Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 97

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 90←Archive 95Archive 96Archive 97Archive 98Archive 99Archive 100

Immaculate Conception Of Saint Joseph

reasoning -Albin013 (talk) 08:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Dont delete this page . the contents are valid

Totoy Brown

I am not yet done editing a biography of a well-known celebrity yet. The reason why I left the page short is because I hope I can expand it and put references to it later. And I did not attack any person in making this page, and I expected what I made as nonetheless unoffensive. Can you please undelete the page and bring it back?

By the way, there were a lot of significant references and lots of facts for this article. I will tag them to this article immediately after it is brought back from deletion. -Choy4311 (talk) 09:54, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

  •  Not done there were no references, and some unpleasant sounding things in an infobox. If you can write a sourced biography, with text about a notable person, you can be free to do so. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Brad Jefferson

This article provides readers with more information on Animoto, a company that already has a wikipedia page. Readers can learn more about the founders and their backgrounds. The article was properly cited and is relevant to the tech industry. The article was first deleted because of the lack references. -Messier83 (talk) 16:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ERSA Group

I, Tidyrambo, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Tidyrambo (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2013 (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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:54, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Cool Oldies logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. -Levdr1lp / talk 17:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

File:All My Jams logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. -Levdr1lp / talk 17:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Big Classic Hits logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. -Levdr1lp / talk 17:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Baird Whitfield Sober Services

Retrieve the article, in order to do modification -Concjames (talk) 01:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done The article was blatant advertising. Wikipedia is not a medium for promotion. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

White Wreath Assoc Ltd

reasoning -58.167.158.174 (talk) 05:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done There is not, and never has been, any article entitled White Wreath Assoc Ltd, nor a page entitled Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/White Wreath Assoc Ltd. Please try to specify the exact title of the deleted article, as otherwise it is unlikely that it will be found. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Jesus as King Messiah

because it addresses a specific question on the page "the Apostle Paul" about whether or not the disciples of Jesus considered him their king. This was contested by the editor of that page, but with so much evidence in support of this idea from the NT writings, and it should be expanded to include OT references, this deserves a page of its own. The page was deleted saying, 'see Christology'. That is a huge topic, and that page scarcely addresses this subject. -YeshuaDaily (talk) 07:34, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

This was not actually deleted, but turned into a redirect. You can see your version at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jesus_as_King_Messiah&oldid=567646150 If you edit this and save it you will have your version back to visibility. VQuakr did not explain their conversion to a redirect, but a discussion may be worthwhile. Othere articles relevent to your topic are Christ and Jesus in Christianity. Your writing uses biblical references only. However it would be a good idea to reference other writers that support this interpretation of the bible. I do not think you would have trouble finding that. So  Not done because it was not deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:31, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

CastLabs

First, I do not understand why this article is considered to be "advertising or promotion", when other articles with exactly the same structure and type of content (for example "Irdeto", which I used as a template) are not. Anyway, the article wasn't ready yet and I was in the process of improving it, and I was unaware that it is required to submit final versions instead of writing online. So please make the content available again so that I can improve/resubmit the article. -Zorbathebuddha (talk) 07:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Soft Rock logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:The Alternative Project logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:08, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:The Classic Rock Channel logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Wild (channel) logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Country Road logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:The Beat logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File very likely qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}} and/or does not meet threshold of originality necessary for copyright. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:23, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Foggy Mountain logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File very likely qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}} and/or does not meet threshold of originality necessary for copyright. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:25, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Hit Nation logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. Files very likely qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}} and/or does not meet threshold of originality necessary for copyright. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:27, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Rock Nation logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File very likely qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}} and/or does not meet threshold of originality necessary for copyright. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:30, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Today's Mix logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:32, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File:MIA logo.png

Request temporary undeletion for transfer to Commons. File qualifies as {{PD-textlogo}}. Higher res available. -Levdr1lp / talk 12:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Biogerontology Research Foundation

Page was deleted on spurious copyright claims -Henry Stanley (talk) 12:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done Assuming that by "spurious copyright claims" you mean a mistaken impression that the page infringed copyright, you need to explain why it was mistaken. However, there does not seem to be any doubt: the substantial majority of the article was a mixture of verbatim copying and close paraphrasing from a page which clearly says "© Biogerontology Research Foundation 2007-2013 All rights reserved". Also, even if the copyright issue were resolved, the article would have no place in Wikipedia, as it was unambiguously promotional. Wikipedia is not a medium for promoting or publicising the aims and work of an organisation. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:00, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Supercfo

Supercfo content was deleted from here.

Career Plus

reasoning -Karan97singh (talk) 13:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done Apart from the fact that no reason has been given why the article should be restored, and the fact that the article Career Plus was a blatant use of Wikipedia to post an advertisement, the article was also a copyright infringement of a page that clearly said "Copyright © 2013 Career Plus. All Rights Reserved.". There is no question of restoring it. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:48, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

worlds first 80+ hockey tournament

reasoning -Hockeystu2 (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

    • I've provided the link because (as the user said on my talk page) the user is too stupid to figure out how to undelete the page you deleted yesterday.Hasteur (talk) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Giovanni Conti (painter)

Pupil of Luigi Pastore, prominent late 19th and early 20th painter in Aversa, participated in major Italian exhibitions -Rococo1700 (talk) 23:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. You know what would be great? If you expanded the entry on him from more than a sentence since you seem to have some interest in this person. Please note that the best edits are those that cite to reliable sources that verify the content you supply. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:48, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Kharthikh_rao

I have updated the reference which is real person -Nirmala30 (talk) 14:55, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done The article was deleted not because of doubt that he is a real person, but because of lack of any indication of being significant enough to be the subject of an encyclopaedia article. The content of the article was so minimal, and fell so far short of establishing notability, that if he is notable enough it would probably be at least as easy to write a new article showing that he is as editing the old one. If, however, he isn't (as seems far more likely) then any time spent on editing it would be wasted, as the article would just be deleted again. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:05, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Concerned United Birthparents, Inc.

Concerned United Birthparents, Inc. was a searchable term/organization prior to the summer of 2012. Suddenly the page disappeared with the message that CUB was a "non-notable organization." Since then I have compiled a ten page list of Exhibits to prove CUB's ongoing viability, as seen by many respected sources. Please make Concerned United Birthparents "userfied" as I am willing to provide these Exhibits before moving the CUB page back into the mainspace. I will be happy to "check back to see the results of my request in case an admin has followup questions"; however, your instructions, above, do not indicate the best way to check back. I assume checking the box for "Watch This Page" does the trick? -CUB.Curator (talk) 23:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done There is not, and never has been, an article entitled Creating Concerned United Birthparents, Inc. (CUB) or Creating Concerned United Birthparents, Inc. or Creating Concerned United Birthparents, Inc. Please make sure you specify the exact title of the deleted article, otherwise it is impossible to find it. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I have cut it back to a stub, because the rest of the material was very close to the organization's Facebook page. That gives rise to copyright concerns, which could no doubt be overcome by making a formal copyright release, but the material is not appropriate because Wikipedia is not Facebook. Facebook is a place for people and organizations to "tell the world" about themselves, Wikipedia is not. What the article needs, if it is to be kept, is references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. More advice on your talk page in a day or two, meanwhile read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. JohnCD (talk) 10:14, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

KISA (NGO)

The article was deleted after an expired PROD. My apologies, I was not monitoring WP for most of last year. I will add the requested independent sources attesting notability (from local and international news coverage). -Vizjim (talk) 09:30, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user Biruitorul (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. JohnCD (talk) 10:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

John Barr (Actor & Singer)

I, Kb143, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Kb143 (talk) 14:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

John Barr is an actor/singer mainly performing in London, U.K.

CDs

All I Am (2009) – available from Amazon.co.uk A Small Affair In Whatever Time We Have A Different Corner Anything Can Happen

Stage Roles

Assassins (2010 – Union Street Theatre) In the 1991 musical by Stephen Sondheim John Barr played the role of Charles J Guiteau who assassinated US president James A Garfield in 1881

 Comment: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Barr has not been deleted. Please edit it, adding references to show how he meets the WP:Notability standard of WP:NACTOR, and re-submit. It is three years since it was declined, and "Articles for creation" is not for indefinite hosting of material considered unsuitable for the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 14:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 Comment: Kb143 the notice you recieved was a warning that your article could be nominated for deletion under G13. The idea was for you to something about a submission that's sat around for nearly 3 years in a declined state, not for you to demand indefinite hosting. Because you were notified today that the article was eligible there was a possibility that annother editor could have come in and officially nominated under G13. What you need to do is to fix the issue or consider if it might be reasonable to delete the submission. JohnCD, even if there had been no complaint the automated process of nominating stale AfC pages would have waited 30 days from the notification date. Knowing that there's 22k pages that are in the Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions queue with the top of the queue being a stale article from April 2009, the page in question (which was an August 2010) would not have been near the top in terms of being dealt with. Furthermore your cosmetic/null edit only serves to kick the problem down the road for this substandard AFC page can hang around prior to becoming G13 eligible again. Hasteur (talk) 15:29, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Ah, it's the first time I have seen this situation. I didn't know there was a 30 day wait, and I didn't want to tell Kb143 the page had not been deleted and then find it went next minute. If Kb143 now edits, that would reset the clock anyway. Is there any standard for how long a G13-undeletion, or an objected-to G13, which is then not edited needs to wait? JohnCD (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
@JohnCD: The Bot has the 30 day wait, that doesn't prevent regular editors going in and nominating for G13 on their own if the criteria are applicable.. G13 is only applicable for articles that haven't been edited in 6 months (which the bot interperts at 180 days). The bot does a true null edit so that templates are re-evaluated and categories get placed. But if an editor objects to having their article G13ed they need to make an edit to the page (which resets the 6 month clock) but ideally they need to make progress towards getting the page out of AFC (either a promotion to Article space or a userfication to their user space to allow them to improve upon it more without the 6 month clock on it). A G13 refund request can be processed whenever assuming that there's no other reason that would hold up any other type of REFUND action(Copyright violation, hopeless advertising, Attack pages, etc.) Hasteur (talk) 17:35, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Jasmine Kyle

My page is not spam. I have not placed ANY links on this page to direct a person on where to purchase my album NOR have I linked ANY social networking sights I have. This page is PURELY factual about me and my work. My husband will be formatting the page later on to make it more encyclopedic. He is a PHD candidate and is used to doing this kind of work. I am unfamiliar with writing that way. Thank you for your time and consideration. Jasmine. -JasmineK52 (talk) 15:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Not done. I am sorry that we do not make it clearer to new users what Wikipedia is not for. It is not a place like Myspace or Facebook for people to write about themselves, for reasons explained at Wikipedia is not about YOU and Wikipedia:Autobiography. Also, it is selective about subjects for articles - see WP:MUSICBIO for what a musical performer needs to have achieved before having an article. JohnCD (talk) 16:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

IndusFusion

was removed as not listing any significance of organization. The group was/is (and it's promoters) were one of the earliest groups to bring the model of offshore outsourcing to the US. Their work in the sub Asian Continent resulted in thousands of employment roles and contributed greatly to the growth of India as a employment resources for US based needs. With the ongoing positive / negative debate on outsourcing, this group is one of the few that can speak to this conversation in detail. Should the article need updating or more 'robust' content on value of the entity, I am sure it can be accomplished. -68.3.226.24 (talk) 17:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. The main body of the deleted article was just the following:

IndusFusion is a strategic venture firm in the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) space focused on "Indus" : India-United States projects and processes. IndusFusion is responsible for coining and marking the term Partnorganic in reference to the strategic nature of the relationships they engage. The group works in a global environment and has contributed to the economy of India, the Dominican Republic, the Philippine Islands and many other countries. Their logo represents the focus on India and US relationships.

This is hardly anything beyond a marketing blurb. We assume that a 'strategic venture firm' must be one that makes investments? If so, what have they invested in? Have their investments received any newspaper coverage? Need reliable sources to show the significance of this firm per WP:GNG, otherwise it doesn't deserve an article. It is surprising that opening up the web site at www.indusfusion.com activates the Wayback Machine -- are they having a problem with their web site? There seems to be no news on them since 2008. Do you think you have enough material to create a referenced article? If so you should register an account and then create a draft in your own user space, or use the WP:Articles for creation process. EdJohnston (talk) 04:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppenheimer Analysis

I would like to get the article restored or at least get a copy of the article and talks page. I have contested the speedy deletion on its talk page but did not get any feedback on my reasoning there. I can not see how Oppenheimer Analysis can be so much less relevant than certain other artists on here. They have a song with 159k hits on youtube [1] and are mentioned on various websites about music. -Danwe From the Other Planet (talk) 19:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. 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 musicians or music groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Select Model Management

sources to be added -Pet Octopus (talk) 00:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

A search of "Select Model Management" on Wikipedia returns results of dozens of articles which mention or previously linked to this page. In my opinion, this establishes its "relevance". Since Select is one of the largest modeling agencies in the industry (and therefore relevant), I am assuming it was removed for lack of sources.

In that case, here are some that I found with a just a quick google search:

Source (ownership): http://www.thebiographychannel.co.uk/biographies/sienna-miller.html
Source (ownership): http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2011/06/15/agyness-deyn-returns-to-first-model-agency-select

Source (relevance): http://www.vogue.co.uk/topic/select-model-management
Source (relevance): http://models.com/agency/Select-Model-Management/ranked
Source (relevance): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2324415/Could-YOU-David-Gandy-Stella-Tennant-MailOnline-join-forces-Select-Model-Management-new-face-Enter-HERE-.html
Source (relevance): http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2013/06/13/oliver-cheshire-model-interview---blog-fashion--style
Source (relevance): http://www.fashionmodeldirectory.com/models/Rachel_Hunter/

If the article was deleted for being poorly written, I am willing to revise the article. Please let me know if you need additional information. Pet Octopus (talk) 00:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. I will notify user ConcernedVancouverite (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. Note that notability is not inherited from notable clients. The most useful references are those which discuss the agency directly; press releases about signing someone count for little. JohnCD (talk) 09:05, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

You (Schiller song)

Song has charted in Germany in 2008. Thanks. --Jonny84 (talk) 13:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC) -Jonny84 (talk) 13:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done please add the info about charting, as this was a criterion for non deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:43, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

James Hurtak

wish to edit and improve -184.21.109.45 (talk) 17:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

  • (Non-administrator comment) 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/James Hurtak, 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. ES&L 19:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Scouting Ireland.svg

please restore earliest non-background version, per Scouting WPMOS, image should have no background -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Helen Burgess

This is a page for my personal use, I would like it back to at least retrieve the information held within it. Then you can delete it again. -Simfan34 (talk) 17:29, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done This was apparently a fake bio of a fictional Congresswoman. I don't know whether it was a hoax or some viral marketing scam or you were just using us as a place to store your fiction; but in any case, Wikipedia will not be a party to any of the above - and restoring your fiction/hoax/scam would be endorsing what you were trying to do. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
It's not a scam or hoax of any sort, it's just a project, it would be at least mildly courteous to allow me to retreive to contents of the page, for my own personal use; if you could send me the text of it without restoring it that would be fine. Furthermore, I would greatly appreciate it if you refrained from accusing me of any kind of maliciousness or malfeasance, calling me some kind of scammer, etc, without a smidgen of evidence that that was my intention. --Simfan34 (talk) 18:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Restoring a fake bio and then deleting it again has no value or utility to Wikipedia.  Not done. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Could you at least send the text? Please? --Simfan34 (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 Not done please try and grasp this point once and for all. Wikipedia is not a free web host for you to develop your "project". Wikipedia is not a free web host for you to create pages for your "own personal use". It is, unfortunately, true that surprisingly many people genuinely think that "anyone can edit Wikipedia" means "anyone can use Wikipedia for any purpose they like", and I am perfectly willing to believe that you made that mistake, but it was a mistake, and Wikipedia is not going to restore the misuse you made of the Wikipedia servers for your own use. (Although it is not part of the reason for declining your request, it may also be worth pointing out to you that nobody accused you of "of any kind of maliciousness or malfeasance" or called you "some kind of scammer": on the contrary, the administrator who declined your first request said quite clearly that he didn't know whether it was a hoax or scam or just using Wikipedia to store your fiction.) JamesBWatson (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Very well then, although I take exception to the suggestion I somehow fail to understand the scope of Wikipedia's project, considering I have been a member of Wikipedia for over seven years- no shorter, if not longer, than any one of you. The concerned page was in my sandbox, which I felt was the place for such things, and again, I do suggest placing the text in my sandbox, which would be appropriate. If not, I am willing to let the matter rest. --Simfan34 (talk) 03:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Sebastian Lletget

reasoning -Guinnessguy (talk) 22:26, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

1=Sebastian Lletget 2=The article was deleted due to G4, a previous article being deleted after debate. I am unaware of what killed the previous article but I feel there is no valid reason other than there was a prior article in it's place. The article is relevant due to the persons status as a professional athlete, well cited, approved initially to publish, and unbiased. There was also a protest/comment from the user who initially reviewed and approved my article, this was ignored and the article was deleted. I would like this deletion reviewed.

 Not done. The newly-restored article still does not address the objections made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sebastian Lletget. The man still has not taken the field in a fully professional game and he still doesn't have enough press coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. EdJohnston (talk) 05:18, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

He is currently listed on the active roster of a team in the top league of English football

http://www.whufc.com/articles/sebastian-lletget-west-ham_2228487_63666 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guinnessguy (talk • contribs) 19:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Not playing a fully professional match hasn't stopped other players of similar profile from having a page created. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Ham_United_F.C._Reserves_and_Academy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guinnessguy (talk • contribs) 19:03, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

As it says in the header of this page, this board is not for appealing the results of AfD discussions. You should either contact User:Coren who was the closer of the AfD, or if he is not available open a request at WP:DRV. 'Being on the active roster' is not the same as taking the field in a fully professional game. Websites exist which document players' appearances. I suggest not pursuing this unless you can specify a date where he appeared on the field. A development squad is not the first team. As Guinnessguy pointed out, West Ham United F.C. Reserves and Academy may include some players who should not have articles per WP:FOOTYN. EdJohnston (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Zeal Wellness Drink

reasoning -Burkeomatic (talk) 17:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe this article should be undeleted. It was recently deleted for {G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion} When writing it, I attempted to maintain an impartial tone and remain neutral on the subject by including many studies from the NIH and other scientific communities on the effects of the ingredients, both good and bad. If editing of the content by the site administration is required to remove it from this category, that is acceptable. I am in the nutrition field and have personally spent countless hours researching this supplement for my patients because there was not enough information about it publicly available. Thank you.

Burkeomatic (talk) 17:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done - restored by Bhadani. JohnCD (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

William A. Reuben

I, Aboudaqn, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please userfy or restore as appropriate. Aboudaqn (talk) 17:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw no justification or even alert that the entry for "William A. Reuben" was up for deletion. On what grounds did someone delete his entry?

As a long-time author and journalist about the Hiss and Rosenberg cases in an entry with ample references/citations (as I recall), I cannot understand how or why any Wikipedia editor could deem his entry fit for deletion. Please email me explanation -- or, better, if deletion occurred in error, please restore the article and notify me. Should you insist on continued deletion, please be so kind as to send me the full HTML/wiki-formatted text of the entry back to me.

Thank you --Aboudaqn (talk) 17:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Done. Apologies - brain malfunction on my part. The article had a dual presence in the Wikipedia and Wikipedia_talk namespaces. I was tidying it up and goofed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Dubai Healthcare City

reasoning -217.164.255.204 (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

  • 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 and reasoning with the reason for your request). ES&L 11:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Dokidoki! PreCure.jpg

File deleted per CSD F5 when it should not have been orphaned or replaced. -—Ryulong (琉竜) 22:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Mark Bartolo

I took the article text from my website, however I did not reference it. The reason for deletion is: (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: G12 (http://markbofficial.com/about/)). In fact this link is from where I took the text. Kindly undelete my page, so that I can reference my website. Regards. -Markbofficial (talk) 11:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done Firstly, there is no question of restoring content copied from another web site without evidence of copyright release. (The unsubstantiated say-so of someone who comes along and creates a Wikipedia account is not enough.) Secondly, even if you provide unimpeachable evidence of copyright release, this page is pure self-promotion, and not remotely suitable as a Wikipedia article, with or without references. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:03, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hugh Salmon

94.14.248.180 (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2013 (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. JohnCD (talk) 20:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Young Republicans (Georgia)

Young Republicans (Georgia) -Giorgi sarukhanishvili (talk) 01:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. The page is not deleted. Nothing to do. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Manifest Limited

notable -Brandwatch uk (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Earlier today I edited a long-standing (dating to 2007) and continuously improved Wikipedia article on Manifest Limited to improve the content and bring some of the information up to date. The references remained as before though I had intended to add to these over time.

The article was promptly deleted by Deb as not notable. My request to at least reinstate the original article was refused by Deb. As Manifest is a leading player in the brand industry and the references go some way to supporting this deletion of the entire article is not valid.

Thanks for your consideration of this case.

Best wishes,

John

Brandwatch uk (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Brandwatch uk/Manifest Limited.. This was done by Deb hours before you even posted this undelete request. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Hassani Kwess

reasoning -MikePress52 (talk) 18:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC) The wikipedia page for hip-hop artist Hassani Kwess was recently deleted by user:Deb (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion).

The Hassani Kwess wikipedia page has numerous references as well as external links. This isn't a soapbox or advertising, it's just stating facts similar to all the other Hip-Hop artists' pages that are on wikipedia.

Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles about music. 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 musicians or music groups 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. On the contrary: it included junk language like "multi-talented", "that hails from" and "he garnered new fans", which reeks of the press release; as well as an ad for a coming mixtape, and the name and agency of his publicist. If you find junk like that in other musicians' articles, please delete it.
By the way: are you a press agent? Your username and edit history makes us wonder. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I could see how language like multi-talented is can be taken as promotion, but in the regards to him garnering new fans, I believed that was significant in the event it put him on Asher Roth's radar. By changing language such as "multi-talented", "that hails from" and "he garnered new fans" and omitting his new project and name of his manager, can this page be undeleted?

My name is Mike Prescott, and I'm not a press agent. I'm a writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikePress52 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Rita Mulcahy

reasoning -Alan.ca (talk) 18:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC) It appears this page was deleted because it was used for promotional purposes in 2011. I was looking to recreate the page as Rita is well known amongst project managers internationally. Rita Mulcahy, now deceased, was a key author and speaker in the Project Management sector. I am working find some good references for Rita's work, but the following article indicates that she has published quite a few books and papers. [2] I cannot find any discussion against her notability.

Alan.ca (talk) 18:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Alan.ca/Rita Mulcahy. No question that the subject is notable, but the article was indeed promotional and justifiably deleted.
In the revision history, you will see two distinct versions: the one that was most recently deleted, and one much more detailed version that was deleted 15 March 2011. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Ajaikumar B S

Dr. Ajaikumar B S is the founder of HCG Hospitals. I have created the page on HCG Hospitals and now want to link it to its founder's page but can not create the Ajaikumar B S page anymore. Kindly undelete the page and let me update the page with good content — Riteshyadavhcg (talk) 07:52, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Not done You are a sock puppet. Your puppet master has a blatant COI. When someone with no COI comes along and creates a properly referenced article then re-creation will be uncontroversial. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:41, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
FWIW, I've protected both the articles against recreation because of the dubious editing Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Thomson Whisky

I had parked the article on my watch list to follow up and research, but it was speedily deleted before I could do so. It may not have merit on its own and shows signs of being self promo, but some of the content may be of use within another article and I wondered if you could userfy it (or place within my sandbox) so I can complete my research. I just need the content at this stage and in fact even if it could be emailed to me that would be okay. -NealeFamily (talk) 20:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC) NealeFamily (talk) 20:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Eliza Rickman

I was having a problem adding references and ran out of time ... I now have time to figure out how to do it and can add references:

1. [1]

parental gatekeeping

reasoning -Kristijrn (talk) 01:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC) This page should immediately be deleted. I tried to "clean it up" a little bit, like checking spelling, grammar, and references, but it is pretty much hopeless. It is full of ideas that are perpetuated by hate groups. The propaganda contained within is information for domestic abusers to seek and obtain control and custody of their children and other victims.

Actually, a page about "Fo Schizzle" would be more reputable and verifiable than this piece of garbage.

 Not done I am not clear what you are asking for. This page, WP:REFUND, is for requesting restoration of pages which have been deleted. There has never been a page Parental gatekeeping. If you mean Gatekeeper parent, that has not been deleted. It seems that you think it should be deleted, but this is not the place to request that: you should nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion, explaining why you think it cannot be improved to be a useful article. JohnCD (talk) 09:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Matthew Thomas

Out of the blue, my article of 6 hours writing got deleted. Nobody said why it got deleted, I don't want the article back on Wikipedia, I want to be able to copy & paste the writing I have done.Mattythomass (talk) 15:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC) -Mattythomass (talk) 15:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. Nothing to do. The page exists, and has existed for years. If you are referring to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Matthew Thomas, the explanation of why it got deleted is plainly there in the log: it was deleted because it was a negative unsourced biography of a living person. As such, it cannot be restored. An oversighter removed the contents, so even an admin has no access to it. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

ASA COLLEGE DIVISON OF BUSINESS (divofbus)

reasoning -ASA COLLEGE DIVISION OF BUSINESS 16:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC) This was not an ad but a detail of an divison within a college.

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 and reasoning with the reason for your request). Hasteur (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Sanjeev Nanda (Entrepreneur)

This is real biographic article of sanjeev nanda -Khalidgaur (talk) 04:21, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment. An article already exists at Sanjeev Nanda hit-and-run case. When that article existed previously at Sanjeev Nanda, discussion led to consensus that he was not notable as an individual and only for the incident (WP:BLP1E). Accordingly, the article about him was moved to that page. Khalidgaur's new article today was a rehash of that. I redirected it to the hit-and-run case article, Khalidgaur blanked the page, and another admin deleted it G7. —C.Fred (talk) 04:29, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Adia.jpg

Some IP vandalized by removing image from Adia. -George Ho (talk) 17:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ ^Andy Downing (June, 01, 2011). "Songwriter Eliza Rickman Finds Her Voice, Lose Her Cat." 77 Square.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_97&oldid=1136068494"