (talk) 00:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Johnny Sins

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 14:07, 18 February 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/Johnny Sins, 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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (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 15:10, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

User:W.Waleczek/Wojciech Waleczek

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —W.Waleczek (talk) 12:27, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

KakaoMusic

There is now more information on KakaoMusic and the company Kakao than in 2015. It's an important aspect and business leg of Kakao so it doesn't make sense to have it deleted now. —AquilaXIII (talk) 21:38, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

  • There's nothing stopping you or anyone else from writing a new article about it. This one was extremely short and only said that it was a social music site. Hut 8.5 23:14, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Gisele Afeche

My page has been deleted for notability. Well, I know of other pages that people are not more notable than Gisele Afeche: A commander in Music in brazil, A voting member for the grammy awards, listed in all music, received the Paris Silver Medal from Jacques Chirac... Is the Brazilian representative of an international school, what more notability is required? —Gisele Afeche (talk) 23:26, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

The page is not deleted, it is here: Draft:Gisele Afeche. References are needed to advance this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:John Henry House

I, ChriCom, 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. ChriCom (talk) 01:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Hydroelectric cell

I, Ved varun, 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. ved (talk) 04:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:SocialBoost

(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.) 185.41.249.253 (talk) 09:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Experiment with Light

I, Susannah Tombs, 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. Susannah Tombs (talk) 12:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Chintan Thacker

further editing and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Kwesedealer (talk) 12:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Western values

I have been advised by an editor that the decision was hasty and to ask for an editorial review via wp:undelete. I have also been advised to shorten and to reformat the article. I have done this and placed the revised article in Drafts:Western values. I have also opened a Talk page on that site. I should like to see the page undeleted. Thank you. —Patnovak (talk) 17:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Patnovak: This is not the place to ask for editorial review. There is also nothing to undelete; all the contribution history for Western values redirect is still available. Please go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and submit Draft:Western values for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Anachronist: The article cannot be restored because an admin (User:RHaworth) has protected that page. What we have here is in essence a silent delete: first User:Patnovak was reverted several times, then the article was protected in the redirect (i.e. effectively deleted) version, and now we are referring him to the Draft which is backlogged for several months, and where his article can be rejected upon the reviewrs' whim. I, for one, think his article belongs in the mainspace, and if someone does not like it, they should go to AfD. I'll ask RHaworth (or another admin here) to unprotect the article, restore the article version, and if you think it is problematic enough, please take it to AfD. The current silent delete and 'go to Draft' situation is unfair; that article has all the right to be in mainspace and to be subject to normal deletion procedure, one involving proper community decision. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
@Piotrus: The article looks like a term paper or perhaps a college thesis. I'm not arguing that the subject isn't worthy of an encyclopedia, but the draft as it stands needs some cleanup. I see a lot of WP:SYNTHESIS of sources in there. Being in draft space isn't the same as deleting it. So what if it's backlogged? Draft restorations are non-controversial, and all anyone needs to do is make a minor edit to reset the expiration clock. There are no deadlines on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I agree: the article is one solid slab of original research. You are just going to have to put up with the draftspace backlog and reviewers' whims. In the unlikely event of the draft being accepted, unprotection of the mainspace title will be uncontroversial. But note that nothing will happen to the article until you slap {{subst:submit}} on the top of it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I slapped an {{AFC draft}} template on it. That at least gives the author a button to submit it after cleaning it up. Also @Patnovak: and @Piotrus: See the detailed analysis that Staszek Lem (talk · contribs) added to the top of Draft:Western values explaining why the article cannot be accepted into main article space at this time. It needs a massive rewrite. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Mary Norwak

(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.) Suntzusuntzu (talk) 22:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Mardigrasind.png

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Algchris (talk) 22:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC) this image should not be deleted as therefor its not even copyrighted.

  Not done You are going to have to give much more proof that the original painting you took the photo from, is not copyrighted. By default, everything painted in the US is copyrighted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
@Algchris: You might want to read Commons:Freedom of panorama to get a better understanding of why we can't restore it. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Residual SvG articles

User:JzG has been resistive of restoring these articles because they were initiated by User:Sander.v.Ginkel. See User talk:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/Guidelines as well. These are legitimate articles. Because of the misdirection in these secret deletions under G5, I really don't know how many other articles with the matching situation (meaning creation by SvG) have actually been deleted. We went through a checking process a year ago, I was part of that process, though apparently some of the people performing the checks were socks. Those socks deceived us all, but in this effort to go back to punish SvG, legitimate content has been deleted. I am requesting ALL previously checked articles that have subsequently been deleted be userfied so they can be rechecked and the legitimate content restored. Trackinfo (talk) 18:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Trackinfo This is correct: it's long-term abuse and sockpuppetry. However, I (and others) are happy to provide the content if you want to use it to clean-start the articles. Do you understand the difference between the two, please? I do wonder if this is the root of a mutual misunderstanding. Guy (Help!) 19:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Userfy the content, I will repost it stripping SvGs creation and other editors history. Trackinfo (talk) 19:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Would somebody please step in and fix this situation. This Guy continues to edit elsewhere but does not address the situation he caused by his zeal to punish SvG. He has dragged this out for days. Trackinfo (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
I think it would be better to retain the earlier edits and attribution,. I do that when I take responsibility for an article that would otherwise be subject to G5. I see no policy that requires us to remove this--rather,as I understand it, policy permits us to delete it if no established user is willing to adopt it. DGG ( talk ) 16:49, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
The only reason I would have cause to remove SvG's attribution for the edits is because his signature causes this irrational approach to content he was once involved with. SvG is gone. If he tries to come back as a sock, shut him off if you feel that is justified. I have not seen anything he has done to cause such aggression towards him, others believe they have. If he were the only editor on the content, you might have some justification for CHECKING the content. Once legitimate editors like myself have signed off on the content, then SvG is just a historical milepost now long past. We DID check his content. In many cases it was my signature that moved things from draft to mainspace, with improvements to the article. If some of the other editors moving that content to mainspace were socks, they did not have the right to do so. Revert their edit and take it back to draft. Don't do it in secrecy. We checked off that list at 100% done a year ago, so if you don't post a note that something has changed, we probably won't notice. Other than that, walk away. Go away. We will take care of keeping legitimate content. Nowhere is delete a rational solution. Trackinfo (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Nemra ( band)

I have edited the article as Nemra yesterday attempted to represent Armenia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2018 , competing in Depi Evratesil 2018 with the song "I'm a liar" succeeding to qualify to the final, please review and help me to improve —Dreamer14513181 (talk) 10:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

  Not done. Draft:Nemra (band) is not deleted, and it still has the same problems as before you began move-warring it. I suggest you drastically reduce the reliance on primary sources while you're waiting for the article to be reviewed. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:17, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Entel UK

please undelete expired draft article for editing many thanks —Angelageary (talk) 08:21, 20 February 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) 21:19, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Code Aster

I, Kalnox, 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. Kalnox (talk) 09:43, 20 February 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) 21:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Jorge Klor de Alva

I, 2600:1700:4940:66B0:B8EB:D71E:EE32:62D9, 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. 2600:1700:4940:66B0:B8EB:D71E:EE32:62D9 (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Tony D Triggs

(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.) 231Pacific (talk) 11:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Balba Camino

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —H2dani (talk) 11:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

The_Founder_(newspaper)

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Adecastick (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

The Founder has been a longstanding part of the student community at Royal Holloway, University of London since 2006. The article for this student newspaper may have been previously deleted or removed for an apparent lack of notability, although it had links to organisation pages which recognised the student paper with numerous awards,[1][2] has an active website[3], has a page on the university's website[4] and is referenced elsewhere on the site[5], an issuu page demonstrating its print activity,[6] has notable social media presence in the local community.[7][8][9] The Founder has also reported original breaking news stories relevant to students at Royal Holloway university and the local community.[10][11][12][13]

  1. ^ ""#SPANC16 Award Winners Announced"". Student Publication Association. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  2. ^ Mickel, Andrew. "The winners Journalism with a passion". The Guardian. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  3. ^ "The Founder". The Founder. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  4. ^ "The Founder". Royal Holloway. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  5. ^ "Getting to know our student media stars". Royal Holloway. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  6. ^ "The Founder". Issuu. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  7. ^ "The Founder Newspaper". Facebook. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  8. ^ "The Founder". Twitter. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  9. ^ "The Founder newspaper". LinkedIn. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  10. ^ Keeble, Helena. "Alumni break world rowing record". The Founder. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  11. ^ Hoekstra, Kyle. "RHUL students march in solidarity with ISIS victims". The Founder. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  12. ^ Hoekstra, Kyle. "RHUL makes profit on Avengers: Age of Ultron". The Founder. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
  13. ^ Hoekstra, Kyle. "Royal Holloway lags behind in University Carbon Progress Report". The Founder. Retrieved 20 February 2018.

Draft:Ingrid_Dahle

More additional information and verfication of notable comedian Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —IconicPR (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you get your username changed pronto, as we don't allow names that imply promotional or shared use. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:02, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

David kausiwa

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —David kausiwa (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Nothing to restore; I've checked with a lowercase k in the last name also. —C.Fred (talk) 22:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
You haven't contributed to any deleted pages. I don't know if you're just looking for Draft:David Kausiwa, User:David kausiwa/sandbox/Draft:David Kausiwa/david kausiwa or User:David kausiwa/sandbox. Hut 8.5 22:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Lina Morgana

The Lina Morgana article page that was deleted on 10 September 2010 by NawlinWiki I feel should be restored because she was a part of history and many people want the page restored and feel that it was wrong to delete the article. It was deleted because of (A.3: Article that has to meaningful, substantive content: A.7: article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject) Ms. Elina Koroglueva (Lina Morgana) importance was that she was a singer and has many songs, and her significance is her fans that are alive and need her Wikipedia page back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GhostFoxxGoddess (talk • contribs) 04:02, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

  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 NawlinWiki (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. —C.Fred (talk) 04:06, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Programming Research Limited

The reason for deletion was lack of notability. Programming Research Limited (trading as "PRQA") is a notable organisation that has provided software quality assurance tools for over 30 years. Its QAC product is the de-facto standard for code analysis in safety critical embedded systems. It contributes to the MISRA coding standard and is the creator of the High Integrity C++ standard. —Richard Bellairs (talk) 09:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Fractal rainbow

(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.) Dapifo (talk) 10:25, 22 February 2018 (UTC)


Jatra: Hyalagaad Re Tyalagaad

It was a soft delete, please restore to mainspace —Atlantic306 (talk) 10:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Artery of Qureshi (Figure 2).jpg

It got deleted accidently. Kindly please dont delete it. Thanks —Ahmerasif (talk) 01:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

That was on commons. Are you actually wanting File:Artery of Qureshi.jpg? You will have to ask User:Túrelio about the deletion or undeletion, as it was not on Wikipedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Unijobs Bangladesh

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Tuhinidealist (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Emtec

I, Devers9, 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. Devers9 (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

V.V.R. Raj Satyen

File:Deck Roof Hi-V No 3655.jpg

Just to let you know, yes, I understand that there is a preserved example of this car in existence. However, I find this car very historically significant. And the other point is that I find it better to use a historical picture in place of a modern picture, because it shows a lot about the subway's history. Therefore, if it is possible, could you please undelete this file? I will eventually delete it again once someone agrees to upload a free version (I tried asking multiple users but they have all refuesd). —Davidng913 (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

  • I don't think you've got a valid fair use case here. Whether an image is replaceable by a free alternative is defined by whether it's possible for someone to take a free alternative, not by whether anyone can be bothered to do so. Can you point to a place where this image would be used to illustrate the history of the subway where a free picture wouldn't do the same thing? Hut 8.5 23:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
    • Then that I cannot do. So be it. I'll just have to find someone to take the picture and eventually send it to us (whether by here or by Commons). I was intending it to be used in the article Deck Roof Hi-V (New York City Subway car).

Draft:Cao Cuifen

I, Zanhe, 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. Zanhe (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Earthglide

(no text provided) Visualride2 (talk) 23:29, 22 February 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. I would recommend that you attempt an article draft, and not a template. more content and references are required. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Dooney Boys

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Algchris (talk) 02:46, 23 February 2018 (UTC) This page was deleted two years ago anonymously for no parent reason. The article its self was sourced and did not violate any terms of Wikipedia's policy.

You should be asking user talk:Ritchie333, as that was who deleted it. The reason for deletion was no claim of importance. You may be able to justify a claim. However blogs, and discussion forums do not make reliable sources. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

"Draft:Jatin Wahane"

I, Tatyana Malaysian, 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. Tatyana Malaysian 06:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Nadera Sweiss Sawaqed

Enter your reasoning here I want to continue working on the article and publish it soon and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Malkofahi (talk) 08:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Joburg Giants

(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.) Nic1211 (talk) 10:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

  Done Although I have restored Draft:Joburg Giants for you, the Jo'burg Giants article is far superior and you should consider improving that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Nancy Appleton

The Wikipedia contributor who deleted it Explicit stated that the article has “no notability or encyclopedia value” as the reason for deletion. I disagree with this Nancy Appleton is a distinguished researcher who is well respected in her field and has spent the last 20+ years investigating the dangers of sugar and the correlation between sugar consumption and chronic disease. She has lectured around the world, submitted peer-reviewed work and published books on the subject. It is because of this that she is not only of encyclopedia value but meets Wikipedia notability under the scope of living people and the scope of academics. Not to mention this article certainly adds to the diversity of Wikipedia.

Please note that the reason I am utilizing request for undeletion without discussing it with Explicit is that Explicit stated on stated on his talk that his he is busy and that requests for undeletion should be made here instead of discussing on his talk page. —Nottoohackneyed (talk) 05:22, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

You don't need to discuss with the deleting administrator for a PROD - you coming here is tantamount to contesting it after the fact. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 06:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Ricardo Álvarez Casanova

I, Struway2, 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. Struway2 (talk) 17:52, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Numbermaniac/talkcat

I only asked for the deletion of the page in the User space, not the one under the User talk space. Please restore the linked "User talk" page - thank you. —– numbermaniac 13:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Dik Buitelaar

I requested deletion for Draft:Dick Buitelaar and not Draft:Dik Buitelaar since the former has no content but there was a misunderstanding and the latter (with actual content) was deleted. Please restore Draft:Dik Buitelaar. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 17:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Sujit Nair

The page of Sujit Nair was deleted as he is a journalist and he did a report against an owner of news channel exposing his scams. Where in revenge he used bots to take down his presence from the internet. This was an act of revenge and not because the page had false information. —Vicky Daniel (talk) 07:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

  •   Done Though your suggestion that bots were used to delete this page appears to be unfounded. If you have any further information about bots being used negatively on Wikipedia, please supply it, and I will block them. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Sheeba Ameer

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Publish changes" button below —Maranchery (talk) 13:56, 25 February 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) 18:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FACEBOOK -STATUS

I, 223.229.180.135, 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. 223.229.180.135 (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

  Not done and will not be done This was a blatant advertisement. We don't restore those. There is no benefit to Wikipedia in doing so. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:RootsFinder.com

I, Erinweck, 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. Erinweck (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


We are working to have press releases published after a few new tools are released and after RootsTech 2018 to provide additional content to the page to make it approved. —Erinweck (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Erinweck: Who exactly is "we"?
Are you aware that press releases aren't valid sources for establishing notability? See Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what is expected.
And finally, most important: Please read and comply with WP:PAID before asking an administrator to do anything further. Thanks. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)'
@Anachronist: To answer your question "Who exactly is "we"?" is us at RootsFinder.com

From my first failure to publish this page from an admin to publish the page, I was informed that press releases were valid as published news content. Ok, I can work without a press release. I'd like to have this page undeleted so I can make edits and republish. I am in compliance with trying to create this page and trying really hard to get this page through. Compared to other genealogy wiki pages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FamilySearch), RootsFinder.com is no different and fits into a relationship with FamilySearch and I'm just trying to build the page with appropriate content.

Please make your WP:PAID decalaration on your user page: User:Erinweck. Sources can be sorted out at a later point in drafting. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: Hello @Graeme Bartlett, I have added the requested WP:PAID to my WordPress Userpage. I am employed by RootsFinder.com and authorized to create and make edits to the page in question. Thank you.
  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) 07:34, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Transition design

I, UnkleFester, 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. UnkleFester (talk) 04:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Request to restore Transition Design pages. I have been working on RL writing and have not had time to attend to this lately.

Draft talk:Transition design

I, UnkleFester, 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. UnkleFester (talk) 04:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Wood Lock

This page was deleted as "Unambiguously advertising". This does not seem to be the case at all (although I can only view the deleted content via Archive.org's Wayback Machine, due to a somewhat misguided Wikipedia policy). ——porges 02:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

It sounds like advertising to me, but not unambuuously so, so I think this should have gone through the AfD process rather than speedied. I'll contact the admin who speedied it, DGG. edited — Charles Stewart (talk) 09:28, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
@Porges:: I contacted DGG who was unwilling to restore the page because of how extremely promotional he found the article. If you want to pursue this, you should challenge DGG's speedy via deledtion review (WP:DRV). If you need help with that process, ask me on my talk page. — Charles Stewart (talk) 09:11, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Restoration en masse of G13-ed articles

Looking through my watchlist, I noticed these drafts were mostly deleted on G13. I request that they be restored for future improvement. Thanks, Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 22:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Mostly you tagged these for problems that meant they should be deleted, or moved them out of mainspace. So some are totally not worth having back. You are welcome to improve the restorals yourself. Don't expect the creators will be back to work on them. Restoring to prove a point or make a political statement is a waste of time.
  • You yourself tagged it with an advert tag. Puffery included: successfully, revolutionary, over 95%, detailed and comprehensive, state-of-the-art, a major step forward, powerful, considerably faster etc. So if you think this topic is important, start afresh. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:51, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Rodrigo Canosa

I, Struway2, 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. Struway2 (talk) 14:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Kavita A. Jindal

I, Ideal Vantage, 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. The original article was deleted because it did not contain the necessary multiple published, reliable and secondary references to prove that the subject Kavita A. Jindal is notable. I have now gathered the appropriate references and wish to update the article with these references. Ideal Vantage (talk) 15:07, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_296&oldid=1009138332"