Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 151

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 145←Archive 149Archive 150Archive 151Archive 152Archive 153→Archive 155

Raksha Changappa

Kindly let me edit the article to meet Wiki standards. -Polymath0 (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G11. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cassette-Translifter System

I, Liftec ASA, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Liftec ASA (talk) 11:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:14, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Wes Malik

I, 101.50.93.104, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 101.50.93.104 (talk) 10:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Wasif Husaini (Politician)

Not given reference for this article,, but now I got it at: http://fciweb.nic.in/upload/Rti/State_Consultative_Committee_LIST_25112011_eng.pdf -Masoomf (talk) 13:51, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Got anything else? That reference is just a list, not coverage of the subject. See Wikipedia:Golden rule for a general overview of what we require. I'm reluctant to restore an article that will be deleted anyway soon after restoration, if that is the only reference you can find. Furthermore, that reference doesn't really support any of the assertions in the biography. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:54, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Muhammed Ragib Nizam

The Title is correct and true evidence of a Person Who is an author Form Bangladesh and this page should not be deleted because the external links of blogs Carries his/her name. then click the "Save page" button below -Jisan.ctg (talk) 13:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion A7. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. The number of blogs that have written about him doesn't matter, as we don't accept blogs as sources unless the blogger is an renowned expert speaking on a matter relevant to his field. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 17:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Robyn Goss

I, Tntjim, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Tntjim (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Clash with Titles reason for deletion.No need for deletion now!!

It was a clash with tiltes lead to the speedy deletion but now the problem is solved and that page can continue it's sucessful working and then click the "Save page" button below -Wellwisherobliged (talk) 03:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)


It was a problem with the titles.So no need for further deltion of this page.As tagged by the user.And that tag was {{db-7}} something like that -Abinpbiju (talk) 03:56, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I'm merging these two requests, since they're for the same article. Also, the current reason for deletion appears to be over notability rather than what the church is or isn't named. The original nominator looks like they want to withdraw, but the issue is that if other editors believe that there is a valid reason for deletion (usually notability issues) then the AfD will remain open. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Deo's Closet

Enter your {{AFC submission|||ts=20140902055957|u=Jhedai19|ns=4}} here and then click the "Save page" button below -Jhedai19 (talk) 05:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done We typically do not restore WP:A7 articles, as we try to get the deleting admin to OK the page's restoration, but in this case it was also deleted as WP:G11, unambiguous advertising. I'm sorry, but it was just far, far too promotional to restore. I'm also a little concerned over the store's notability, as you will have to prove notability via independent and reliable sources (WP:RS). No matter what good causes the store might be working towards, all articles must establish notability per WP:GNG. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Luke Hunt

I, Zonefocus, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Zonefocus (talk) 04:10, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I'll get back to finding examples; Luke Hunt's byline appears in several outlets, some including a photo byline that matches his Twitter avatar. It's apparent that he exists and reports and writes analyses for major news outlets, which presumably are trustworthy enough to bolster his case as a Wikipedia journalist entry -Zonefocus (talk) 04:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I do have to warn you that being a journalist does not automatically show notability for someone. While we would like to have proof that he wrote for various places, they will only be considered WP:PRIMARY sources and cannot give notability as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by Hunt working for notable papers and organizations. What we need would be things like news articles and the like that are written about Hunt specifically and go into depth about him. Things that only mention him in brief are considered to be WP:TRIVIAL sources. What makes this somewhat more difficult is that if the article has been written by someone who has employed him, it would pretty much be considered a primary source that cannot give notability. The only exception would be if the paper was writing about a major award he had won that would help extend notability. But as a rule, just writing for notable publications does not make a journalist notable in and of itself. It may make coverage more likely, but it is not a guarantee as there are a large amount of journalists out there that are well-known but never receive the necessary coverage to be considered notable. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Sunil Dutta

The article has been deleted based on a political controversy going on. As such, it is a deletion based on politics and prejudice. -Heather1964 (talk) 06:30, 2 September 2014 (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/Sunil Dutta, 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 Deor (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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:40, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
  • @Heather1964: Please do not accuse other editors of operating out of a prejudice against a specific person. Please assume that everyone was operating out of WP:GOODFAITH, as the major concern seems to be that Dutta had really only received coverage over the article (WP:ONEEVENT), as it mostly pertained to the events in Ferguson. (Which means that the concern would be that at most, Dutta would be mentioned in an appropriate section in the Ferguson page and not have his own article.) Right now it's too soon to say that the article Dutta wrote would be of such lasting notability that it would be considered notable per Wikipedia's guidelines, so I can see why the AfD closed as a delete. You can bring this up at deletion review, but I would highly recommend that you not say that it was deleted out of any sort of bias against Dutta, Ferguson, or so on. Claims like that are usually fairly poorly received because in most instances the accusations are unfounded and the claims usually end up backfiring as far as the accuser goes. I understand that you must be angry, but please do not make accusations because you are upset. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:40, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
  • If you do go to deletion review, I'd argue for notability based upon coverage in reliable sources and provide as much coverage as you can- preferably new ones that were not previously on the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Scott Victor Gutierrez

More Time To Edit To make It verifiable -Scott_Victor_Gutierrez 10:38, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kim Perry

I, Kp4kids, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Kp4kids (talk) 02:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:BP Analytics

I, Maurice2008, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Maurice2008 (talk) 16:07, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Jerrett9000/Lobstick

I, Jerrett9000, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jerrett9000 (talk) 17:20, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 18:45, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Sun Liangang

It's an introduction of a celebrity in China. We will add references. -Yolanda416 (talk) 18:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

no Declined. Yolanda416, that article was so blatantly promotional that there is no benefit to the Wikipedia project in restoring it. Please use Facebook for such material. And who is "we"?
You can try submitting it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation instead. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/U-part wigs

I, 78.149.243.100, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 78.149.243.100 (talk) 23:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to make the necessary edits to comply with your rules and have the article published pleased. -78.149.243.100 (talk) 00:02, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done I'm sorry, but the deleted version was very promotional and would require a complete re-write in order to make neutral. It also reads as if it was taken from a press release or company website, meaning that there's also a concern about potential WP:COPYVIO, which would also keep us from restoring the article. Feel free to start a new, fresh copy in the AfC space, however. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:56, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  • On a side note, please avoid using phrases that start like this: "Belo's idea was so fantastic in delivering realistic hairlines that it was an instant success amongst the hair industry". The thing is, no matter how frequently you tell us how fantastic or revolutionary something is, it's still seen as promotional and we would still require coverage in independent and reliable sources per WP:RS. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ Automated Function Point

I, Depot75, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Depot75 (talk) 05:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Calarts School of Dance

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Cyberpuke 03:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC) Hello, I am requesting the retrieval of the CalArts School of Dance page. When it was developed, it was thorough and information, and I plan on incorporating it within the main CalArts page that is sensible and meet Wikipedia's standard. Thanks.

It's not under that title. Is the capitalisation accurate (Wikipedia articles are case-sensitive)? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:53, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Other pages that may be of interest to Cyberpuke include CalArts School of Film/Video, Gregory Ecklund. I have restored the early history of Aaron Rose. The is also Sharon Disney Lund School of Dance, but this is just a redirect. Is any of this what you want back? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Hello, this article I am searching for did not originate from me. However, I do know it existed. It could be Sharon Disney Lund School of Dance.Cyberpuke
  • @Cyberpuke: The problem is, there doesn't seem to be any article by that name and the only thing we can find is a redirect with no article history. Meaning, it started as a redirect and was never an article. I think that you may be forced to just start a new article on this, as I can't find anything out there in AfC or in the mainspace. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  • @Tokyogirl79:. Does the speeling count? Would it help to search for "CalArts School of Dance" or even, "CalArts School Of Dance". I know at one point it was link to the main CalArts if that helps with the search. Cyberpuke
  • @Tokyogirl79:. UPDATE: I looked into it myself, and I believe I found it. It should be under the title "The Sharon Disney Lund School of Dance". Please let me know if that works. thanks!! 08:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
That "article" was created as a redirect 1.5yrs ago. It was never a separate article, but always pointed to the more notable topic: the university overall the panda ₯’ 08:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  • @Cyberpuke: That's the one- I'll restore it, but... it has some issues with promotional prose. For the most part it's fine, but then we'll have sentences like this one: " Blau took the lead in designing a radical educational model that favors independent artistic work over rigid curricula, collegial relationships among a diverse community of artists over hierarchies of teacher and student, and continuous interaction and cross-pollination among the different branches of the arts over the self-containment of each discipline" Definitely inappropriate for Wikipedia, but the overall article isn't so bad that I'd decline restoring it based on that. I'll restore the history and move it to your userspace. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Done I've moved it to draftspace at Draft:The Sharon Disney Lund School of Dance. I've removed the sentence I've quoted above, but the whole article needs re-writing in places for neutrality- the description of the various degrees is a key example of why it got nominated for WP:G11, but again- it's not so bad that I'd be totally against restoring. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:39, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vladimir Pakhomov

I, Kirill24, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Kirill24 (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Aditya Kudaravalli

I want this to represent myself.. There are many Celebrity profile. They are not useful. But why are you accepting them and deleting my page? -Blackdhoom (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. There was no indication whatsoever that the article was about a notable person. See Wikipedia:Autobiographies and WP:COI - you should not be writing about yourself in the first place. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Rredinger2014/sandbox

I, Rredinger2014, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Rredinger2014 (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 19:23, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dmytro Morykit

I, 109.146.86.108, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 109.146.86.108 (talk) 16:55, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 21:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Death(novel)

I, Timee5, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Anthony Avram (talk) 23:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 23:51, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Michael Felgate

Needed information -Paralimni (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done. The article has been deleted via an AfD twice (see here and here). REFUND is for restoration requests that can be performed uncontroversially. If you feel that the deletion discussion was closed in error you can ask the community to reevaluate it at deletion review, though I don't think that will be successful unless there are significant new sources available. Protonk (talk) 14:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Ahmed Gheselbash

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Ahmed Gheselbash (talk) 14:47, 4 September 2014 (UTC) please can you send the page back

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Braden Diotte

I, Skinwalker66, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Skinwalker66 (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - @Skinwalker66: as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:26, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vizion Interactive

I, Joshuatitsworth, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Joshuatitsworth (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@Joshuatitsworth: The page is not deleted (as you can see from the blue link page title above) and was restored by User:Tokyogirl79, after your request back on August 14.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:45, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

PAW Patrol

I, Babita arora, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G11. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Babita arora 04:54, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ETSOMNA

I, ETSOMNA, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. ETSOMNA (talk) 16:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

@ETSOMNA: Not done The submission was nothing more than a highly promotional paragraph and a large list of external links. Subjects must meet the notability guidelines for inclusion, and as the one paragraph stated, the artist is not yet known. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

ollia alexandra rarisame

This page should not be speedily deleted because Ollia Rarisame is a famous person in London. She has been working on a fashion label called Rarisame which is quite famous there in. She is a daughter of politician from Russia and is well known from that time. About her popularity, she was recently covered by one of the top 10 fashion magazines on globe i.e Vogue and GQ.

She is regularly been covered by famous blogs around Europe and India. Her interviews are getting published at many places.

I believe, she is slowly becoming a public figure and should be given allowance to be on Wiki page -Mukul91086 (talk) 11:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. There is no benefit to the Wikipedia project in restoring an article that does nothing but promote the subject. It would have to be re-written from scratch in a more neutral fashion. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prefessional U

Ddragon609 (talk) 15:51, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

User: Rochelle Coleman

The page was deleted because it violated G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. This violation occurred by accident. I am new to creating Wikipedia articles so my ignorance led me to violating G11. In fact, I am not Rochelle Coleman. I am a friend of hers who thought it would be cool to share her unique and interesting life story. When I created the website I added two external links, one to Rochelle's current company, and the other the website of the professional basketball team she used to play on. I now realize that those external links were red flags because they blatantly advertised those organizations. That was not my intention. I linked them because it was a feature I saw was available, I was unaware it would violate G11. To summarize my statement, I want this page to be brought back as a draft. This way I can edit the page and remove all of the aspects which violated G11. I apologize for violating one of Wikipedia's rules, it was sincerely unintentional and if you decide to bring back the page I can assure you I will be more careful in what I post, in order to avoid violating any more rules. Also, I have requested to change my username as to not confuse editors. The editor that deleted the page thought I was Rochelle Coleman, which is completely understandable and 100% my error. Thank you for your time and I hope you decide to bring back the page. I worked hard on it and a small error led me to go through all of these steps. -Rochelle Coleman (talk) 19:08, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I apologize for the confusion. I was working under the username Rochelle Coleman because I thought the name of my account would be the title of the article I wrote. I now realize this was not the case. Secondly, I changed my account name to Club Member in an attempt to avoid confusion. I am now working under the account username Club Member, and would like to have the page "User: Rochelle Coleman" brought back, at least as a draft, so I can edit it into a new article (with proper changes made). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Club Member (talk • contribs) 04:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I have restored the article to your user space at User:Club Member/Rochelle Coleman. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

messengers from the sexual frontier

Messengers from the Sexual Frontier · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Hey there, Ahecht tagged my article for speedy deletion because he felt it was not substantiated properly, I would just like to have a dialogue with you to see if we can work together to restore it. It was very difficult to attain the information that I did and it was a lot of tracking people down and talking to them in order to get the full story. In my exchange with Ahecht I cited the wiki page for shitting glitter and how it mentions recruiting the bass player from MFTSF and I also mentioned that if Shitting Glitters page is allowed to exist then so should this one. He stated that the SG page was borderline but passable. If relevance on other references would help my cause, could we please discuss it so that I may attempt to add whatever items that are needed to validate and undelete the page I created... Thank you in advance for your help

BeforeTheirTime (talk)BeforeTheirTime — Preceding undated comment added 19:38, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

@BeforeTheirTime: Hi BeforeTheirTime. There might be nothing wrong with your write up about the band for some other venue (although there is a copyright issue that might be a problem anywhere). I see you did a lot of hard work. Unfortunately there are a number of problems with your write up as an encyclopedia article, and because of that, it cannot be undeleted and does not look like it would ever be a suitable topic for an article here. I am willing to email you a copy of the parts of the article that were not copied from online content. You will need to enable your email however, which it's not currently. (Just go to your preferences, scroll down to Email options at the bottom of the page, enter an email address, confirm it.) A large problem is that you have copied a large portion of copyrighted content. Even if it was in quotes, which it was not (even though you do indicate its someone's else's writing in the text) it's far too large a quote to meet fair use. Second, the text itself indicates that the band is not notable as we use that word here to mean the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Which also indicates (as does statements in you request above, that you tracked down members to write it) that the content is reportage – original new content that is not already reported elsewhere by primary and secondary sources out in the world. Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is a tertiary source, and it thus never properly contains original research. Again, I commend the effort, but this is the wrong venue for it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Downloadsoftwaregratisan.com

its usefull for indonesian comunity information -Firmanh19 (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

But is it useful for the worldwide Wikipedia readership? It was not deleted until you brought it here; I restored the CSD tag wrongfully removed, and have indeed deleted it since you got here. Notability according to our standards is not negotiable the panda ₯’ 22:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Ghost Rider (motorcyclist)

Request this be brought back (prefer in draft space) so I can work with WikiProject Motorcycling to add new reliable sources. The Swedish wikipedia article has at least one, here are some others: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] -Brianhe (talk) 18:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

You can see the sources formatted here: User:Brianhe/sandbox#Ghost Rider — Brianhe (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, moved draft to to draft:Ghost Rider (motorcyclist) (location noted for the archives). — Brianhe (talk) 02:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Garment sewing data

This page should be undeleted since it could be a important piece of information for people that wanted to sew something -58.33.91.112 (talk) 09:39, 6 September 2014 (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/Garment sewing data, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Alternately you could start a page at WP:AFC. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Leneka Rhoden

Enter your I have updates on the person's progress here and then click the "Save page" button below -Leneka Rhoden (talk) 04:18, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:15, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freethought Student Alliance

I, Ultratempum, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Ultratempum (talk) 17:29, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:40, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kv Sanjit

I, Ghousecg, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Ghousecg (talk) 05:48, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

FALSE

The reference to this interesting subject on minimalistic programing language from other articles is broken - I don't know the deleted content of the Wikipedia page but it should have been similar to this

FALSE is a stack-based programing language with single-character commands and variables. It was implemented in the 1990 as a dialect of the FORTH progamming languages. It has put influence on other minimalistic programming languages that build up the mind for Turing completeness in very short implementations. For example, 3 + 1 can be written in FALSE by evaluating (λ x → x + 1)(3): 3[1+]!

--- my contribution for your discussion on restoring the deleted content: FALSE is an example of computer programming history that is often referred to in teaching computer science - so it should be part of wikipedia. Some other ressources/links that may help to decide that the subject is worth undeletion or at least deserve a stub to these: - the esoterric programming language: http://esolangs.org/wiki/FALSE - a description of the history from the originator: http://strlen.com/false-language - an implementation of FALSE in the programming language K: http://www.nsl.com/papers/false.htm

Thanks. -84.119.66.146 (talk) 10:35, 7 September 2014 (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/FALSE, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. the panda ₯’ 11:05, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Great_Lakes_Institute_of_Management

The page just had the information about one of the Business School and was categorised into its Accreditation, Campus with some external links as per the references. I dont think there was some advertising of promotion done through the page. Also, there are multitude of pages like the one I posted and they look to be having much more promotional content. e.g. of such pages are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_Development_Institute, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellogg_School_of_Management. Please let us know what kind of content should I write to ensure that the page stays there. -Dsachdeva123 (talk) 09:47, 7 September 2014 (UTC) Dsachdeva123 (talk) 09:47, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: The use of phrases like "ultra-modern" and "world-class" are certainly WP:PEACOCK terms that should never be in an encyclopedia. Note: never compare things to another article, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is never a good way to do things. It is possible that this topic does meet notability requirements, but nowhere in the article did you address those. Articles like this should never be drafted in articlespace - you should either create a draft in your userspace or use Articles for Creation until the "article" meets the minimum requirements the panda ₯’ 11:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

COMMONDEER

Please restore to user space for select incorporation into NSA ANT catalog -{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 01:02, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@Elvey: I restored it to User:Elvey/COMMONDEER. There wasn't much there, just 3 sentences and 3 references. When you're done with it, tag it with {{db-u1}} to re-delete it. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:05, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
TY. OK. Working on making a template at the moment.--{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 15:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

European Nuclear Education Network

It was the European Nuclear Education Network who has created the article in Wikipedia to inform the public of the purpose and actions of our international nonprofit organization. It is necessary that the article is restored and that somehow we can protected it from future similar actions. Please read the Disclaimer at the bottom of the page: http://www.enen-assoc.org/en/about/what-is-enen.html -PedroMadrid1976 (talk) 10:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

It is good to see that you can put a notice on the web site. However Permission to publish only on Wikipedia is not what we want here. Instead we need you to state that the content is licensed under a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. This allows use by anyone for any purpose. If you are willing to release content from your website with this license, tell us here once you have changed that "disclaimer". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:32, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
@PedroMadrid1976: I will add that the article cannot be protected as you desire. Anyone can edit it, and if the community decides in the future that the article should be deleted, then it will be deleted. If it exists for publicity purposes only, as you suggest is the case above, then the article is not likely to survive here. Wikipedia is not to be used as a publicity medium. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:55, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
@PedroMadrid1976: I also want to throw my two cents in. Personally I recommend re-writing everything. The problem with giving the content up as fair use and all that is that the page will continually get people coming in and pinging it as "copyvio" before realizing that you've given it up as fair use. Not only that, but the other problem is that since it was taken from the ENEN's official website, there will be some promotional type prose somewhere in the written material. What that means is that it will run the risk of sounding promotional and getting nominated as WP:G11 (promotion). Long story short, you will save the article a lot of time and scrutiny in the long run if you just re-write everything and put it in your own words. Not only will you save the article a lot of negative scrutiny (as well as people assuming that you are trying to misuse Wikipedia as a place to advertise for ENEN, which never looks good for any group), but it'll also potentially save time in the long run with re-writes and all that are usually inevitable in most cases where someone posts potential copyvio. It's not the worst I've seen and for the most part it's neutral-ish, but I'd just recommend a re-write in your own words for ENEN's sake. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:17, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett:@Amatulic:@Tokyogirl79:Thank you for your inputs and suggestions. Just to clarify that the purpose of the article is not publicity, but encyclopedic information. Following your advises, I have taken two actions: 1st) I have rewritten the whole article with my own words. 2nd) I have rewritten the disclaimer in the ENEN website to: "Disclaimer: ENEN allows the wikipedia user "PedroMadrid1976" to publish content in the Wikipedia article of the "European Nuclear Education Network" under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license." -PedroMadrid1976 (talk) 15:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Curtis Books

Spurious PROD deletion, creator not notified -The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 10:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. However, it currently fails the notability requuirements for companies and is apt to be deleted under criterion A7 of the speedy deletion criteria at any time. Yunshui 雲水 12:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Curtis Books, again

Undeleted at my request earlier today, but immediately speedied, apparently on the theory that having been a significant American book publishing house for more than fifty years isn't important enough to even merit a discussion. -The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: checkY Userfied to User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz/Curtis Books so that you can add an assertion of significance, and preferably some references. The two-sentence article says only that it is "An imprint of" Modern Literary Editions Publishing Company (which has no article). It also says "There is no connection between this publisher and the Curtis Publishing Company", which was the target of the redirect you originally created. JohnCD (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NOAH (musician)

I, 104.162.204.63, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 104.162.204.63 (talk) 13:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Read WP:Your first article for advice, and note the need for references to verify what the article says and how he meets the notability of WP:MUSICBIO. JohnCD (talk) 16:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Gannons Solicitors

Sharpey1 (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@Sharpey1: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Check out WP:Your first article and WP:Notability (organizations and companies). JohnCD (talk) 21:40, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

La'Bella MAFIA

La'Bella MAFIA information is NOT promotional and IS encyclopedic facts. Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -USFactFinder (talk) 00:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion G11. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. Something can be "encyclopedic facts" and yet still blatantly promotional, since promotion is at least as much, if not more, about presentation than the content itself. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 02:20, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Jenny Lynn (photographer)

On deleted page, it is stated: "Expired PROD, concern was: no evidence of work in a major collection or other notability)" Ms. Lynn is a noted photographer. From her website (http://jennylynn.com/#/about-jenny-lynn/resume), one finds the following, under "Public & Private Collections": Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, PA, Center for Creative Photography, Tucson, AZ, Museum of Modern Art, New York, NY, The Buhl Collection, New York, NY, Albin O. Kuhn Library & Gallery, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, Absolut Vodka’s Absolut Artists collection, New York, NY, McDonald’s Corporate Collection, Chicago, IL, The Polaroid Collection, Cambridge, MA, Norton Museum of Art, West Palm Beach, FL

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newjersey2014 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

@Newjersey2014: Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. I will notify user DGG (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. It will help if you can add to the article independent references (not just her own website) which confirm how she meets the notabiity standard of WP:CREATIVE; for instance, the Katonah Museum of Art website which is linked to does not mention her. JohnCD (talk) 09:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Rockford Solution Private Limited

This Page I was created about a company in my town. Which is doing a good job for us. I thought to put an article about them, with their permission, Now I am afraid this deletion may cause them brand loss. Please restore it -Kunwarsurya (talk) 03:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kunwarsurya: 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.. Anything like "rising high with a unique and flexible business mode to deliver successful and quality deliverable" is an advertisement, not an enyclopedia article, and is deleted at sight - see WP:PEACOCK. JohnCD (talk) 09:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Mpasqualy/Casey Oxendine

I, Mpasqualy, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mpasqualy (talk) 04:04, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mpasqualy: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 09:46, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_151&oldid=1146625323"