Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 94

< Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Archive 90 ← Archive 92 Archive 93 Archive 94 Archive 95 Archive 96 → Archive 100

The Amazing Race Canada 1

he page has proper cites and sources, the page has been written properly with links to related articles. A related article such as the The Amazing Race has sub articles for each season they produce as the page I've edited and created is similar too and is same as it. As a new editor and user under the Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers policy states; "This both discourages new editors and deprives Wikipedia of much-needed insights", "Assume good faith on the part of newcomers. They most likely want to help out. Give them a chance!". Also the article does not include any content that may violate the Wikipedia Terms and Conditions on Terms of Use. To the "no proof another season will be made: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazing_Race_1_(France) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Race_Philippines_1 has 1 season and has 2 pages 1 for the series and 1 for that particular season -EuroCarGT (talk) 19:50, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

As of 20:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC) the page has not been deleted yet and arguments have been provided on the user's talk page and the redirect's current talk page as to why the article is not necessary. WP:BITE does not say anything about removing newly created articles that are not helpful and there has been no rudeness given to the user who has been on this site for at least 1 year. It has been explained that The Amazing Race Canada already fulfills all the requirements of the proposed article, as currently visible to all in the page history, that EuroCarGT copied and pasted in a way that does not conform to the standards set by other articles. The arguments that other recent entries are set up this way are not suitable, as both have second seasons planned and as such are separated. EuroCarGT has been properly advised on these matters but is acting in a way unbecoming of a Wikipedia editor.—Ryulong (琉竜) 20:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Twistys

Factual information was provided with external, verifiable references. It does not promote any one person, site or service - it focused on the history/development of the site, with information completely verified and with consent from the original owner. No discussion was entered into as a warning. This page was simply deleted without contest. Please provide feedback on what can be improved and how this page is any different from any other page about a popular website. -Ila 20:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

  •   Not done The entire useful content of the page was "Twistys is a site on the web". This expresses no statement of why this web site is important. However you are welcome to write something in your sandbox that explains to the reader why this is important. The basic requirement is that other independent reliable people have written about it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Balloon 27

I, Byballoon27, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Byballoon27 (talk) 07:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

  Not done - this page is a copyright violation. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

2013/13 Ystalyfera RFC season

revision -DCGeorge (talk) 11:26, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Feitian Technologies Co.,Ltd

Having the same article name of a previously deleted article doent mean that the content is the same -NickyLarson29 (talk) 07:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

  • The editor above has contacted me, as deleting admin, and I've replied on his/her talk page. I haven't been asked to userfy the content Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Celinés

<Long, promotional copyright Spanish text removed>

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tito5918 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
  Not done. This is the English-language Wikipedia, but your submission was written in Spanish. Also, it is a copyright violation from http://www.angelfire.com/ct3/dvonct/celines.html
Esta es la Wikipedia en idioma inglés, pero el texto fue escrito en español. Además, se trataba de una violación de los derechos de autor de http://www.angelfire.com/ct3/dvonct/celines.html. JohnCD (talk) 15:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Mekaela Academies

The article was deleted by INeverCry in May and I have since edited the contents to eliminate promotional passages. The new text is in my sandbox of the same name, when the article is undeleted I will replace the old text with the new one -Stefan (talk) 13:25, 27 June 2013 (UTC) Stefan (talk) 13:25, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

User:MrOrigamiPants/Jennifer Margulis

reasoning -UniversitySeminar (talk) 20:25, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Revised entry indicate more notability of the subject (book reviews in major publications).

  •   Not done as User:MrOrigamiPants/Jennifer Margulis is not deleted. However for notability purposes we need to have two independent, reliable substantial references on the topic. I see things written by the subject, but not writings about the subject. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Quentin Angus

reasoning -TheBillAngus (talk) 01:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC) Surprised that this page was "speedily deleted" It was re edited before the deletion to include more information and links to verify the content. This was also indicated via the link to contest "speedy deletion" and several hours were spent modifying and linking sources to the page. The next evening I returned again to continue, only to find the page and all my work gone.Could I at least get the info back for re editing if I promise to do it in my "sandbox" now I understand the system a bit better? The page is information on a jazz performer and academic who has won several international awards for composition and recording and is played on Australia's national broadcaster, The ABC, as well as having huge radio airplay nationally in the USA. He is also a published academic with several papers to his name. How "famous" do you have to be to avoid deletion before the article is fine tuned?

TheBillAngus (talk) 01:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Fauna of the Cayman Islands

This was deleted in 2007 with the comment "non notable person" by an administrator who has since left the project. This was probably a mistake; Fauna of (country) is usually a notable topic. I did not create the article, but I found a helpful reference that I would like to add that would help to establish notability of the topic: S L Olson, H F James and C A Meister (1981). "Winter field notes and specimen weights of Cayman Island birds". Bulletin of The British Ornithologists' Club. 101: 339–346. -Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:23, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

  Not done. Unfortunately, it wasn't a mistake. Despite its title, that article contained nothing useful. It started: "Victor is the coolest being in the world because of these reasons/// He is the coolest He is the smartest... " and went on like that. Nor were there any useful earlier versions. I'm afraid you will have start from scratch. JohnCD (talk) 06:00, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Ayush Patnaik

reasoning -Ayush.patnaik1 (talk) 16:21, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Émile Poirier

Contested PROD. Meets WP:NHOCKEY as a 1st round NHL draft pick -Dolovis (talk) 21:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Fran Hauser

CorporateM marked this article for deletion saying that there is nothing special that meets Wikipedia standards, in Fran Hauser's article. We meticulously gathered all pieces of information together, every line, word, has the evidence! I was just present at the huge event in the Martha Stewart's office where Fran Hauser has been nominated for her distinguished contributions to GlobalGiving non-profit where she raised $100MM to save children's lives. Please help me to NOT delete this article - every single word is a true story in the shortest possible digestible format, but can be expanded to the eternity - please help us - [email address redacted] -agringaus 07:10, 28 June 2013 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Agringaus (talk • contribs) — Agringaus (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Who the hell is "we" in the above post? Are you Hauser? What position do you occupy in Time, Inc.'s publicity department? --Orange Mike | Talk 23:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I see: "Web Technology Fellow at Time Inc." --Orange Mike | Talk 23:46, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I got it now. --agringaus 16:58, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
By definition, information such as the town of her birth, her father's name, etc. is supposed to come from verifiable publication in neutral, reliable sources, not from co-workers, e-mail, phone calls and skypes, IMs to the subject's assistant, etc. None of what you list is acceptable here, completely aside from your history as a former Time Inc. employee who only writes about Time Inc. executives. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:40, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  •   Not done This "article" is up for deletion discussion and is not currently deleted. As such, there's nothing for this forum to act upon. Please review WP:DELETE and make policy-based comments on the AFD. Note that "WE" is an issue as role accounts and shared accounts are not permitted by policy. Conflict of interest editing is also extremely problematic, and be aware that such input into AFD discussions will typically be taken at less value. If you work for the company, do not write about people at the company. Although blunt, OrangeMike is right to ask questions and investigate breaches of policy. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I don't work for Time Inc., and this is not a consulting gig. I wanted to do this article because Fran Hauser helps raise consciousness for causes closest to people's hearts, children related. She's a goodwill ambassador. I'll keep working on improving the article. I now understand the reason for high standards. Thank you again. --agringaus 16:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Howler (magazine)

The magazine has now been published, is available internationally and is about to publish third issue. -151.226.30.181 (talk) 09:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

  •   Not done That most certainly does not make it notable. Existence is not a suitable inclusion criteria - it must be notable, and that notability must be confirmed by external third party sources (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:00, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
There are several high profile sources:
  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user Guillaume2303 (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. Please update the article and add your references. JohnCD (talk) 20:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

BanuAbbsMan-Arabia.jpeg

One of many useful images deleted wrongly with no discussion even though images are in the public domain with proper source and licensing information. -166.147.72.169 (talk) 02:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

  •   Not done picture is published 1932 which means it is not public domain in USA. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Old-Mutual-Place.jpg

A representative of Old Mutual Group has contacted OTRS with the appropriate licensing statement for the above photograph. The file was deleted before the request was able to be checked. This request can be found at OTRS ticket # 2013061810008594 -I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 03:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC).

Kristers Gudļevskis

Please restore the edit history for this recreated article -Dolovis (talk) 03:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Origjina e Allahut

reasoning -68.151.253.1 (talk) 10:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC) My article in Albanian titile "Origjina e Allahut", the Origin of Allah, was deleted June 30th by the user "Planeti". My article was properly cited, I essentially translated the English version of the article and included ALL my sources. The user claims the article is "not encyclopedia material" however, this is clearly untrue. Furthermore, the user anounces his religion to be 'Islam', so I suspect that he has deleted my article out of BIAS. Please undelete my article, and block this user from attempting to delete it in the future.

  Not done. Your article was not deleted here but on the Albanian Wikipedia, and that is where you must ask about it. Each Wikipedia is separate, with its own rules and standards. JohnCD (talk) 10:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Pawo Tsuglag Threngwa

Apparently an editor mistook a page about a sixteenth century Tibetan historian for advertising, perhaps the page was vandalized. If so, it should have been restored to an earlier version rather than speedily deleted. I would have contested the speedy deletion, but did not make it in time. -Tibetologist (talk) 22:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done. You are quite right. I have restored the pre-spam version. JohnCD (talk) 22:46, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Paper_Rabbit_Rope

was prodded before i could oppose, & the prod rules very clearly state that prodded pages will AUTOMATICALLY be restored if requested by any user. so i'm going to agf here... it's a notable japanese anime, with an extensive article in jp wiki. the admin who deleted it as nn has no interest in anime (based on their last 1000 edits & userpage); an editor with interest in & knowledge of the subject would not have done so -Lx 121 (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Lectonar (talk) 18:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thank-you! ^__^
side-note, i might have detected a small "bug" in the wp/wikidata interface...
before it was deleted, the article had an interwiki link to the ja version.
when it was restored, it did NOT (i had to hunt for the correct link & restore it manually, then re-enter the wikidata info)
it looks like the wikidata entry is modified when an article is deleted, BUT NOT modified/restored, when the article is restored.
if that's a consistent behavior, it's going to become a serious pain-in-the-ass...
does anyone else have info about this?
18:46, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
it's there now, but i think that's because i restored the wikidata entry for it (EVEN in the "history" pages). it DEFINITELY was not there, when i first checked the article, because i had to hunt for the link to the ja piece to re-add it.
do you happen to remember if it was there when you FIRST restored the page?
alternatively: could you check the next few deleted pages that you restore, to see if any of them restore WITH wikidata interwiki links (i realize that most pages might not have had interwiki links)?
OR: you could try re-deleting the paper rabbit rope page, wait 24 hours, then restore it again? just to see what happens. (if you do this, let me know, i want to see what happens @ wikidata when it's "gone)
Lx 121 (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I am rather sure it was there, but not 100%...I always look at the interwiki-links, because I am interested in languages, generally. To redelete this would be overkill, but I will look at the next article I restore, ok? Lectonar (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Douglas Moran (author)

reasoning -Mrtraska (talk) 22:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Is the objection here because he's a former businessman, now leadership coach, or because he's a consultant? Do consultants automatically get thrown out, or what?? This guy is a former public official, namely the former Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Resources of the state of Virginia. Why is that not worthy of note? Does the fact that he wrote a book after he left his government job disqualify him from consideration? I don't get the reasoning here at all. In fact, I think the person who deleted this page should be forced to explain why in much greater detail, because I certainly don't see grounds. If it's a question of removing some of the citations for interviews, that's one thing; removing an entire entry is quite another. Mrtraska (talk) 22:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done The article was deleted because it read like a big piece of puffery, essentially like advertising for Mr. Moran. Nonetheless, the deleting admin,Tokyogirl79, has offered to userfy the article to work upon it, so please contact the deleting admin. Lectonar (talk) 08:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm willing to userfy as long as you eliminate well, most of the material in the article. Now the problem about holding political positions is that most of the government positions aren't really anything that would give notability in and of itself. The higher the position the more likely they are to gain coverage, but it's not really a guarantee. If you're interested, give me a note on my talk page and I'll transfer a copy into your userspace. If I have the time, I'll remove all of the promotional and primary sources and give you the equivalent of a stub to work from. The thing to remember about primary sources (sources from the person himself or anyone representing or related to him) is that no matter how impressive you try to make them seem or how interesting the subject matter they cover might seem to be, no primary sources will ever show notability for a subject. It's actually better to avoid using them in general and I try not to use them until I've at least established some notability for whatever I'm writing about. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

TTTech

reasoning -Sathescha (talk) 06:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC) I feel this page was deleted too quickly. I saw it was discussed for deletion so I started editing and verifying a lot of the content. I corrected a lot of the things that were mentioned in the discussion for deletion, spending hours to add multiple sources. I would have been happy to discuss how to further improve the page - maybe a point or two could have been omitted and the language could have been improved too. But I don't understand how this could have been accused of being purely promotional when the page also included controversies and such. I have looked up the page because I'm a student at the Technical University of Vienna and I took several lectures with professor Poledna and professor Kopetz who are both founding members of this company and acknowledged in their field. I found the page to be informative. In addition, I have just seen last week that TTTech has won an export price by the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber so it is indeed a well known corporation here. I know you're not supposed to compare but I can't help thinking TTTech has partnerships with Audi, Boeing, Airbus etc. and if I look up those company pages they are no different from this one so in that context the deletion really seemed too fast to me. I have since continued working on the article - it is now in my sandbox. I hope for this deletion to be reconsidered.

  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/TTTech, 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 Y (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. Lectonar (talk) 06:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Timezones Curriculum Support Science Theatre

I, Subtexts, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Subtexts (talk) 08:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done Lectonar (talk) 08:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Everard Findlay

reasoning -CT EFLLC (talk) 13:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Please contact me in regards to why this article was deleted.

  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. Lectonar (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Rajeev Chawla

reasoning -Anirmukerji (talk) 06:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The page on Rajeev Chawla has been deleted by stating he is not a notable person. There are many public references including below

1 Princeton university doc 2 Forbes article 3 pm award news in major news papers 4 UN award where selection is on whole world basis for all worlds bureaucracy is amongst whom candidates are selected 5 tech museum award which is open to entrepreneurs across the world 6 capam award open to all Govts in commonwealth 7 IIT Kanpur alumuni award 8 world bank calling me for presentation on land related issues 9 OECD Experts meeting on innovating out of poverty in Paris 10 Nandan Nilekani in his book

Please undelete the article

  Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajeev Chawla, 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 Ymblanter (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. Lectonar (talk) 12:49, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

New Beginning (Advisory Group)

The grouping is a not-for-profit body legally representing and politically lobbying on behalf of those with distressed mortgages, and in negative equity. Especially those who can not afford representation with Banks who are seeking to repossess their homes. -Ruy costa (talk) 21:22, 3 July 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. And in terms of notability it does not really matter if they are fighting for a noble cause. Lectonar (talk) 08:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Covenant Eyes

prod delete and article is referenced from other pages making those pages less useful -24.180.241.210 (talk) 06:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Could someone remove the prod notices, please? Somehow I can not edit the article.....Lectonar (talk) 08:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Actually I can not edit any article...Lectonar (talk) 08:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Ok, activated visual editor, and now I can edit...this is weird...Lectonar (talk) 08:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Fresible Corporations

This page should be undeleted so as make necessary corrections to the reasons why it was deleted. Fresible Corporations is a Nigerian company with different divisions. Most of the links contained in the original article were improperly imputed and the company net worth improperly calculated. Fresible Corporations is a Nigerian registered company, their should be no reason why this page should be deleted. It is legitimate and if all necessary mistakes are corrected on the article, it will better show how reputable the company is. -41.206.15.140 (talk) 12:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fresible Corporations, 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 SarahStierch (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. Lectonar (talk) 12:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Such a coincidence...someone just recreated the whole article. To whom it may concern: this is definitely not the way forward. I deleted it as a recreation of an article deleted via articles for deletion. Lectonar (talk) 20:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Women organized to resist and defend

Article blanked by author and thereafter speedily deleted after editor was bitten by other editors. Author has returned and requested undeletion per this revision. Having seen the article before it was deleted, the editor was making a good-faith attempt to improve based on copyvio and promotional tone concerns. -I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 00:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

craigslist

reasoning -24.30.138.20 (talk) 01:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Philippe Padovani

This page was delete under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Yesterday, the owner of the copyrighted material has email to permissions-commons at wikimedia.org his consent to donate his material 20:58, 2 July 2013 (UTC)~~ -Reydelhi (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide us with a bit more information? ORTS ticket Nr. etc? Lectonar (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

This speedy deletion notice came to me from Way2veers 06:26, 30 June 2013 (UTC), I do not notice a ORTS Ticket nr. What additional information are you requesting? This is my first time dealing with this type of issue and this process. I was instructed by Way2veers to go to this page to request undoing the deletion. I will forward whatever information you require. Let me know what you need. Reydelhi (talk) 21:33, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

FYI: for text, you can send an email, ideally using the language from the template at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries:

(1) From an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org; (2) After sending the email, place {{OTRS pending}} on the article's talk page. Someone will reply to your email, indicating whether the content and your license is acceptable and update the page to indicate that the confirmation of the license has been received. So someone should have replied to the email, and that is the info that is required. Lectonar (talk) 08:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Will have the copyright owner re-email the donation permission as instructed. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. 67.53.217.163 (talk) 22:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Mark Fischbach

reasoning -Unknownrostam (talk) 13:50, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Fischbach is considered a Youtube celebrity and has a very fast-growing Youtube channel, with 1/2M subscribers in a year.

  • This appears to be a response to a declined AFC request, and is therefore offtopic. Either revise the AFC submission or discuss with the declining editor. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:42, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
  • No, it was submitted as an article and deleted per WP:CSD#A7. JohnCD (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
  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. JohnCD (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Dad's Garage Theatre Company

The deleting user cited my company as a non-notable group, which is untrue. We're an 18 year-old professional theatre company with a million dollar per year budget, and the largest improv company in the South-Eastern United States. We're not a fluke. Here's a link to our website for verification. The deleting user also cited lack of reliable independent sources -- here's a video piece on CNN about us that should cover that. -Linneapants (talk) 17:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user Wikipedical (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. Please add references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish Wikipedia:Notability - all the existing references that work are to one local site. JohnCD (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Balinese cuisine

Apparently there was a list article there previously that I would like to have a look at. Would an administrator kindly move whatever was there to my sandbxo so I can have a look? Thank you kindly. Candleabracadabra (talk) 20:25, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Replied on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 21:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. If that is the content in its entirety that's all I needed. Carry on. :) Candleabracadabra (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Tom Barnard Podcast

The tom barnard podcast was one of the most downloaded new podcast of 2012 and page that was sent up is very similar to other slightly more popular (and longer running)podcast pages. - Wjugovich (talk) 03:15, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done. This cannot be undeleted because it was almost entirely a copyright violation from www.tombarnardpodcast.com and other sites. Please read Wikipedia:Copy-paste. Even apart from the copyright issue, an encyclopedia is not a place to simply copy endless plot summaries from the show's website, and any Wikipedia article needs references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish Wikipedia:Notability. I suggest you add a (brief) description of the podcast to the article Tom Barnard and provide a link from there to the website for anyone who wants all the detail. . JohnCD (talk) 13:03, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Richard R. Pieper, Sr.

The subject is a notable Milwaukee figure who was awarded the BizTimes Lifetime Achievement Award for his many philanthropic endeavors and his innovative servant leadership approach to business. -107.201.13.145 (talk) 17:33, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

  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. Puff piece and resume for very obscure local businessman here in town. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:58, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Egyptian Infobox.jpg

File was made up of images from wikipedia commons (with sources) and one personal image from my own Flickr account, but it was deleted inappropriately and was said to be a blatant copyright violation without discussion. -76.212.121.208 (talk) 02:00, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

  •   Not done There is a stated issue with the image of Mohamed Mounir. There is no proof about this being a free image. Actually there are 33 images in your collage, and 3 have no explanation. However if you can prove the suitable license of the last 3 images you have a chance to have this restored. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:41, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Dr Reza Ghorbhani.jpg

Deleted per F7 speedy deletion. Editor has provided an appropriate license from the copyright holder per VRTS ticket # 2013070110006982. Requesting undeletion as ticket agent. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 16:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done. Please annotate accordingly. JohnCD (talk) 17:01, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Nagesh Chawla

reasoning -Shoopyinc (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC) Nagesh Chawla helped bring his hotel back up after the bombings in 2009 happened. I don't think it should be deleted as he did great things.

  •   Not done the page was promotional and yet did not make a clear claim of importance. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Malta International Music Master Classes

reasoning -Wangran26 (talk) 19:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC) This is perfectly informative page, that provides with info about courses and ecducational programs. There are many pages of a similar content, but not highlighting the programs is such a clear way. It is a very useful page, helping our readers to get answers on their questions. That is what the Wikipedia was created for! Thanks

Walter Chalá

He plays for FC Neftekhimik Nizhnekamsk in the fully professional football league Russian National Football League links

Truth In Action Ministries

Well known Christian Organization founded by Dr. D. James Kennedy -CharlieVIE (talk) 19:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Good afternoon,

I created a page for Truth In Action Ministries today and it was flagged for deletion right after I saved the first draft of it. I was editing the information posted and had to go to a meeting, so I logged off and came back 20 minutes later to find that the page was deleted. All my information I edited was gone. No remark why or a chance to justify my page. My reply on the talk page was obviously ignored. I created the page with my account CharlieVIE.

Would you please be so kind to clarify as to why my page was delete and would you be able to instruct me on how I can create a page that will be accepted?

Our Ministry was founded by Dr. D. James Kennedy, who has a page on Wiki. We were formerly known as Coral Ridge Ministries (CRM) and that page for CRM was redirected to Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church. This was wrong, though we were both founded by Dr. Kennedy, we are not affiliated what so ever.

I eagerly await your answer. May God Bless you and thank you for your time.


Charlie Artner Senior Web Developer

At least part of the article was copy and pasted from http://www.truthimpact.me/index.php/about/‎ GB fan 20:05, 8 July 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. The copyvio makes this even more unrefundable. Lectonar (talk) 20:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Oh, and please read this. Lectonar (talk) 20:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
...and this. JohnCD (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

XpoLog

reasoning -Haimko (talk) 21:33, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

1. The article was originally deleted since we did not get the time to edit it. 2. There many similar pages like Splunk, Loggly and others with info both on technology and products and you guys keep deleting our page only. 3. We embedded general concepts of technology into the page which are very important and changed today technology

Mark DeSantis

Contested PROD -Dolovis (talk) 03:14, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro-urban

I believe this page should be restored. While a relatively new urban planning concept, its use is appropriate and novel. Though infrequently visited (as evidenced by the PROD period passing), it was a useful source of information. Ironically the discovery of its deletion was at the time I was going to add information to this page and as well reference it for a research paper. I would note I am not the originator nor related to those the term originated with, just find it useful. If certain aspects of the page need to be cleaned up and/or added to, I'm happy to contribute. Thanks! -WikiWesty (talk) 04:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. -WikiWesty

Bosch Chassis Systems India Ltd., Jalgaon

reasoning -Coolgama (talk) 10:54, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I think this page Bosch Chassis Systems India Ltd., Jalgaon needs to be restored as it is an important article regarding the workwise complany Bosch who has manufacturing set up at Jangaon. The article is not the advertise of this company on the other hand is written with right references. and have good scope for expantion the way Tata motors can be.

  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. Lectonar (talk) 11:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

CAIO Induscar

This is a large International bus manufacturer not unlike any other that has been included in Wikipedia -BlaineMasterson (talk) 12:49, 9 July 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. And concerning your argument about the existence of other articles, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Lectonar (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

MitPeck

Contains notable song 'Beastly'. Widely covered. -Jbass3586 (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mit Peck, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Spartaz (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Tiferet Journal

Article is not spam, nor intended to be advertising, rather, as with many other publications that appear on Wikipedia, it is an explanation and history of the Journal's existence and contribution to the literary world. If it still does not fit the criteria, could you kindly be specific as to what needs to be edited to fit Wikipedia's criteria? Many thanks. -Tinfoilrose (talk) 23:25, 9 July 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. Hm, let me quote.... "Tiferet aims to further meaningful dialog about what it is to be human and conscious in an often contradictory and confusing world"..... "are dedicated to promoting peace and tolerance and to furthering an understanding of the creative process". If you can not see why this was deemed advertising (I agree with this evaluation, btw), we can not help you. Also see WP:COI, WP:NOBLE and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Lectonar (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Fran_Hauser

the page has very decent content, I am working on improving it. it was deleted without warning, and I don't understand why this page was marked for a speedy deletion - there is nothing in there that would not be a candidate for improvement. This is not fair. I can delete hundreds of other pages that have a lot worse content now. -agringaus 10:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fran Hauser, 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 Mark Arsten (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) 10:38, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sencha Inc.

I, Sgmarch, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Sgmarch (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done - this page is a copyright violation. Another reason for deletion was the fact that it was a copyright violation (G12); we do not restore copyvios. Lectonar (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Shivbramhapota

reasoning -Shivbramh (talk) 18:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC) It is historically established. The supporting books are in custody of erstwhile Maharaja of Jaipur. On geography it is established. There are many more records.

  Please repair your request - we cannot process malformed requests. Please use the code {{subst:refund|pageName|reasoning}} (replacing pagename with the name of the page you wish to have restored). Did you perhaps mean Sheobramhpota? Lectonar (talk) 18:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Karen Pryor

New hire at Karen Pryor Clicker Training to copyedit, research, and justify previously un-cited content. Karen Pryor is a prominent figure in her field and is the identifiable face of an entire philosophy of animal training and behavior modification. She has expanded this philosophy with her parent company (Karen Pryor Clicker Training) and an academy for animal training professionals. Pryor lectures both domestically and internationally, in addition to hosting two company-specific expositions each year. -70.88.200.153 (talk) 19:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. What this article needs most are reliable sources, and I would urge you to add them as soon as possible. Lectonar (talk) 19:14, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
It absolutely reeks of promotion and bias. I've cleaned out a little of the very worst stuff. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Cindy Siegel

reasoning -Waterrockhannah (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC) My reason for the not deletion is because in the article, Cindy Siegel was written as important because she was the mayor of Bellaire, Texas for two terms.

  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. Small-town mayor; fails WP:POLITICIAN. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
The article has been recreated and is now at AfD. Lectonar (talk) 12:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I have speedy deleted the article again. Lectonar (talk) 13:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

David S. Wills

The reason cited by administrators for the deletion of the David S. Wills page was the lack of notability of the subject, Mr. Wills. Mr. Wills' recent book on the author, William S. Burroughs, and his relationship with Church of Scientology, in addition to his work on the Beat Generation with Beat magazine, would suggest that he does indeed has the requisite notability for a Wikipedia article. -175.100.32.160 (talk) 07:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David S. Wills, 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 Joe Decker (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. Lectonar (talk) 07:23, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

rsinghduhan

reasoning -Rahduhan (talk) 14:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

  •   Not done - a deleted page with this name does not appear to exist.. You personally have no other edits to Wikipedia, so I cannot find anything to undelete (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

rsinghduhan

about a user of wikipedia -rsinghduhan 14:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done I did not find a deleted userpage with that name. Lectonar (talk) 17:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
And for the article page   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. Lectonar (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SchoolDesk

I, 50.138.127.21, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. 50.138.127.21 (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not done The draft could have been deleted as a G11 (advertisement) easily, as it was extremely promotional. If another admin wishes to restore nonetheless, feel free. Lectonar (talk) 19:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Murder of Shaima Alawadi

Although I have not been as active in the past due to being busy with real life (including work) and did not see this AfD I would like to contest the articles deletion. The event which is the subject of the AfD occurred in March 2013, for a brief period the event received international attention, and coverage lasted well into 2013. IMHO this meets WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE, although coverage has fallen regarding the trail that doesn't mean that the event is therefore not notable, see WP:DEGRADE. -RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

If we look at the coverage, it received significant coverage in the many months after the event occurred, with the last major article written in January 2013, this maybe due to the fact that after the pleading, the next trial regarding the case will not occur until 25 July 2013

Next Court Date: Preliminary Exam, Jul 25 2013 8:15AM, Department 11, San Diego Superior Court, East County Division, East County Regional Center

— San Diego County District Attorney, 10 July 2013
.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I will not template you, so....first I would contact Mark Arsten, as he closed the AfD; if he does not restore the article, deletion review should be the next step. They are quite good at evaluating things like these. All this because I do not think the undeletion would be uncontroversial. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 20:36, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bradyon

I, Dimension10, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Dimension10 (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_94&oldid=1140261364"