Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 56

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Archive 50 ← Archive 54 Archive 55 Archive 56 Archive 57 Archive 58 → Archive 60

FreshMinds

Invalid PROD, as the article had been kept at AfD; admin responsible since desysopped for inactivity. -Skomorokh 14:53, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

  •   Not done Deleted via PROD more than 3 years ago. The article clearly did not meet the notability requirements for businesses under WP:CORP, nor did it even assert any form of notability. The current status of the deleting admin is irrelevant. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:38, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
1. Articles kept at AfD are ineligible for PROD; the deletion was an error, and the ex-admin's status is why I couldn't follow up with him personally.
2. It doesn't matter what you think of the merits, articles deleted via PROD are supposed to be restored following any good faith request. See the administrator instructions for REFUND.
I appreciate your response, but this is really admin 101 stuff. Skomorokh 16:51, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
  Done use an AFD not a prod or CSD on this one. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:28, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Ship foot

This is an actual term seen in several instances throughout the internet and is a well known phrase in England, for example check this page http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-ship-foot.htm -190.55.13.113 (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done but any one is still free to AFD, particularly if reliable sources are not added within the next 96 hours. Wisegeek is not a reliable source. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Daya Vaidya

Concerns at deletion debate have been met and a new article was created by updating a copy of the deleted article. Request restoration of the revisions deleted as a result of the delete decision in the deletion debate for the required attribution history. Also there may be useful deleted revisions in the article discussion page as well that should be restored. -Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:35, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done Minus an intial copyvio. The talk page only had the biography header now present as well. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:24, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

list of auteurs

a)It had references to many great film directors, b) Was a great source of knowledge. c) I took pains to add links to it d) I have donated to Wikipedia ;-) -NarasMG (talk) 07:01, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. It may still be brought to WP:AFD even if you make another donation. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:33, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Essentia

  • Essentia · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions] ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: Pure advertising with no evidence of notability).]Relevant company page. Essentia built its Wikipedia page following the other business pages such as Tempur-Pedic's Wikipedia page. Essentia has proprietary technology known as Natural Memory Foam. The only cite that can be added as evidence of notability regarding the foam is testing done with UCLA. All media references can be verified on said media's website for example: Dr.OZ, Planet Green, Rachael Ray and HGTV. }}

[Page deletion info: 23:50, 7 November 2011 Courcelles (talk -76.67.171.98 (talk) 22:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't blame you for not wanting to restore this but take a look at the article's history. It looked like this before 76.65.103.77 spammed it up. I would recommend restoring from that version on down and semi-protecting the article for a week or so. Is it notable, perhaps not but that's an issue for AFD. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
  Done as suggested by Ron Ritzman along with logo and talk page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:15, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Missouri State bear logo.svg

Replace File:Missouri State bear logo.jpg, which is just a rendering of it. -— Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 14:36, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

  • The jpg is different. The SVG version has now lower teeth, and a damaged upper tooth, as well as a TM added. Does this sound correct. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:19, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Friendsphoebe.jpg

Log tells me that this file is speedy-deleted per WP:CSD § F4. Well, if that is indeed the problem, I believe I can supply the source and licensing information. -Fleet Command (talk) 12:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

  • actually licensing information was OK, but no source was given. Do you have a source? It was supposed to be a television screenshot of a character. For use in Phoebe Buffay. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes, I have source. I know what picture it is. (It is Phoebe on the dark blue background). Saw it five days before deletion. Fleet Command (talk) 06:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

The Black Hole at The Center of The Universe

Page name:- The Black Hole at The Center of The Universe. I would like to re-write my article, in light of what I now Know. I realise there were errors before. I have learned much in the meantime. Thank you for your consideration, Peter Lamont (Author of The Black Hole at The Center of The Universe.) -Peter Lamont (talk) 17:40, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done What JohnCD in September said. Good that you learned more about the subject, but unless others discuss your theory elsewhere, it is not a topic for Wikipedia. Even then you'd still not be the right person to write neutrally about it. I'll post some links on your page. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

List of most expensive schools

Original reason for PROD: (Expired PROD, concern was: Selective list, seemingly restricted to Switzerland, of minimal use. What is the definition of an expensive school? Probably unverifiable. Unreferenced)

List states mainly swiss schools because that is the truth. 9 of the top 10 most expensive schools by yearly fee are in switzerland. this has been published by forbes in 2007 (not sure if a more recent study has been conducted). Thank you. -194.209.36.14 (talk) 22:53, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Nevertheless i share some of the concerns mentioned above, so I've redirected to List of boarding schools.--Tikiwont (talk) 17:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

homeless hub

I understand that the Homeless Hub as an article has been blacklisted. The Homeless Hub is a research related resource for those interested in homelessness. it is not for profit. It is one of the leading examples of knowledge mobilization in homelessness research, and has an established international reputation in the area of homelessness. It is well respected, it is not commercial or spam, and i am not sure why it has been blacklisted. For those interested in homelessness and homelessness research it is an important resource, and its absence from Wikipedia is a bit surprising.

So, my request is that the blacklisting be removed. For more information, feel free to contact me:

Stephen Gaetz Director, Canadian Homelessness Research Network Associate Professor, Faculty of Education York University 631 York Research Tower, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3 <redacted, there is the internal mail feature>-Stephen Gaetz (talk) 16:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

There two issues here. Whether to have a separate page on the site and whether to allow linking to it. The page on the hub has been deleted as not indicating sufficient importance or being overly promotional, but it's not being protected against creation or rather raising this issue with a good draft towards the deleting administrators or at Deletion review. Regarding the blacklist entry, see MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February_2010#homelesshub.ca for a previous discussion. That would also be the place where to rise it once more, preferably by interdependent editors for either point--Tikiwont (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The article The Homeless Hub has been deleted three times after three creations by User:HHub. It is not creation protected. Perhaps "the Homeless Hub as an article has been blacklisted" is a confusion with external links to homelesshub.ca which are blacklisted at MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/homelesshub.ca and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February 2010#homelesshub.ca. If it is the blacklisting of external links you want removed then the place for a request is MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed removals. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Maya Vik

'It was deleted because the source needed to be "a newspaper or magazine". That´s what they were, at least one newspaper. -Oyvindhb (talk) 22:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Eton International School

OTRS has been processed - details available on the talk page -Russavia Let's dialogue 03:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Range Resources

Current (drastically different) changes to content can now together make the article encyclopedic, would like merge previous content. The previous article was deleted for being a promotional press release; I wrote critical content sourced from the NYT and NPR which will balance it out. -elle vécut heureuse à jamais (be free) 06:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Honey Singh

i can add more information about the music director Honey Singh -Gurjinder.romana (talk) 09:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

  •   Not doneSince this has been deleted about 4 times before I would suggest that you make a new userspace draft and ask for a second or third opinion before moving to mainspace. Also it should not be a promotion and must have references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:06, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Fusion (student movement)

Independent sources exist e.g. [1] (1997) [2] (2003) and [3] (2008)in Evangelicals Now. Those articles indicate notability. Moreover, they are critical of the organisation; I did not see the original article but it could probably be made more balanced with these. Also mentioned by Ekklesia (think tank) in [4] (2006). – Fayenatic (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Venurao Dindi

pls check your facts before deletion -Maahole (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Akhtaboot

I believe the article is noncommercial, it contains useful information for the public as Akhtaboot is a known recruitment website in the Middle East (www.akhtaboot.com). I, the creator of the article, abided to all of the rules of Wikipedia as I respect the rules and regulations of any website I use -Article123456 (talk) 18:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

You may want to bring that up with the deleting administrator, DGG who considered it unambiguous advertising. The only uncontroversial action here would be to restitute you the text in case of need. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
the proposed changes on my user talk page remains highly promotional. See an explanation on my user talk p. DGG ( talk ) 19:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Doctor_Who_story_chronology

Hello, I see there was debate and eventual resolution to delete a page I visited frequently. I have no interest in debating the merits of the arguments, but would merely like to request one of the admins to please email me a copy of the contents of the page (or restore it to my userspace) so that I can have the data. Much thanks to you for your assistance! -Avgjoefriday (talk) 00:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done E-mailed. As you're aware, this has already been exported somewhere, in case you find out whereto, consider to make this known at Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who. --Tikiwont (talk) 11:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Swiss Medical Digest

the article refers to the history of medical publishing in Switzerland, see also www.meducationfoundatin.org -Robertgcoenen (talk) 05:42, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I'm not seeing the relevance of that site, but in any case without good external sources, it looks like candidate for deletion discussion --Tikiwont (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
  Not done After revieewing the artcile and a tag by a fellow admin once more, I've deleted it per WP:CSD#G11, thus reverting my own restoration. There is no prejudice against anybody uninvolved writing an encyclopedic article based on external suourcs but not a 'success story'. --Tikiwont (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

kraftwurx

No participation other than the nominator. -Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 07:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC) Strike, to avoid impresison that Martijn posted this. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

User Martijn Hoekstra requested speedy deletion of Kraftwurx which was removed less than 12 Hours after being created under claims:

A7 and G11

Martijn Hoekstra did not request clarification, amendments or the publication of additional credible sources before deletion.

Martijn Hoekstra was notified of the existence of 2 articles as sources that were in the article and has been made aware of the availablility of many others.

Martijn Hoekstra has been asked why the apparent biased speedy deletion of Kraftwurx was made when he did not delete or request edits to 3 other related topic articles including shapeways, ponoko and sculpteo. Even after alerting him to the related articles he still made no effort to "verify" the other pages.

Kraftwurx is arguably as noteworthy as the other afformentioned businesses. It is an actual business with a large number of articles and publications spanning back to 2006 and a global reach that can be verified.

It was requested that Martijn Hoekstra allow the addition of additional references to the article instead of deletion which he did not allow. It was also reqeusted to include the hangon tag to be added however; the deletion occurred more rapidly than any other edit I have seen on Wikipedia since 2006. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcn0209 (talk • contribs)

  Not done Nothing to undelete since Martijn Hoekstra has already reversed his deletion and opened a dsicssion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kraftwurx. If you have any good sources please bring them up in the discussion or add them to the article whilst trying to avoid referecnes other dubious articles --Tikiwont (talk) 09:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

FULLSTEP

reasoning -Omaurandy (talk) 20:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Please review the "FULLSTEP" article and re-consider its deletion. It is nothing but the description of this company's activities, with references to several reports from Gartner, where the company appears. Those reports can be very interesting and helpful to any procurement professional and or specialist. FULLSTEP appears in those reports alongside with ARIBA and EMPTORIS for example, who have the same type of descriptive articles published in Wikipedia. The list of products and services may have flagged the article as "promotion", we can get rid of it. Thanks in advance for your response.

I think the green cloud logo of Friendster can be restored. Since the old logo should be suitable to that article. -112.202.3.153 (talk) 02:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

There needs to be more of a reason for use than "the old logo should be suitable". I would expect there to be a paragraph on the topic of the old logo to support its inclusion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Mukesh Bhatt (Actor)

reasoning -Mukesh Bhatt (Actor) 08:10, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. This speedy delete could be counteracted by supplying references that show that magazines and newspapers have written about this actor. The article had none. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

andy evans - author

I am an established author with verifiable links at many sources including Amazon -Brdjani (talk) 09:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Andy Evans (author) says books were published but there was no claim of importance. Did they sell over a million copies? Has any one else written about this author? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:50, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

CouponCabin

This is not a re-post of previous article as was indicated in the deletion explanation; this article is completely new with well-sourced facts and cites more than 40 reputable third-party references. Please review the content. Thank you. -ZeldaKarma (talk) 16:31, 30 November 2011 (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. By the same token, a G4 must be contested at WP:Deletion review, and not here. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 20:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Erycom

i am a new user, i was not aware, kindly forgive me. -DJ Erycom (talk) 21:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

OTRS permission confirmed, refer to Talk:Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network -Russavia Let's dialogue 23:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Disparity between United States federal criminal penalties for crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses

This article's purported subject matter is important to our project, as per the amount of ongoing attention it is receiving in academia and relevant literature. Though I cannot see the content to determine if it was severely lacking, I can see that it was evidently sufficient to accommodate DYK inclusion in 2010. Reason for deletion was CSD#G5.   — C M B J   06:11, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

  • You are welcome to start this from fresh but contributions from banned users are not welcome, which is why this removed. It won't be restored. Spartaz Humbug! 18:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I realized that risk prior to making this request, but was unable to find any such guideline precluding independent requests for restoration of content. In fact, more or less the opposite, in principle, is outlined by our banning policy: "This does not mean that obviously helpful edits (such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism) must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor, but the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert."   — C M B J   23:39, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
We could email the content to you so that you can rewrite it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Theodor Hassek

Nobody delets my articles. Iam not spending my precious time at this website for other people to delet my work without using their brains. The article already exists in German language and this was the translation for English users. -Hhassek (talk) 08:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

  Done

Actually the article was at Theodor hassek, but it will be deleted soon enough if references are not added. German Wikipedia has different policies than here, so arguments for existence there do not show it should exist here. Also if there is a reason to delete articles written by you, they will be deleted too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Removing blp prod template without adding references will not save the article from deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Can you use WP:BLPPROD on an article whose subject allegedly died in 2009? Maybe it doesn't matter; even if that's the wrong process, difficulty sourcing a death date is evidence of failing WP:N. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilopi (talk • contribs)

Bushiroad

unjustly deleted -Bloope (talk) 15:52, 1 December 2011 (UTC) I believe that this page was deleted for reasons that did not apply. Please note that I was the one who originally made the page.

Bloope (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

RayWilliamJohnson

Now that Ray William Johnson seems to be sticking around, its previous versions were restored, and can now be seen in the early article history. Other attempts were made to create the article, a number at RayWilliamJohnson, which I feel should also be given the undeletion/history merge treatment. -117Avenue (talk) 06:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Span

Talk page of page that was undeleted. -Peter E. James (talk) 01:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

  Done Though there is not much useful and most has been moved to Talk:Linear span but that should be clearer now. --Tikiwont (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

fc nelson

no reason to be deleted when no different to Nelson Suburbs or Richmond Athleitc pages which are similar clubs -Glym (talk) 09:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

  •   Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FC Nelson, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, 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. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually the result was "soft delete" which is generally understood to mean that the article is "refundable". I myself prefer the term "delete without prejudice". --Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

North London County

reasoning -Sam4731 (talk) 11:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC) I have checked the criteria for speedy deletion and it does not seem to breach any on these rules. We would like this page to be reinstated because it is important to us to leave a legacy and for other people to know of our team. Please consider my request and I hope you will see sense and undelete our page.

Texas Services for persons with disabilities in Bexar County

Please provide me with a copy of the deleted page Texas Services for people with disabilities in Bexar County. It was proposed for speedy deletion by Nolelover. I believe it was done erroneously. It meets the notability and neutrality requirements of Wikipedia, in my view. Thank you for your assistance. -Ahill1225 (talk) 21:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a venue for the publication of service directories and the like. If you wish to publish such a directory online, then contact an Internet Service Provider for help in setting up a website. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:16, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Anthea McIntyre

Anthea McIntyre has just become the latest British MEP due to the Lisbon Treaty giving the United Kingdom another seat and I had noticed that there was an article about her on wikipedia but it seems to have been deleted. I currently work for Anthea and would happily add more sources if that was the reason for the deletion. I was wondering if anyone could unblock it as then I could add more to the article which describes a Member of the European Parliament -81.110.223.11 (talk) 20:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Please be aware that with your obvious conflict of interest, you are very very very VERY strongly discouraged from editing this article (which already exists). See WP:COI for further details. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

dropout crisis

page originally was marked for deletion BEFORE I added information from TEA, NEA, and other credible sources -Eygarcia20 (talk) 00:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, two editors commented after you added them. More importantly, the discussion raised issues about the overall approach of the article. As deletion was a consensus decision, the only thing we can do here is restitute you the draft, so that you can work on it, and then bring it up with User:Davewild who deleted it, BEFORE putting it back as article. It is at User:Eygarcia20/Dropout crisis As you're knowledgeable about the topic, i't would be great if you continue to contribute, but maybe you start by reviewing and improving related articles to get used to wikipedia. There is no deadline.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Jack Kevorkian-Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia -four pictures accidently complained about

Requested picture removal by accidently pressing the "report this image" button. -76.205.58.17 (talk) 03:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you pleas clarify which pictures have been deleted? Things are in general not deleted accidentally here, even if you have made un unintended action. Thanks. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:29, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thoroughbred BASIC

Article factually correct but needs editing and references adding. Deletion decision alludes to incorrect association -86.140.120.12 (talk) 07:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thoroughbred BASIC, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Wizardman (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. If it has nothing to do with Thunderbird Software or Business BASIC or Dartmouth BASIC then I suggest that you write a completely new article with additional references beyond http://www.thoroughbredsoftware.com and put it at WP:AFC if you do not have an account. If you do have an account then it could be userfied for you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:46, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

EU Referendum Rebels

This was a major political upset for the Coaltion Government of the United Kingdom, when nearly a third of the Conservative Party either rebelled or abstained over the vote. There is currently an article about the Maastricht Rebels and that rebellion was sort of on the same lines, so the EU Referendum Rebels were not only a surprise for the Goverment but they were also the first and largest rebellion staged by Conservative MP during David Cameron's Premiership -81.110.223.11 (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

  Blocked Seems to be a clear case of block evasion by the blocked creator of named article.--Tikiwont (talk) 18:42, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Female Members of Parliament for the Conservative Party

This article aswell as the other deleted article Female Members of Parliament for the Lib Dem, SDP and Liberal Parties is of major importance to British Political history and as User:Sam Blacketer has put on his user page Women in the House of Commons is an astonishing omission. As even the House of Parliament have thought that it is so important that they have created an article [1] and so I think these articles should be allowed back onto wikipedia due to their historical importance. -81.110.223.11 (talk) 18:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

  Blocked Seems to be a clear case of block evasion by the blocked creator of named article.--Tikiwont (talk) 18:42, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Darrenm540/TKM_Entertainment_Group

reasoning -Darren•M540 U|T|C 14:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

So called administrator "DragonflySixtyseven" has deleted several sub-pages off my personal User page, User:Darrenm540 including TKM Entertainment Group, Darren Test lol, Hal Manning and Luke Jamieson, with the latter 3 being deleted for the spiteful reason of "for user's own good". These pages were created to test the capability of different types of infoboxes and this 'administrator' has used his privileges to remove my personal work which actually did take quite a bit of time to prepare, seeing as I am not the most advanced of Wikipedia editors. Please may another administrator attempt to restore these pages and/or set a sanction towards "Dragonfly Sixty-seven" and I will be eternally grateful. Thanks a lot, --Darren•M540 U|T|C 14:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

  •   Not done Any request that begins and ends with attacks against the deleting admin will not typically be actionned. You should also remember that the WP:BLP policy applies within userpages - including test pages...indeed, all pages belong to the Foundation, and can be removed if they clearly a) violate policy and b) serve no purpose in the building of an encyclopedia. Unfortunately, a glance at at least two of the files you mention appear to have been deleted due to a). (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Awkward Turtle

I want to redirect it to Awkward turtle. I know the article has been deleted many times in the past, but it's 4 years hence and I really think that the article is notable enough now. For some reason, I am not able to create Awkward Turtle myself, and then redirect it, so I am seeking your help. -Coin945 (talk) 18:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

  •   Not done I see no real benefit in this redirect. "Awkward turtle" appears to be the correct capitalization. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Richard Andrew Deases

I am requesting this page be undeleted for the reason that this page was created for an individual whom has lived a life of anonymity, and now wishes to step back into the family of his birth. This page was deleted on the grounds unambiguous advertising or promotion, of which I see none. If there is such promotion, I would like for possibly some assistants to correct such mistakes. Thank you. -Prinz.Deases (talk) 19:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

3dchat

This article is about 3Dchat's virtual world and social network and not a web site, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content as was referenced in the deletion. 3Dchat is very similar to second life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_life or IMVU http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imvu and as a number of all 3 personally I don't see why I can't get 3Dchat listed on WikiPedia. More and more people are becoming members to 3Dchat because it offers more to users then Second Life and IMVU... So this is why I stared the article. I plan on updating it with the history, system requirements, options and other useful information that is already listed for other virtual worlds in Wikipedia. By no way am I advertising 3Dchat for them, I just get a lot of users in other virtual worlds asking what 3Dchat is because it's relativity new in comparison and I thought WikiPedia would be the best place to have unbiased info they could use to get better educated. -Workmuch (talk) 20:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/A7

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G11

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G12

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G4

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/U5

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G10

User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G5 Also, The existence or absence of Article X DOES NOT AND CANNOT JUSTIFY the presence or absence of article Y. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 20:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Ruth Bratt

Previous deletion suggestions not a notable actress/comedian, however the show she appears in is now in the West End and she has appeared on the BBC. I was surprised not to be able to find her details on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Bratt -82.41.24.125 (talk) 20:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. January (talk) 20:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

=3

Now that Ray William Johnson seems to be sticking around, its previous versions were restored, and can now be seen in the early article history. Other attempts were made to create the article, a number at =3, which I feel should also be given the undeletion/history merge treatment. -117Avenue (talk) 06:06, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

  •   Done but there is not much worth while here apart from the emoticon. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:19, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I didn't know that, but thanks. 117Avenue (talk) 20:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Appeal for undeletion of: File:Tombstone be anonymous in Hong Kong Cemetery, Happy Vally, Hong Kong.JPG

While the original photo was, as far as I know, published in one of the Hong Kong newspaper's website (unknown to me, as the photo was supplied to me by the nephew of Yeung Kui-wan, in which article I posted it), I appeal the deletion of the title .jpg on the grounds that:

1) I had problems with defining the copyright status at the time of posting, but more importantly:

2) The subject of the photo (Yeung Kui-wan's unnamed tomb) is in the public domain, i.e. in Hong Kong cemetery, Happy Valley, and ANYONE could have taken such a photo.

Hopefully 'you' will arbitrate in favor of undeletion of this image, as it is so pertinent to the article. Thanking you in advance -Duncan.france (talk) 05:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

  Not done we must respect the copyright of the photographer who took the original picture. Since, as you say, the photo is easily replaceable, we cannot steal their work. If anybody could have taken such a photo, we need only wait for somebody to do so, and to license or donate that photo for use by Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:14, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
The essential words in the quotation you gave from my appeal "anyone could have taken" are "could have". It is now no longer possible to take such a photograph as the HK government has now put up a plaque next to the tomb. One of the points of the article was the campaign to get a plaque placed so it would be very useful to show the tomb without the plaque. Please undelete the photo, perhaps of 'Fair Usage' grounds.--Duncan.france (talk) 19:53, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Chaudhry_Feroz_Din_Khaleeq_Gujjar

reasoning -2.51.249.126 (talk) 21:22, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

pls dont delete this page

  Note: Of the speedy deletions this article has, the most recent deletion is a A7. Articles meeting this criterion are generally not undeleted either because they require a complete rewrite or they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. The other speedy, a G12, likewise will not be restored here. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 10:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Richard Andrew Deases (2)

reasoning -Prinz.Deases (talk) 02:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

  Note: Of the speedy deletions this article has, the most recent deletion is a A7. Articles meeting this criterion are generally not undeleted either because they require a complete rewrite or they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. The other two deletions are G11s, which likewise will not be restored. See WP:Notability (people) and WP:Spam. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 10:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
  •   Not done Congratulations! Your request to have an article protected against future recreation has been granted. Contrary to all assistance up to this point, you have continued to create a WP:COI article that clearly does not meet Wikipedia requirements. Although contributions are what this project is about, there are requirements for notability and verifiability that cannot be supplanted. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Mike Carano

Mike Carano is a real person who I have met personally. He is who he says he is and although the general public hasn't heard of him, numerous comedians do. Internet celebs have pages and so it's only right to let Carano have his again. -KiwiPie16 (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2011 (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. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 10:25, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Joaquim Leitão

Has a page at IMDB listing significant film output, and has won two Golden Globe awards. -– Fayenatic (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


−

International Federation of Surveyors

please bring it back. it is not commercial organization. thanks ! פארוק (talk) 17:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

  Not done - this page is a copyright violation of http://www.fig.net/wb2009/contacts.htm. January (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
THANKS ! :)

Sling-on

your reasoning for asking to undelete it -PersianHunter (talk) 18:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I have read the general criteria and I hope someone would guild me in a more specific and simple terms how I can reinstate the article. My intention is simply introducing a new product. I am not in any form advertising it here. It is simply informational. Yes I am the designer of the product. Would it help if someone else would write about it? Thank you

User:Dr-mahfouz

I am new on wikipedia and wanted to about my self all around the world, its not about Advertising Please Help Me Undelete This Page, Thanks. -— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr-mahfouz (talk • contribs)

Javlin

The page should serve as a general information about Javlin Inc. company. To start I used as a placeholder "about" description from Javlin inc homepage - reason for deletion. As I represent the company I am authorized to use that text. Nonetheless the intention is to work on the text so it contains relevant info. -Dpavlis (talk) 10:12, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

  •   Not done A few things: first, this is not a directory of companies, and to be considered for an encyclopedia, the topic must be notable (see WP:CORP for specifics). Second, as you represent the company, conflict of interest kicks in - when we sign up on Wikipedia, we agree not to write about ourselves and our organizations. Third, until WP:OTRS has confirmed that you are fully released the contents of the copyrighted material from any website, WP:COPYRIGHT cannot be broken. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:21, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PetroSkills_Alliance

Well firstly I feel terrible, this was the first article I chose to work on, and I got it deleted for "advertising" I followed the wiki rules and the only content that I added was an info box, fixed links, and added a blurb or two from 3rd party sources not affiliated with the company. I am also well aware that this is not simply a company directory and that the company needs to add something of value. I am a Petroleum Engineer for a company and have seen the reach of PetroSkills as a company, they have partnered with some of the industry giants to make progressive training to basically improve the oil and gas industry as well as making those work environments safer for those of us out on the rigs. I was hoping that someone could either help me make the article read not "like an advertisement" and more like an objective encyclopedic document which was my intent. If not could the article be emailed to me so that I can try and fix it myself? Thanks - -Limerick1988 (talk) 14:28, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

  Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Limerick1988/PetroSkills Alliance. It was already not in good shape before you started editing it. Now, you can work on improving the article's assertion of notability and neutrality at its new location, but please contact Fastily (talk · contribs), the administrator who deleted the page, before moving it back to the article space. Please see the criteria for speedy deletion and the relevant notability guidelines - articles that are not in compliance will be deleted. --Tikiwont (talk) 19:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Return On Event

No references is not a valid reason to prod. no wp:before. bad engagement of new editor. - Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Jay_T._Snyder

User "Fastily" deleted the article via PROD with the argument that Mr. Snyder is neither a notable nor a public figure. However, he was a U.S. Representative to the United Nations and a Member of the Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy at the State Department. He is also a prominent businessman and philanthropist. -71.167.45.144 (talk) 15:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:47, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Molander and Associates

I am requesting the last revision of this page to be emailed to me, no mainspace restoration required. Thank you -Phearson (talk) 20:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Facility Condition Index

The FCI is a well-established bemark used in the Facilities Management industry. The author of this article has the same information in a national publication for higher education -RobertGBrooks (talk) 21:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Kyra Simone

I believe this is incorrect and I am disappointed by the lack of warning and encouragement of wikipedia by this user. I notice that it appears there is tag/teamwork by a user from visitng the users page so to verify personal opinion and request my page be reviewed and restored. I am creating pages of interest and wish to continue in this endeavour. Reasons were ‎ (Multiple reasons: Speedy deletion criteria A7, G11) -Cynthia 76 (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

An A7 means that the article's subject fails WP:Notability. A G11 means the article is intended only to promote something. Articles on Wikipedia should be about notable subjects and should be written from a neutral point of view. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 21:12, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
  Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 20:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Brayden richards

Please, oh please, give me this page back. I'll change it. Please? My life is over without it. -Chanchilla (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

And why is your life over without it? Are you Mr. Richards' publicist? —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 21:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  Not done and will not be done The article contains no useful content whatsoever; please read your first article before attempting recreation. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Equals Three

Now that Ray William Johnson seems to be sticking around, its previous versions were restored, and can now be seen in the early article history. Other attempts were made to create the article, a number at Equals Three, which I feel should also be given the undeletion/history merge treatment. -117Avenue (talk) 06:07, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean? What did you leave? 117Avenue (talk) 20:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
An offensive attack version was left in the deleted state. I realise this comedian likes offensive material, but the version was unsuitable for inclusion here as it was speedy deleted as an attack page. You don't need it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant)

As of 2011, subject is now founder and Executive Director of National History Bee and Bowl. Also compares favorably to List of Jeopardy! contestants -Scott Illini (talk) 11:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/m04b.pdf
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_56&oldid=1136068523"