Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 248

TVPaint
It was deleted in January because of so-called "copyright infringement", which is untrue because TVPaint deserves a Wikipedia article for being a popular raster-based animation software. If someone wants to fix the article to avoid violations, then they need to rewrite the article based on sources, along with http://wiki.tvpaint.com/index.php?title=TVPaint and the other links here, instead of deleting it altogether. -187.113.203.102 (talk) 20:42, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg 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 Articles for deletion/TVPaint, 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 . After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. user talk:Coffee may be willing to turn it into a draft for you to improve. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:06, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I will also note that popularity is not WP:Notability, and a good chunk of those sources are from TVPaint's own website. I would also suggest the article be named Newtek Aura instead as that's what the usable sources that *are* there refer to it as. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 04:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Psycho Killer (video game)
We are trying to improve the article; but with little info on the game it's not easy. -SirJim 08:05, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg 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 Articles for deletion/Pyscho Killer, 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 . After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:10, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Serban_Ghenea
Serban Ghenea is a world-famous mixer. It looks like some person unaware of what a mixer actually does, in the music business, has deleted this page. It is a very high valued job and vital for making a song sound great, and very very few people can do that as good as Serban Ghenea. Being a mixer myself, it is strange to see that is is possible for someone to delete the page of the world-wide best professional in the business, and - according to lots of comments on the internet about this deletion, not being aware of what in fact a mixer does. To check out what he does and how the professional community reacted, try googling his name together with wikipeda and deletion, to see how the community reacted. -FrodeFrode (talk) 09:09, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg 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 Articles for deletion/Serban Ghenea, 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 . After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:31, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Ahmed Omar Bin Fareed
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -EDQ 14:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC) Many links and videos were provided to prove notability. The members who requested deletion intentionally ignored the provided links and went on and deleted the page. Please undelete the page.EDQ 14:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg 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 Articles for deletion/Ahmed Omar Bin Fareed, 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 . After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:44, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Previous versions of File:Capital FM Network logo.png and File:Fly Eye Records logo.png


I'd like to have the previous versions of these files be restored, because these files are in the public domain as they are ineligible for copyright in the United States. XPanettaa (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ these are not that simple. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, but I don't think that these are copyrightable in the United States as the the level of originality required for copyright protection is very high, but in the United Kingdom. See c:Commons:Threshold of originality. These files are free contents in the United States but non-free or potentially non-free in its home country, the United Kingdom, because level of originality required for copyright protection in the United Kingdom is very low as these files would most likely be deleted there. See c:Commons:Threshold of originality. Wikimedia Commons only accepts files that are public domain or freely licensed in both the country of origin and the United States. In order for Commons to host a file, it must be free in its home country and in the United States. Some countries, particularly other countries based on common law, have a lower threshold of originality than the United States. It seems that these logos are in graffiti styles. I have verified each of these 2 files and I'm afraid we disagree on the complexity of these logos. They are all free in the United States, but not in the United Kingdom. XPanettaa (talk) 13:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd like to dispute the notion that these files are PD in the US as well. The text isn't, but the imitation of a fly eye and the rounded shapes may cross the TOO. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * What do you think of File:Audi AG logo.png? This one seems is simple and seems unlikely to cross the TOO. I think that the previous version should be restored, because this one is from Germany. See c:Commons:Threshold of originality for images that are not copyrighted in the country of origin. XPanettaa (talk) 19:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's PD in Germany but I am not going to gamble on it being PD here as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * This does not look that simple, as there is a 3D effect with reflection/ray tracing, which is a significant creative input. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I you think that this does not look that simple, you should take a very good look at c:Category:Audi logos and c:Category:Audi rings, where the logos (which looks the same as this one) can be found. XPanettaa (talk) 20:52, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Those ones are also too complex for copyright. In most cases the photographer or designer would own the copyright. When 3D objects are photographed a new copyright exists in the 2D work. But the original 3D rings would not ahve a copyright, as the rings made of metal themselves are PD-simple. The rings depicted in Audi-Logo 2016.svg would be PD-simple also. But File:Audi logo detail.svg is a copyright infringement as it was lifted off an Audi website. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Well I don't think that these ones really are complex for copyright, aren't they? They're just simple geometric shapes (circles). And also, it seems unlikely to me that File:Audi logo detail.svg really is a copyright infringement. This image only consists of simple geometric shapes (circles, which are made of metal themselves) and text. It seems that the rings made of metal themselves are PD-simple. See c:Commons:Threshold of originality and Threshold of originality for information. XPanettaa (talk) 19:29, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

May I suggest that you contest the deletion of a file here on WP:DELREV? This page is not a forum. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:40, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the previous version of this image should be restored. XPanettaa (talk) 19:56, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Arun Behll
''I, Arun Behll, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Arun Behll (talk) 06:35, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg 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 Articles for deletion/Arun Behll, 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 . After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. I have also deleted your re-creation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:30, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm just passing by. I noticed that the introduction of this page had mentioned "restoring pages... in deletion debates with little or no participation other than the nominator". Just to correct you, it does apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. - TheMagnificentist (talk) 14:31, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Two people wanted this deleted in this case, so that's enough to avoid softdelete in my opinion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

PKX Drawing
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Kamble2017 (talk) 12:00, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:07, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * it's deleted now. And it will not be restored. Please go to Articles for creation and follow the procedure described there to write and submit an article. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:14, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Uksharma3
inadvertently deleted while trying to test the request delete tag -Uksharma3 (talk) 02:31, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Lady  of  Shalott  02:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Colorado Care
Clr06160 (talk) 06:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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) 08:08, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I've reverted the comment you made below this one. Saying "Give me my data you bastards" is NOT a good way to get what you want. I also note that you created a temporary page at the draftspace and said about the same thing, accusing us of being bastards and not giving you your data back. As you can see here, all you had to do was ask for it back. I've given you a temporary block for what is ultimately an attack against others. It might have been in general, but that type of behavior is still unacceptable. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

karamoko dembele
I want to edit this football player but i don't have much information about him. Plesae help me! -Dorinrin (talk) 07:18, 17 October 2016 (UTC) {{Infobox football biography
 * It looks like it was deleted as a test page, since the only content was as follows:
 * name               = Karamoko Dembele
 * birth_date         =
 * birth_place        =
 * height             =
 * currentclub        = Celtic Under 20
 * clubnumber         =
 * youthyears1        =

My recommendation would be to work on the article in the draftspace at Draft:Karamoko dembele. Someone already started an article there and that would be the best place to start, since you'd have more time to edit. As far as getting help goes, I'd recommend talking to the group at WikiProject Football, as that is a project full of people devoted to anything football related. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Trustlook
Please restore this page. will work on improving information about this security company.
 * X mark.svg Not done This was deleted for two reasons, WP:A7 (notability) and WP:G11 (unambiguous advertising). Either one would make it something that we wouldn't restore, at least not at REFUND. You can ask the deleting admin,, if he will restore it to the draftspace or email you a copy. Offhand it looks like the reason for its deletion was the use of promotional WP:BUZZWORDS like "innovator" and "leading experts", terms that are very frequently used to promote a topic. On a side note, if you are employed by the company and/or are otherwise affiliated with them, you will need to disclose this per WP:COI. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:31, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Pfadfinderinnenschaft Sankt Georg.svg
now meets criteria as article exists at Pfadfinderinnenschaft Sankt Georg -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:44, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Appium
i have written only one sentence without any matérial previously deleted by other. it is my own creation with my own sources. i have put 2 sources that are correct i think -Vatadoshufrench 14:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * So we won't speedy delete this with G4. But what are are you asking us to do here?  Do you want a history restore?  Have you viewed Articles for deletion/Appium? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:24, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I am waiting for a reply from you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:17, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Graeme Bartlett i don't know, it seems the speedy deletion is stopped but another procedure of deletion is running. (Articles for deletion/Appium (2nd nomination)). I am not familiar with wiki "en" so i will let you communnity do what it want.
 * on my talk page "Walter Görlitz (talk) said "If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion"." and i think i come here after. But then torai stop speedy deletion https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Appium&diff=743859745&oldid=743839917 . and now just a running deletion (Articles for deletion/Appium (2nd nomination)).
 * And now i will just wait for the article to be delete or not. (i don't know what is G4, and i will not ask for a restauration of the history while the article will perhaps beeing delete. So i will just wait.)Vatadoshufrench 11:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You should give a better explanation of why you want to keep that page on Articles for deletion/Appium (2nd nomination). The G4 delete reason is for when a page that was deleted comes back  the same. (or even worse) Since you wrote this from scratch, it does not apply. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Graeme Bartlett "You should give a better explanation of why you want to keep that page on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Appium (2nd nomination" i have already given sources and explanation. If it is not enough, i am ok, to the article to be deleted. Vatadoshufrench 13:25, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Brianhe/Images
there were some notes on the page that I would like to recover -Brianhe (talk) 17:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Clonbony GAA
To my opinion, during the AfD-discussion the fact that Clonbony GAA Ladies won three consecutive county titles (and took part in the island-wide All-Ireland competition) was insufficient appreciated as the participants focused on the hurling (male) part. But that is the way it goes, so I like to have the article userfied so I can improve it without AfD-stress. - The Banner talk 15:02, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:The Banner/Clonbony GAA. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Populous series
This template was deleted almost 8 years ago as the result of a WP:TFD discussion: Templates for deletion/Log/2008 November 5. I was not editing regularly at the time, but if I was, I would have voted to "keep" it. As referenced in the TFD discussion, the nominator's rationale was that the template was redundant to Template:Bullfrog Productions. My keep vote would have stated something along the lines of "Keep. Populous DS, a title of the series, was not produced by Bullfrog Productions since that company was absorbed by Electronic Arts (specifically EA UK) in 2001 and Populous DS was produced in 2007/2008." I'd like this template restored so that I can continue to work on it in its previous state to improve it for Wikipedia use. - Steel1943 (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Meng
''I, Meng New Silk Road, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Meng New Silk Road (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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. Please make this less of a promotion and more like an encyclopedia entry. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:43, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Argos Logo.png
This logo was deleted per F5 - An editor had removed this logo from Argos and replaced with a logo that's already in the infobox, This logo is different from the infobox one as well as the one that replaced this, (I had asked to undelete but I've noticed he's not been on for quite some time so figured I've ask here), Thanks, -– Davey 2010 Talk 20:18, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done remove the timed deletion tag if you use it. But perhaps you can justify PD-simple. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:47, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Brilliant thanks Graeme. – Davey 2010 Talk 21:01, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Kyle Storer
This person is now a notable footballer, please can the previous history prior to Articles for deletion/Kyle Storer (2nd nomination) be added to the article, to help expand it? Deleting admin is inactive (1 edit in last 2 weeks). -Joseph2302 08:37, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm... normally it should be done through the deleting admin, but has been very sporadic since the beginning of September and even before that, wasn't editing a huge-huge amount. If shouldn't be a big issue to restore it, although I will wait until another admin pipes in. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:43, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification . No objections from me. Jujutacular (talk) 23:22, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Daido Juku Kudo
I recreated Kūdō today, not knowing the original Articles for deletion/Daido Juku Kudo had been put up for deletion 3 years ago. Can you userfy it, or park it at talk:Kūdō so I can see if anything is worth salvaging? I'll put it right back up for delete after. Thanks! -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:08, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done see history of Daido Juku Kudo Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:06, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I got a little from it, not much but it pointed me in the right direction! Shall I speedy it or go through a process of deletion again?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If you think the redirect is worth keeping, then just leave it. Otherwise you can ask me to speedy delete it. (I would use R3 for the redirect, G6 for the history) Do you also want Kūdō deleted? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Please speedy G6 delete Daido Juku Kudo for the history, it's promotional. Don't delete Kūdō, that's the one I'm working on! (panics) LOL, thanks.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:19, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Azuma Takashi
In creating a redirect for Takashi Azuma, I found that there was a 2010 prodded article for it already, may I see it, please? (see Kūdō, above) Thanks! -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. history restored Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, again not much to get out of it. I hope I'm not just recreating stinkers.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Deep Kapuria
I am still working on the page and have gathered better citations to source the article -SurbhiJain23257 (talk) 05:33, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done and will not be done It looks like it was deleted at AfC in the past for containing copyrighted material. It also looks like you didn't address these issues when you tried to recreate the article at AfC, which I didn't see when I reviewed the article or I'd have nominated it for speedy deletion then and there, rather than let it get G13'd. You cannot and I repeat CANNOT post copyrighted material on Wikipedia. Closely paraphrasing something is seen as a copyright violation just as much as taking it word for word. Even if it is not initially discovered, it will eventually be found out and no amount of sourcing can rescue an article if it's entirely taken from a copyrighted source. The article would still have to be completely re-written. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * On a side note, if you were hired or otherwise asked by Kapuria to write this page then you will need to disclose this per WP:COI. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Kidz Bop Classics
This article was for a children's music CD and it says it was deleted on April 1st 2016. This obviously is someone messing with Wikipedia -Rebecca Moonstone (talk) 14:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ Yes it was done by someone messing with Wikipedia. He never wrote about the CD, and changed his mind, and the page was deleted. Even if he did not change his mind to blank the page, it would have been speedy deleted as A7. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Rebecca Moonstone: Yup, the entirety of the content is "Chris Dunlaevy Chris Dunlaevy is awesome, likes football, and is cool." There's nothing there to restore. I also have to say that it doesn't look like this is really covered anywhere, to the point where I almost thought the CD didn't exist or was never released. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Guides Catholiques de Belgique.svg
no longer in violation as article is at Guides Catholiques de Belgique -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Kodhel, Lezhe
I want to write it in english -Alban marku (talk) 15:18, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. I restored the article to draft space, at Draft:Kodhel, Lezhe.

RadioVeRVe
I noticed that this page was deleted because the radio station in question is now defunct. I don't believe that is good reasoning for deletion of the page. RadioVeRVe was a really important project that pioneered a lot of positive changes for the independent music community in India. I think the right way to handle this is to bring the page back, and update the content to reflect that the project is not active anymore. -84.159.198.3 (talk) 13:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Please update the article to reflect the current situation. I will notify user, 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) 16:19, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

International Medicine Olympiad
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -JL905 (talk) 01:34, 18 October 2016 (UTC)


 * 1= International Medicine Olympiad
 * 2= International Medicine Olympiad (IMDO) is an international competition in biology and medicine for high school students. The first annual competition was held in 2016 from August 1st to August 3rd on the campus of University of California, San Diego. More than 100 high school students from 5 different countries competed in the event. A wikipedia article is needed for IMDO just like for all other important international science competitions for high school students, both to document its existence and ongoing annual occurrence for historical reasons and to facilitate research by journalists, high school students, parents and educators who are looking for more information about the event.
 * I'll note this is not actually explaining how you think the listed concerns which included questionining its stated information, are not applicable, and then how you would actually improve it, because simply stating that it's this or that, and that it "should have an article like any other group" is not how notability and an article are made. I believe you honestly should've put better statements than simply stating us what it's about, and instead actually focus with what's suitable for articles here. SwisterTwister   talk  04:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I did not have access to the prior content of the article, and I was not aware of the "listed concerns". I only knew there was a tremendous demand for information on this international competition from the top American high schools and Asian countries, especially China, South Korea and Singapore, where it made news because their teams did well in the competition. I discovered that there was an article in wikipedia on the International Medicine Olympiad, and it was deleted. I found that there are wikipedia articles for similar international competitions that are still in existence and have not been deleted, and so I would like to address this curious omission. Please kindly let me know what the "listed concerns" were, and maybe I can do some investigation and address them, or maybe others who are much more knowledgeable about the competition can do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JL905 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It looks like the concern listed for the PROD was the concern that it was not notable and that the article was essentially calling it a fraud. Fortunately, PRODs are restorable on request here. Unfortunately, attack pages, which this could conceivably fall under, are not. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 17:35, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Didn't look like an attack page to me, really. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Matthewmbury/Steelism
Matthewmbury (talk) 20:35, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Matthewmbury/Steelism


 * Yes check.svg 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) 21:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Exceptional common year articles
I would like these articles, which were previously deleted under WP:PROD, to be userfied to User:GeoffreyT2000/Exceptional common year starting on Friday, User:GeoffreyT2000/Exceptional common year starting on Wednesday, and User:GeoffreyT2000/Exceptional common year starting on Monday respectively. - GeoffreyT2000 ( talk,  contribs ) 22:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. -- GB fan 22:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Dansk Spejderkorps Sydslesvig.svg
article now exists at Dansk Spejderkorps Sydslesvig -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:39, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Joel Sichela
Joel Sichera (talk) 08:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I have to assume that you're asking for the restoration of the draft article. A look at the article shows that it's written in a very casual, almost promotional style that would need to be substantially, if not completely, rewritten in order to meet NPOV guidelines. I'm also concerned about notability - either one would be a barrier to acceptance at AfC. My recommendation here is for you to just start on a new AfC draft - however I do have to caution you that writing your own article is heavily discouraged on Wikipedia per WP:COI and WP:AUTOBIO. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:49, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

black water restro & bar
The page was deleted under speedy deletion and I could not re-work on it as I was not available to make the edit. Please restore it so that I can work back on it -Bishal revenger (talk) 04:22, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ as it was highly promotional. It was actually at Black water restro & Bar Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:56, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Gary Llama
Provided notability with new association -Spookyhaunts (talk) 08:21, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Since it looks like some A7 material might get restored as well, I'm going to tag on this just to make sure that she's OK with this. Offhand I see no reason not to restore this, although I'd recommend restoring it to WP:AfC. I'm concerned that Llama might not pass notability guidelines given the sourcing on the deleted page. A good chunk of the sourcing is WP:PRIMARY, meaning that it was written by Llama himself. Be careful about the association with notable groups and people. Working with them doesn't automatically mean that he inherits notability from these groups - the general assumption with NBAND is that the performer will play a large enough role in the groups to where they would be mentioned in reliable sources. Showing up in the database credits on AllMusic doesn't establish this - you need reviews and articles that specifically mention him. Also something to be careful about with sources is to make sure that the sources discuss Llama in depth. Stuff like this could be considered a WP:TRIVIAL mention because Llama isn't the focus of the article. The article isn't about him and the basic gist is that he was brought in as a commentator, which isn't the type of coverage that shows notability on here. This one might be usable. It's a little brief, but it could be useful. However this brevity could be something that could count against it, as it's not really the strongest source to base notability on and people could argue that it's too short. This is good and the RTD is a RS on here, however the issue here is that it's local and these tend to be depreciated on Wikipedia. It's really difficult to establish notability on local sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  10:03, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done I did not restore the A7 material, just what the requestor wrote. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:52, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Chuttalabbayi
Our movie chuttalabbayi wiki pedia page has deleted, we also don't why the page has deleted. Please help us to live the wikipedia page as we are less knowledge in wiki pedia page. -115.97.160.163 (talk) 12:04, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The page was deleted because user:M S Sai Chander blanked the page. If this is you, you can ask for the page to be restored. However was this film ever released?  Are there any references on the topic? Did any newspapers or websites review the movie? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:19, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Unafilm
''I, TitusKreyenberg, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' TitusKreyenberg (talk) 12:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

It was deleted, because I didn't edit it for too long after it was not accepted. I would like to change it now with more sources -TitusKreyenberg (talk) 12:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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) 12:34, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

RaheQamar
Promotion content which violates G11 will be removed and although credible sources have been mentioned, more will be added for A7 -Mohdify (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, for a restoration, you need to explicitly show and cite what, where and why you improve it, and that you acknowledge the concerns of it; a G11 advertising is quite rarely restored if it was simply existing for advertising. For example, for a subject to be notable and acceptable, we need in-depth third-party sources such as news (note press releases and simple mentions are not convincing for notability, therefore, please state here what improvements you would actually make, considering these notes). Another solution to G11 is actually restarting it altogether with new contents and at least using a WP:AFC Draft so it can be reviewed. SwisterTwister   talk  23:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

File:DOORN Records.png


This image was restored by Magog the Ogre on Wikimedia Commons on September 7, saying that this logo is "pretty simple even for its home country" and "I think it is below TOO", but nine hours later, Natuur12 nominated this image for deletion again, saying "Restoring this file ingores a decade of Dutch case law" and this image was deleted by lNeverCry earlier on October 19, saying "better to leave this deleted than to guess and not be sure". However, it is unlikely that anyone is sure that this logo would be a copyright violation in the Netherlands, judged by c:Com:TOO, but it would be borderline. In the United States, this would not be a copyright violation, because the blocks can be seen as a typeface, forming the letters D-O-O-R-N, as Jcb has said that per. I think that this logo should be restored here (not on Commons) and relicensed to. XPanettaa (talk) 20:38, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:17, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Roberto Ferrante

 * X mark.svg 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 Articles for deletion/Roberto Ferrante (2nd nomination), it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user . After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Adobe Photoshop screenshot.png
This non-free image has been deleted after it was unused. I'd like to request its undeletion because it should be used again in its article, Adobe Photoshop, which has no image right now. -Codename Lisa (talk) 12:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Please use it Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Ali Khalifa el-Zaidi
prod w/o proper notification -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Ok, please supply some referencing for this! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and I just feel compelled to share this journey! This is what makes Wikipedia fun past all the bureaucracy and vandalism we get muddled in. I am really using my brainskills here tonight! I'm of the mindset that anyone who has achieved the highest commendation in the world's largest youth movement is inherently notable; proving it is something different entirely. This stinker was definitely not mine, the dates were 30 years off, thankfully someone had left his name in Arabic on the Libyan Scout article. Can't read it, and when you punch in English on the Arabic Wiki it all comes out jumbled... BUT! I found his article there, (now linked) with a source with photos and everything. Tonight's a good night, thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Julie Johnson (author)
[No reasoning specified] Ssmith3759 (talk) 17:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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) 20:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

dr. biju
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Sanju388 (talk) 17:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✔️ by GB fan see Dr. Biju. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bluelounge
''I, Hbardenheuer, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Hbardenheuer (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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 colored button in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft for review!" Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Niaz M. Khan
please restore this prodded article and File:Niaz Mohammad Khan.jpg, I can rectify both -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done This will need some referencing too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again ! And the file File:Niaz Mohammad Khan.jpg ? Sorry forgot to hyperlink it...--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Is this person still alive? We don't use non-free images of living people. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Different guy, sorry, names tend to repeat! (Though I am sure there are not hundreds of Graeme Bartletts) ;) --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Udaiyan
The original article was deleted in 2009 as it was deemed that the artist was not notable. It looks like in the meantime he has had extensive coverage in the international press: Washington Post, Daily Mail and two articles in the Guardian newspaper. Other artists have individual pages with less press coverage. People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. This artist has had multiple coverage on different occasions from reliable independent international newspapers. He is also notable as he is the founder or the Cambridge Stuckists. - 217.33.181.41 (talk) 08:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You do not need to list all the references here. The article was redirected after WP:Articles for deletion/Udaiyan, so it cannot be restored here. You should apply at WP:Deletion review, giving a link to this version in the history, and citing any additional references not already there. JohnCD (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Bharat Bijlee
I am doing it for the first time and I had no intention of marketing or selling any product. Please undelete it and I will work on the content -Wikishovel (talk) 10:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharat Bijlee (talk • contribs) 07:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg 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.. JohnCD (talk) 10:46, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:ENVI-met
''I, 87.171.63.107, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' 87.171.63.107 (talk) 13:58, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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) 15:52, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Hem1982
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Hem1982 (talk) 09:04, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. You do not say what page you mean, but I assume it was User:Hem1982. The reasons why that was deleted were explained on your talk page:
 * Your user page is not for articles. When you start to edit it, you see a notice that says:
 * If you want to draft an article, please create a userspace draft instead of creating it here.
 * You may also want to read Your first article, which explains what is expected of articles on Wikipedia.
 * Articles or promotional content, (including CVs or resumes) on user pages may be deleted. For more information on userpages, see User pages.
 * The contents appeared to be promotional, with words like creative and a long list of services, but no references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources required to demonstrate Notability.
 * If you want to try again, read WP:Your first article, collect indepndent references, and then use WP:Articles for creation to guide you through the process. JohnCD (talk) 16:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Bob Willard (author)
This was my first article submitted to Wikipedia. The article was deleted due to "lack of notability" reasons. I would like the article undeleted so I can make the suggestions recommended by the administrators and resubmit once it meets all Wikipedia guidelines. This person is one of the leaders in Sustainability in the world. I will find more secondary sources to support this article before resubmitting. Any help would be much appreciated, thank you. -Rosewoodva (talk) 20:35, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I have userfied the page to your user space at User:Rosewoodva/Bob Willard (author). When you are finished improving it, there is a submission form at the top of the article for you to submit it for review before it is accepted for publication in the main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Peace Revolution
I am re-proposing an article with the name Peace Revolution, and would like to prove that the new proposal is better than the previous one. The previous article was deleted in 2009. -S Khemadhammo (talk) 13:07, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * This was deleted after Articles for deletion/Peace Revolution and, as it says at the head of this page, articles deleted after a deletion discussion are not restored here. I see that you have made a draft and submitted it for review, good. It was not clear to me at first that it was about the same subject as the one deleted seven years ago, but checking the linked websites I see it is. In seven years it may well have become notable. What you should do is, apply at WP:Deletion review, with a link to your draft, so that if it is accepted at review there will be no obstacle to posting it. JohnCD (talk) 15:45, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you, .--S Khemadhammo (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * , at the top of Deletion review it says I should contact the admin who deleted the 2009 version of the article. I'm going to try and trace that person and contact—might take a while. What's your stance on this? --S Khemadhammo (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * that admin is no longer active, so don't worry about it. Sorry, I should have told you that. JohnCD (talk) 21:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . I'm on it.--S Khemadhammo (talk) 21:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You know,, , I think it would make most sense to just do a history merge of the deleted article with the draft. I see no harm in restoring the deleted edits to the draft history. It'll be easy since there is no chronological overlap. I'll go do that. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * History merge completed. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:44, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * This has been taken care of, even if not in the way that I expected. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

File:PPL logo.png
Pfadfinder und Pfadfinderinnen Liechtensteins has reverted to their historic emblem, I am pretty sure that is this file from 9 years ago. If not, I will gladly get it speedied, as always, and thanks again! -Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. I have reset the di-orphaned-fair-use timer, so it will self-destruct after seven days if you don't use it. JohnCD (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, got it and done!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:04, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again! Overnight, it got transferred over to svg, should I mark it for speedy deletion?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Project Dragonfly
''I, Heineken11, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' New references that address the concerns that originally lead to the rejection of the article. -Heineken11 (talk) 07:51, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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) 09:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Zama Arman
Please Undelete this Page, This is a real film and This is the first Page of Nadiagul2424 -2A03:2880:3010:CFE8:FACE:B00C:0:8000 (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC) 2A03:2880:3010:CFE8:FACE:B00C:0:8000 (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Clash with DD
There is no response from the editor who proposed it for deletion as I have contacted him but of no reason I have got less time to recover the article -Tiven gonsalves 15:13, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Global youth
This draft was about the organization Global Youth and is a 3rd person account of it. -Jhoomar (talk) 15:53, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done The text of the page is unacceptably promotional and reads like a manifesto. And I wonder if it's a copyright infringement as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a copyvio of http://www.globalyouth.in/ so this is not possible to restore. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Mollyannprice/Polly Punkneck
''I, Mollyannprice, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Mollyannprice (talk) 20:39, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg 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) 21:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)