Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 87

Archive 80

←

Archive 85

Archive 86

Archive 87

Archive 88

Archive 89

Archive 90

Contact (word game)

• Contact (word game) · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I believe that sources could be found for this article but may not have been due to the fact that the article covers a more obscure subject. Reson Given for Deletion was: "Expired PROD, concern was: unsourced; only sources presented so far are copyrighted". -Eatmark (talk) 06:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Jeff G. (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. If it is to be kept, you will need to find sources that show significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. JohnCD (talk) 13:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Alpha Sigma Rho

• Alpha Sigma Rho · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

The wikipedia page was accurate and was deleted for weak reasons. Although a small organization, Alpha Sigma Rho Sorority, Inc. had a wikipedia article that was informative with up to date details. There are plenty of online articles, pictures, official FaceBook pages, websites and other sources that can be used to validate the information on the wikipedia article and add to the content to strengthen the article that was written about the Alpha Sigma Rho Sorority, Inc. -155.247.166.29 (talk) 22:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, 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 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha Sigma Rho, 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 Postdlf (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. JohnCD (talk) 13:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Fled The Southwest

• Fled The Southwest · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

The article I created was about a band that I am currently in, and did not contain any insignificant or false information, all of which can be proven with evidence of the band's existence. The page was deleted because of "failure to provide reason for the significance of the article." The significance of an article is opinionated which leads me to feel that it is unfair for my article to be deleted for this reason, please consider restoring the page. Sincerely, Alec Morrow, Lead Guitarist in Fled The Southwest -209.33.35.4 (talk) 00:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves or their own bands. See WP:BAND for what a band needs to have achieved before having an article, and Wikipedia is not about YOU for the reasons why, even then, you should leave it to someone uninvolved to write it. JohnCD (talk) 13:32, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Ameer Idreis

• Ameer Idreis · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

it is about an author whom is becoming more known, also there are other authors who have wikipedia pages just like his, it contains valide information leading to three personal sites and some others. -Ewaldlover223 (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done See WP:UPANDCOMING. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Ewald series

• Ewald series · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

The wikipedia page was accurate and was deleted for terrible reasons. Although it is a not so well known book series, The Ewald Series, had a wikipedia article that was informative with up to date details. There are plenty of online websites, pictures, official FaceBook pages, and other sources that can be used to validate the information on the wikipedia article and add to the content to strengthen the article that was written about the Ewald Series--Ewaldlover223 (talk) 14:26, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

 Comment:: this article has not been deleted. Deletion is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ewald series, and that is where you should comment, but read Wikipedia:Notability (books) first. JohnCD (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Mishapocalypse

• Mishapocalypse · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

It is an event that has occurred and effected more than 13 million people. While the original article might not have had sufficient data, there is more information on the subject now. It is an important event that people would most likely want to inform themselves on. Please undelete the Mishapocalypse page. People need to know. -Discodaleks (talk) 19:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done Non-notable children's game being played on Tumblr to publicize an obscure performer. Sockpuppets have been blocked.--Orange Mike | Talk 21:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Mettler Toledo

• Mettler_Toledo · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Content was informative, not promotional -208.85.168.103 (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done - this page is a copyright violation. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Old Red Cracker

• Old Red Cracker · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning - Old Red Cracker (ORC+) was a significant character of the underground reverse engineering movement in 1990s. He was and will be a prominent historical philosophical leader in the history of computing. The page was the only thing in Wikipedia about him and should be restored. 164.111.99.105 (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. However, please add sources in support of its notability, or it may be deleted at WP:AFD. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Mishapocalypse

• PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -99.155.183.37 (talk) 22:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. See response three above this. Please stop wasting our time - further requests will be treated as trolling and removed. JohnCD (talk) 22:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Bohlin Cywinski Jackson

• Bohlin Cywinski Jackson · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Page originally deleted because nominator was the only one commenting -no conversation with page editor/user who made most recent changes. Admin notes that the changes made by the user in question were recent and not substantial, and they not introduce the problems stated in complaint. I was referred to the page by a professor of an architecture class as a good source of the company's history and work and would like to have the page undeleted for reference and updates on the firm. Raindelay95 (talk) 23:44, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested "soft delete", the article has been restored on request. JohnCD (talk) 10:02, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

JohnCD - thanks so much for your help. I'm glad to see the page is back up! Raindelay95 (talk) 23:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Deep Thrusts

• Deep Thrusts · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

No info about the video in the article Enumclaw horse sex case article -Female bodybuilder enthusiast (talk) 18:15, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The video fails GNG. Whether or not the article needs the video ref is a different story.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  20:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I checked the GNG and still can't figure out why you deleted it. Anyway I could create a new article of Deep Thrusts and edit it to meet GNG rules?Female bodybuilder enthusiast (talk) 01:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Make a draft in your user space (click on Help:Userspace draft to start), then check with the deleting admin, The Anome (talk). If The Anome is not convinced, you can go to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 08:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Potty Training: learning with the animals

• Potty Training: learning with the animals · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I created the stub and within few minutes it was nominated for CSD#A7. Then i dropped it and requested the nominator to try AfD so i can keep adding sources. But before i undo the tag, it was deleted. Kindly help. Many thanks, -†@πωεεṝ ♥@me 22:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Tanweer Khan /Potty Training: learning with the animals. You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact NawlinWiki (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. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'll contact NawlinWiki (talk · contribs) for sure before publishing it or will opt for AfC. †@πωεεṝ ♥@me 13:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Lhermite's Models

• Lhermite's models · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

reasoning -L2j2 (talk) 22:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

 Comment:: this article has not been deleted. Deletion is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lhermite's models, and that is where you should comment. To understand the concerns expressed there, read Wikipedia:No original research, which includes: "If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery." JohnCD (talk) 23:27, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done It has now been deleted as a result of that discussion. As such, the correct venue to dispute the deletion is Deletion review, not this page. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Global Telecom & Technology

• Global Telecom & Technology · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

nLayer purchase in May 2012 makes it notable company now -60.241.90.39 (talk) 07:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Mean as custard (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. If the article is to be kept, it needs to show references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish notability, and to be written less like an advertisement. JohnCD (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Jip Deng

• PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -Siulingng6 (talk) 12:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Jip Deng is a phrase we speak in Cantonese like Dai Pai Dong. Jip Deng implicitly symbolizes low-income family in Hong Kong as it is one of the affordable furniture for them. Also, it was a common used prop in previous Hong Kong movies. Therefore, it represents Hong Kong's collective memories and cultures and it is extraordinary important to record it.

 Not done Hi Siulingng6. This page is for undeletion of articles that were deleted in an uncontroversial manner. This means two things: 1) The page has to have been deleted in order for this page to have any applicability; and 2) the page has to have been deleted by a process that was not on the merits, such as after an articles for deletion discussion. Here, you asked for undeletion when the page was marked under prod but not yet deleted and now ask again when the page is still not deleted, but under discussion at articles for deletion. So there's nothing to undelete since it still exists, and if it is deleted at the current discussion, then this page will still not be the correct place to get any action because it does not apply to pages deleted on the merits.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Everlast Polymeric Cladding

• Everlast Polymeric Cladding · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

There is no promotional or unambiguous language suggesting a further action to be made by the reader, it is solely an informational article that does not slander any other product. The article simply states some product detail that the average homeowner would not understand because of its complexities and frankly because they do not care know. The information is strictly unbiased and simply states facts. I am more than willing to revise the article in places where it should need editing. -Unitedhomeexperts (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Unitedhomeexperts (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done - this is not an appropriate topic for inclusion on Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Wikipedia does not accept articles which consist of original research, or which lack any reliable sources of information. Marketing junk like "All colors feature ColorHold® capping resins, a UV- Stable acrylic polymer for exceptional color retention" has no place in an encyclopedia. Please also see WP:COI and WP:NOTCATALOG. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

RecycleBot

• RecycleBot · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the recyclebot was not advertising -- as an open source project there is no "product" and although I believe there are some companies planning commercial versions there is nothing for sale now to the best of my knowledge. I tried to cut out all the non-wikipedia sounding information from the sources - please reinstate the page and mark what was promotional -- I did try to cite a source for any claim.

On the G12 front all the text I lifted was from either the appropedia page on the topic which is cc-by-sa or the reprapwiki which is all gnufdl 1.2 - both of which I thought were consistent with wikipedia. Please reinstate - I think it is a great idea which has a ton of promise - and the initial list of media sources I used from appropedia make it clear it is noteworthy. (I also paired down that list of the references as a lot were repeats). Please let me know what else needs to be done to fix the article to reinstate it. -Recyclebotboy (talk) 00:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Done I'm not seeing any clear instance of copyright violation (much of it's copied from a couple of free-licence sources, but they are credited appropriately), and this isn't so promotional as to qualify for G11 - the article has been restored, please work to improve it at your leisure. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Renaud Laplanche

• PageName · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -64.183.42.39 (talk) 22:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

After I edited the Renaud Laplanche article by adding references to support the notability of the subject, the article was deleted by User: Nick-D who claimed that the article is spam and "references do not establish notability - are all about the person's company with only passing coverage of him" . I would like to contest the deletion for the following reasons.

Renaud Laplanche, the subject of the article, is notable on the basis of Wikipedia notability criteria for people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BIO):

1. he has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject -- many, though not all, of the existing secondary sources were cited in the article
2. he has received well-known and significant awards or honor -- the awards were mentioned in the article; in addition, his company has under his leadership been recognized by awards not mentioned in this article but mentioned in the article about the company (Lending Club)
3. he has made widely recognized contributions that are part of the enduring historical record in his specific field -- he is the leader of the largest company of the kind in the world and created new but already established alternatives to traditional institutions

I disagree with the reason that the deleting administator gave for deletion because people in leadership positions like Renaud Laplanche are not notable independently of their professional achievements. The facts about the company that he is the CEO of were not meant as promotions of the company but to highlight his significance and the achievements made under his leadership. This is similar to achievements of a coach of a sports team -- a coach is notable to the extent that the teams that he is coaching are notable.

I also argue that the deleting administrator did not pursue altenatives to the deletion and used his power of censorship unneccessarily: if the edits I made were indeed so detrimental to the quality of the article that the article needed to be deleted immediately, which I objected to above, it would have sufficed revert my edits or delete some sentences about the company rather than delete the whole article because the person is still notable (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Alternatives_to_deletion).

Done User:Orangemike has already restored this page. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Andres (Dre) Hidalgo

• Andres (Dre) Hidalgo · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

G12 speedy. ticket:2013040410000068 indicates that the subject has given permission to the original article's creator to reuse his website's content, but I'd like to assess notability before restoring to article space. Please userify to my account (maybe at User:FreeRangeFrog/Andres (Dre) Hidalgo) so I can take a look and get back to him. Thanks! -§FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done "Permission" is not enough. I do not see a free-license release of the content in the OTRS ticket. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No, there is not, however we do allow images to be uploaded pending OTRS permission, and text is no different. But OK then, can I get the contents emailed to me? §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

...and just to clarify, I would like the contents please if they are not simply a copy of this. If they are then there's no need at all. Thanks again. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

There is very minor rewording, but it is effectively the same. And, as is almost always the case with people's own websites, it is a waste of time giving OTRS permission because the content is hopelessly unencyclopedic and promotional in tone. JohnCD (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, no prob. Thank you for checking. I figured as much, but I just needed to make sure we were not ignoring a valid request. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Lawrence Frankopan

• Lawrence Frankopan · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd | afd2 ) · [revisions]

The person in this entry is the brother-in-law of a member of the Royal Family. His sister is married to the Queen's cousin, Lord Nicholas Windsor. So it is remarkable someone managed to delete this. The entry about a successful young businessman, with ample citations and documentary evidence, was deleted without any discussion. No one had noticed the entry was gone and there was, at no time, any possibility to contest the deletion. None of the criteria for deletion was fulfilled and the entry seemed to have been done as a personal attack on the relevant person. Please re-instate thie entry. Official Lists (talk) 17:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Done as a contested soft deletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

santander consumer usa

• Santander Consumer USA · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -Accuracygenerator (talk) 18:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

An independent page is needed for Santander Consumer USA because it has its own operations in the US. The problem with just redirecting it to the Santander Group page is that Santander Consumer USA does not get the desired visibility. I suggest that there be links between the pages but that there be two separate pages. The same goes for the RoadLoans page.

Thanks.

Accuracygenerator (talk) 18:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is not here to provide "the desired visibility" for companies; it is an encyclopedia, not a business listing directory or a platform for any kind of promotion. Subsidiary companies can only have their own articles if they are independently notable (see also WP:CORP), and even then those articles should not be written by anyone connected with the company. If you are connected, please read the guidelines Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest. JohnCD (talk) 21:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

DSM Training

• DSM Training · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Want to re-write the article so that it doesnt get deleted -Leonfifield1 (talk) 17:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion. 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. Moreover, this topic seems to bee too new to avoid that the article promotes it. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

ItaloBrothers

• ItaloBrothers · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This article was deleted because it had a lack of relevance. The band gained chart success in German-speaking countries this and last year, so it meets now the relevance criteria. I want to see what already was there, and use this and the German article as a base for writing a useful article. -Ali1610 (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Because this had been repeatedly re-created while they were not notable, the title was salted (protected against creation) by admin RHaworth (talk). I have userfied the article for you - moved it into a sub-page in your user space at User:Ali1610/ItaloBrothers where you can work on it. You will need references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to show how they meet the notability standard of WP:BAND. I have re-salted the title - when your article is ready, check with RHaworth that he will agree to lift the protection, or failing that go to WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 10:43, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Asante Africa Foundation

• Asante Africa Foundation · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

the content is neutral and has credible sources -Afrisante (talk) 00:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

It was deleted under section A7 but I changed the format of the content following the warning to be notable and neutral. I have used credible sources as well and it was assessed as Start Class. Kindly undelete the article and advise on what to do.

Not done the page was recreated through AFC several days ago, and indeed, was in article space when you filed this request. I have had to remove a large amount of the text (which as, as in previous versions, copied from the Foundation's website), but the article itself is still there. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Elisheva Shomron

• Elisheva Shomron · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

in our circles, she is in fact a notable singer. -2600:1013:B02A:574D:3407:6CAF:690C:B438 (talk) 04:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. In order to establish Wikipedia:Notability, it needs references to "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." JohnCD (talk) 10:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Bleach Blood

• Bleach Blood · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Hello,

The page I was creating for one of the bands Bleach Blood, on our record label Transmission Recordings has been deleted. I understand to make it valid I need to cite more references from third parties. The page wasn't finished and I would like the content back to edit and make acceptable for wiki.

Regards,

Ali Palin Transmission Recordings -Transmission rec (talk) 09:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is not a place for record labels to promote their artists. An encyclopedia does not carry advertisements saying "For all future dates and tickets check here: " etc. JohnCD (talk) 10:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

John Christian Hopkins

• John Christian Hopkins · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Hello, I was told that John Christian Hopkins, an author, journalist, poet and public speaker, was not notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. However, Hopkins has won several awards for his work, is a nationally syndicated columnist and has written five books. Each student in my American Indian Literature class at the University of New Hampshire was assigned a Native American writer for their final project. It would be unfortunate if I had to tell Hopkins that he is not notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. -Othomas39 (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

This page is only for article that have already been deleted. Not only has this article not been deleted but the speedy deletion was declined. That being said, note that the article needs more secondary reliable sources that verify the information and show notability, as opposed to primary sources which the article is almost entirely sourced by. The fact that the speedy deletion was declined does not mean it may not be deleted after discussion on the merits at articles for deletion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG

• File:Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -VM321 (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

 Comment:: this file has not been deleted, but deletion is being discussed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 March 14#File:Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG, where you have already commented and it has been explained to you that the copyright status of the photograph is not acceptably clear. That is the place where you need to produce any better information you have; any decision there will not be over-ruled here. If the file is deleted you can go to WP:Deletion review but, frustrating though the problems of image copyright are, this is not an area where the legal rules can be bent. JohnCD (talk) 18:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_D._Christenbury

• Jonathan_D._Christenbury · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This article did not meet the requirements for speedy deletion. With G11 guidelines, this article is not "exclusively promotional" nor would it "need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." I request that the page please be restored. There is no promotional wording whatsoever in the article. It does not fit the description for a speedy deletion under G11, which is the reason given for deletion. Please overturn this decision as it does not fall under your guidelines for speedy deletion. -IvanB85 (talk) 18:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done The REFUND process is for uncontroversial stuff only.  If you believe that this decision was found in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact first the administrator who made the decision, user DGG (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, or you can't agree, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Caroline Harriet Abraham

• Caroline Harriet Abraham · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

There is a consensus within Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_Zealand that people with DNZB entries are notable, but I did a crap job of showing it in this stub. If undeleted I'm happy to add more content and evidence of notability (and defend at AfD if necessary). -Stuartyeates (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Stuartyeates/Caroline Harriet Abraham. so you can give it a a once over hopefully avoiding an AfD. Best, --Tikiwont (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:57, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Frank Murphy (radio)

• Frank Murphy (radio) · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I find the given A7 reasoning for deletion to be questionable - the subject is a prominent player in his local market, with quite a few awards and press mentions. This should have been up for AfD, as there were quite a few indications of importance/significance in the original article, as well as references. -MikeWazowski (talk) 21:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Done The sources seem enough to disqualify A7, so I am sending it to AfD. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! MikeWazowski (talk) 21:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Chaotic Shadow Warriors

• Chaotic Shadow Warriors · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

reasoning -68.100.4.247 (talk) 01:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

 Comment:: this article has not been deleted. Deletion is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaotic Shadow Warriors, and that is where you should comment. JohnCD (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Gegham Aleksanyan

• Gegham Aleksanyan · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

not advertismenet, just biographical information and recent achievements -75.84.156.115 (talk) 08:13, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. Not advertisement? "one of the most celebrated artists of his generation... collected by a virtual list of who's who globally... associated with several prestigious galleries... Exclusively represented by Signature Auction Gallery..." Wikipedia is not a place for galleries to puff their clients. JohnCD (talk) 16:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Australian Staghound

• Australian Staghound · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Since I think its better to improve an article than to delete it, i wanna view what it said. If it was good i can I use it for the new article. If its not i'll just write a new one. But to know, i wanna know what it looked like. --Knight of Ni (talk) 09:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user Tikuko (talk), who proposed it, and who may choose to nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. What it needs is references to establish notability. If you look in the history, you will see that Tikuko linked from his PROD he only reference he could find. JohnCD (talk) 16:39, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Joan Hartock

• Joan Hartock · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

deleted a few years ago for having never played in a fully-professional league/competition, player recently played a fully professional league game for Stade Brest in Ligue 1. -— Limabeans (talk) 12:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done. There was nothing useful in the article as it stood, so I have written a one-line stub with one reference. Please expand it, in particular adding a reference to show that he has played; there is more material back in the history which may be useful. JohnCD (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I've found another ref to show he played, but it could still do with expanding. JohnCD (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I've expanded it a bit using the references on the French Wikipedia article and some of the past revisions. — Limabeans (talk) 17:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mauro Baranzini 2nd copy

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mauro Baranzini 2nd copy · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

was deleted with the rationale "G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP" but was not disparaging and had three sources in a section called Sources; requesting undeletion so its author can continue work on the draft -—rybec 07:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. There is an existing unsubmitted copy at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mauro Baranzini which the author can work on. As far as I can see, it is identical except for a short "Sources" section at the end, which I have copied across from the deleted second version. While I agree it was not an attack page, the rejection was probably for inadequate referencing: for a BLP it is particularly important that the references actually confirm what the article says, but here most of the links to universities and institutions simply go to the institution's website and say nothing about Baranzini. JohnCD (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for helping; I'd still like to see this restored because I had brought it and its review up for discussion on the AfC talk page before it was deleted, to preserve the history in case this should ever be moved into the main space, and because the unsubmitted draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mauro Baranzini was made before the author made an account (I don't remember the account name of the author). If you look at the second draft, you can see where the author specifically asked that the original draft be deleted, so the first draft is the one that should have been deleted (as CSD G7).

The addition of the references may have been the only change. The criterion under which the second draft was speedily deleted is only for pages that are both entirely negative and unsourced, but this was neither. I'm not sure that the links were intended as references; the references given in the Sources section were books. I agree that there's a great deal of room for improvement in the sourcing of this article. —rybec 00:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

OK,  Done, and I have deleted the first one. The second one, which I have restored, contains two complete copies of the article, for some reason; I thought his "please delete" referred to the second copy here. After restoring, I reverted Theonesean's rejection, so its status now is, back in the queue. Best of luck with it. JohnCD (talk) 12:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you! —rybec 12:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

La Bonche

• La Bonche · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

although La Bonche is not widely written about in other media to date it can be found on Facebook as a page and also is referenced in posts on www.Circuscentral.co.uk/news/ date 27 feb 2013. And increasingly on Twitter. In addition to this on facebook the are at least 16 people who call themselves La Bonche publicly, but you can only find them without the space ie LaBonche. It's is because they are blending their given names As well as their stage names. There will soon be a La Bonche collection held indefinitely in the Tyne and Wear Archives and Discovery Museum. The time line is very shallow for corroborating articles about La Bonche but that does not mean that it doesn't exist as a significant sub group for the youth circus community in the NE and UK. It is particularly important for this to be recognised as a real contributor to the cultural life of the NE of England. See article on Durham Jugglers website mentioning Kernel La Bonche. It is the intention of the author to write articles about the Five Ring Circus and other youth circuses. If these subjects are not a valid subject for Wikipedia then that is a real shame in terms of reflecting the diversity of youth culture today and it's validity ... After all Mods and Rockers are valid - I commend this article to the community. -Madame La Bonche (talk) 10:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done Youth circuses are valid subjects in principle but need to be written about first in other media which doesn't seem to be the case here, especially not with respect to the alternate name. More info at your talk page. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

File:PAR.png

• File:PAR.png · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

there is no commons file named File:Precision Approach Radar.png -65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

No, I can't find it either. I have asked the deleting admin to comment here. JohnCD (talk) 11:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

It did exist when I deleted PAR.png as it was linked from the bottom of the PAR.png, it has probably been deleted from commons. If you have a look at Commons:WikiProject Aviation/recent uploads/2013 March 21-31 it still shows as a place holder. It was like PAR.png unsourced from what I remember. MilborneOne (talk) 12:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Shouterbox Studios

• Shouterbox Studios · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -ShouterBox (talk) 09:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I am really sorry about it. What do you want me to do? We have actually games in development. This is really my company. This is my first article.

:(

Please don't do that anymore, ok?

Not done - this page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Please read WP:FIRSTARTICLE and WP:COI (✉→BWilkins←✎) 09:56, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Burnpur Cement

*Burnpur Cement · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions] The page was speedily deleted under A7, though the deletion was contested at the talk page. The company is a BSE and NSE listed company, and have significant coverage in WP:RS. Lack of citations, or mere improper formating should not be a ground for CSD. It was an improper decision by the deleting admin. -Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 13:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Withdrawn. Misunderstood the place for discussion. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 13:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

C-Loc Present Camp III: Thug Brothas

• C-Loc Present Camp III: Thug Brothas · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning i wish to have the article undeletion because the article is the offical complication album by rapper Lil Boosie and C-Loc (Concentration Camp) this album & youngest of the camp landed him to be sign with Trill Entertainment -Loso1993 (talk) 04:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I have asked the deleting admin to comment here. JohnCD (talk) 21:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

The main group of the article is C-Loc which is apparently deleted (to my surprise as I see it meeting GNG). Just because Boosie was part of the group doesn't mean the album is notable, and as long as the C-Loc article is deleted and the album shows it meets WP:GNG I'm not going to restore it. But if someone willing to userfy, that's fine with me. Secret ^account 04:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Angolans in Brazil

• Angolans in Brazil · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

The only discussion of deleting it (then as "Angolan Brazilian" – I would remember that one of the reasonings is that it is a rather problematic term as according to the English usage we are >70% of the country, both me and my parents could be Angolan Brazilians by the given definition even if our phenotypes can perfectly match French [only me], Portuguese or Romanian according to Europeans themselves) took place in 2008. One of the reasonings was that it was another ethnic plus Brazilian term that isn't recognized in Brazil society, and a lot of the hyphenated Brazilian categories we see now – such as much less known Barbadian, Latvian and Icelander – weren't created yet.

One of those users that frequently edit articles on hyphenated nationals re-created it with an adequate title. It was nice, and the <2000 figure of Angolan Brazilians given by the source is way far off. They only need a year in the country to be naturalized AFAIK, speak a dialect of Portuguese extremely close to ours, have a deal of cultural contact with us by media, and are the African group to arrive by illegal immigration to the most though easily mantain themselves invisible. Like, I have an Angolan neighbor, and I live in the middle of nowhere, it is a frequent sight. There's a lot of them in Rio de Janeiro and Niterói, they are about as recognizable as the Koreans here (though less than the Chinese). Brazilians aren't concerned with illegal immigration – we have a mentality that we shouldn't be, we immigrate at least tenfold more than we receive immigrants over the past 5 decades, further we would need U.S. American numbers for about 4 or 5 years for them to become a reasonable percent of the population –, we mostly lack true Western-style right-wing politics, the only bigger force of this are the Evangelicals with their social conservative issues but then they don't mind poor people, so in recent years after the earthquake Haitians arrived in the thousands and hundreds of them were granted naturalization just by arriving at the frontier and before we could learn how to pronounce "Pórt-ôo-Prrénss" everybody already forgot what happened.

But then it got deleted again by the reasonings of 2008 that really don't apply anymore. Angolans are among the most visible groups of immigrants and expatriates here (apart of being part of the few that are [relatively] recent), much more than other hyphenated Brazilians with even poorer articles. -Lguipontes (talk) 12:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

No comment? Ok, here goes a source: http://pt.globalvoices.org/2013/04/03/brasil-ira-deter-o-novo-curso-da-imigracao/ "O Brasil abriga cerca de 4.500 refugiados de 75 países, a maior parte deles vindos de Angola e Colômbia." The figures shown in the Angolans in Brazil article count legal immigrants only, not an estimate of all of the number of Angolans here including illegal immigrants and refugees. Lguipontes (talk) 12:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Betterfly

• Betterfly · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I think the article was deleted as the noteable point was not prominent - the noteable point being that Betterfly is the company responsable for the innovation of Verbal Aikido - an increasingly popular form of conflict management. Maybe I should include the Newspaper reference, but it is in French and as I'm not quite sure yet how to create an article in another language, or link two articles about the same think in different languages... Maybe you could point me in the right direction. Many thanks -Frogmaneo (talk) 17:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. Well the article was within speedy criteria when deleted with three sources LinkedIn, Facebook, and some blog like source none of which are acceptable sources, see our criteria in reliable sourcing and WP:GNG. I could move it to your userspace to work on the article, or better yet go though articles for creation where a better review would happen. Secret ^account 04:59, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Karsten Rohde

• Karsten Rohde · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

There is no good reason for the article to have been deleted. Article about person exists in 2 Wikipedias,it is connected with history of Russia, Russian empire, Russian fleet, Denmark, Poland, Germany, Baltic Sea and a whole region around it. - Serge-kazak (talk) 04:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Done Undeleted, as it doesn't seem to have met the A7 criteria, needs much better sourcing however. Secret ^account 04:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Union_Square_Ventures

• Union_Square_Ventures · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This venture capital firm page was deleted for Unambiguous advertising or promotion (G11) because the body listed the investments it has made. The firm exists to make investments, so its investments are part of what make it notable. -NYC Avidya (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

• Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. Notability is not transferred in that manner (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Holistic management

• Holistic management · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

I had it Userfied User:Redddbaron/Holistic_management and have completely rewritten it in a way that I hope will be up to wiki standards. It was deleted per the discussion. In the process of rewriting it, I did receive messages from 2 people that agreed there should be an article, it's just that the original article was very poor and did deserve to be deleted.(I didn't write the first one) They have been guiding me along with advise, since this is my first article for Wiki (although I have made anonymous very minor edits for years, before I ever had a wiki account. Redddbaron (talk) 19:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC) -Redddbaron (talk) 19:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Already done The article was already moved - did not need WP:REFUND for that (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, someone else helped me do that. Thanks anyway!Redddbaron (talk) 02:34, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Transart Institute

• Transart Institute · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

not advertising, see original article talk page for case made for retention. In summary, there are currently undeleted pages for similar educational institutions, and this institution is listed on a page along with other low-residency educational institutions. -Artboy67 (talk) 23:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Artboy67 (talk) 23:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Not done The only source is it's own website. Existence is not the same as notability. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason for undeletion (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Roberto A Dabdoub

• User:Hr1kb5 · ( talk | logs | links | watch | mfd ) · [revisions]

Roberto A Dabdoub not a Microbiologist. His contributions has been in the area of Photography, Phomicroscopy and Electrophotography, more specific in the early colorization of human chromosomes in Cytogenetics. His early research with fluorescent insitu hybridization and digital photomicroscopy helped many doctors and scientists. He developed a technique to identify DNA fragments and subsequently into the genome project. he is a Photographer who used scientific methods to make art and to show the world the beautiful side of medicine, using a very simple light microscope. I am not sure how electrophotography, a somewhat controversial subject was incorporated into his photomicroscopy. No one has done this before. This was highly revolutionary. He produced very unique images. One of the reason he has been included in NOMA, and had a solo exhibit at the Contemporary Arts Center All I can said, Dr Dabdoub's work it's truly revolutionary, perhaps in the tradition of Man Ray and others. Here in my desk, I have several scientific publications and hundreds of newspapers articles from reliable sources. I'll be glad to provide more documentation if you feel it's needed. Again, this article should not be classified in the area of Microbiology. He is an Artist and a scientist. A photographer whos work showed a connection between science and art. For over three decades his work has been a source of inspiration for budding scientists across the globe. Over a millions neckties, labeled with his name were made. Procedures of the sale went to cancer research. The first time images taken under the microscope were used in the fashion industry. Other followed later perhaps, but he paved the road. -Hr1kb5 (talk) 04:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done, your userpage was deleted via a deletion discussion; if you wish this overturned, you will need to file a motion at Deletion review, not here. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Revolution_System_Games

• Revolution_System_Games · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -Markanime (talk) 08:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

This page is about a company and is interesting to write about it because it appeared on several media like TV: |Televisión Española, |Canal Sur news on the internet: http://www.juegos.yopalandia.com/index.php/noticias/30960-decadence-se-presenta-en-sociedad http://frikarte.com/2013/03/decadence-se-presenta-en-steam-greenlight/ http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Decadence-Joins-Greenlight-Combines-Shenmue-With-Elder-Scrolls-54218.html

• Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

James Andanson

• James Andanson · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -182.188.146.227 (talk) 12:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Not done This WP:PROD was deleted 3 years ago. Even without references, there's no way the info would be even close to recent if undeleted (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

प्राचीन मिस्र का इतिहास

Page is submitted in hindi which is not available in hindi .hence it shold not be deleated this information is only in English -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkjairaj (talk • contribs) 18:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Not done Please look at the Hindi wikipedia for this article. The English wikipedia is for English articles. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Manchuker

• Manchuker · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Manchuker is a notable rapper in Taiwan and Mainland China; he has released 4 albums -Ajunrhim (talk) 02:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Ajunrhim/Manchuker. Please add sources that demonstrate notability before moving it back to mainspace. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Richard McIver

• Richard McIver · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Seattle politician, recently deceased. Deleted as non-notable (and the article wasn't much as it stood) but he served 3 terms (12 years) on the Seattle City Council (which has only 9 members, all elected citywide rather than from districts, so anyone on the council is elected in a district with half a million people). One of less than half a dozen African-Americans ever to serve on the Council. I think he's notable, the article was a perfectly good start, and should be restored as a basis to expand. -Jmabel | Talk 04:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Global Network for the Forecasting of Earthquakes

• Global Network for the Forecasting of Earthquakes · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd | afd2 ) · [revisions]

reasoning - 07:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

New sources makes it notable company now. below links Institute of Geophysics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. http://www.igph.kiev.ua/GNFE/GNFE_Halilov_ENG.htm Pakistan National Centre for Physics http://www.ncp.edu.pk/ces.php Isark Vali (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, 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 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Network for the Forecasting of Earthquakes (2nd nomination), 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 RegentsPark (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. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

DNS Service Discovery

• DNS Service Discovery · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I am not sure why this article was deleted. DNS-SD is one of three Zero Config technologies, each of which stands on its own and is defined by a separate RFC. The other two have their own Wikipedia articles, this one currently doesn't. IMHO, all articles relating to Zero Config need some work, which I anticipate doing, but they cannot be consistently structured unless this article is restored. -Joeldbenson (talk) 13:37, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done This was the article: "DNS service discovery is a sort of protocol used by Apple. In a nutshell, it puts SRV records in a DNS server.", and it was deleted in 2007 (the older versions were just links). I'd say better to write a new sourced article. Lectonar (talk) 13:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Root Catz

• Root Catz · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

reasoning -Htamraz (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

1.) The article was deleted because it had no notable information. (I didnt have time to update that "speedily" this is a wikipedia assignment for my college to see how effective wikipedia is.

i need time to do this, or can you tell me this goes against policy, and that will be fine.

thanks,

• Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about 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. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:12, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Rock & Roll Heart Attack

• Rock & Roll Heart Attack · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I'd like to have a copy of the finished article to resubmit later, the artist is notable, I was in the process of improving and contesting, what was the big hurry on this? -009o9 (talk) 23:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:009o9/Rock & Roll Heart Attack. It would be best to get an article for the artist accepted before re-posting this. JohnCD (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Toki Pona/Archive 1

• Talk:Toki Pona/Archive 1 · ( logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]

This talk page archive was deleted at a time when Toki Pona had been deleted. There is a deleted redirect to the archive called Talk:Toki Pona/Archive1, which is also linked to from Talk:Toki Pona; as this conforms to the current standard format for talk page archive titles, this should be the goal for the restoration. -Florian Blaschke (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done - I have done it as you asked, since the other archive from that page is "Archive2", but in fact the format described in Help:Archiving a talk page has the space between "Archive" and number. JohnCD (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Whoops, I missed that. Damn. I'd have asked to restore it to the original title (with space) then and move the other archive accordingly. Oh well, I dunno, perhaps you'd like to do that still, anyway, but it's not that important. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, both moved to titles with spaces. I didn't leave redirects: you might do "What links here" from the old titles in case any links need updating, but I doubt it. JohnCD (talk) 11:48, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Scottsdale Mall and Scottsdale Centre Mall

• Scottsdale Mall · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]
• Scottsdale Centre Mall · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Please restore both these articles to my userspace. Erskine Village, an alternative name to these two, has been created by me as a redirect to something else and it would appear, looking at the deletion discussions, that there are enough sources to warrant an article. -Launchballer 10:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC)