Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 252

Template:PD-chem
PD-chem was deleted about a month ago by after a request from  at Templates for discussion/Log/2016 October 18. It was described as unused, which is most likely only because most things tagged with it are ultimately moved to commons (where they are tagged PD-chem, not PD-ineligible). While PD-ineligible may apply as a technical replacement, PD-chem is more informative where images with chemical structures / equations are involved, and explain why these structures are automatically ineligible for copyright protection. I have regularly seen these sorts of images uploaded with CC-BY-SA licenses which do not apply, and would much rather use a replacement which explains ineligibility rather than simply asserting it. I will invite comment from contributors to the Chemistry and Chemicals WikiProjects for input as the most likely to have views (in favour or restoration or opposition), and anywhere else anyone suggests might be appropriate for notification. Thanks. -EdChem (talk) 01:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I recall that while it is more specific in name, it still only makes an identical copyright claim to . I would also argue that an unused PD license tag serves no realistic purpose, considering that such files where said tag would apply belong at Commons, where they can be a benefit to all WMF projects. -  F ASTILY   01:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done But it is still a good idea to upload to commons instead of here Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Christopher Carter
Carroll F. Gray (talk) 01:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I have had health issues, but will complete my article "Draft:Christopher Carter" within a month and submit for approval. Please undelete my article, thank you Carroll F. Gray (talk) 01:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I have had health issues which needed my attention; I will be working on the article "Draft:Christopher Carter" and submit for approval in a month or two, please undelete, thank you -Carroll F. Gray (talk) 01:57, 23 November 2016 (UTC) Carroll F. Gray (talk) 01:57, 23 November 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) 02:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

User:BlaccCrab
Just not going to bother interacting with a certain editor who acts ridiculous. -BlaccCrab (talk) 06:35, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Restored to the last non-vandalized version I found in the edit history. I also semi-protected the page so that anonymous IP addresses can't vandalize it. That means also that you must be logged in to edit your own user page. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:54, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Water in The Arab Region
The page was deleted because 'Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Middle East.' This seems to be a mistake, the page Middle East only mentions water in one sentence. Thanks -John Cummings (talk) 20:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done  I have moved this to Draft:Water in the Arab region so that it can be fixed up to be less like a general article on the middle east or a jobs outlook and more about water. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much, it seems one of the issues isn't the content of the article but the title is to broad and would need other aspects relating to water added. The article covers the relationship between the economy and water in the Arab region so perhaps a title of something like 'Water and the economy in the Arab region' or 'Water and employment in the Arab region' would be more suitable? Thanks again --John Cummings (talk) 09:54, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Gres d'Annot
''I, Wilsonaj, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Wilsonaj (talk) 08:17, 23 November 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) 11:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_William_Knowles
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Voleares195 (talk) 16:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

The page in Question has been rewritten in its entirety. The deletion was made with an assumption by the reviewer and deleted as such. Edits were provided with additional credits to the subject and links to the subject. This was overlooked and the page was deleted without review. The subject in question is in regard to a show in China that has been a subject of question without proof and confirmation. This has been provided and should not be overlooked in this professional's new wiki page due to a past oversight. This is poor judgement.
 * This will not be restored since it was deleted as, not only a restart of a past community listing closed as Delete, but the nomination specified the concerns, so there was no " assumptions by someone else". Simply because he's a hard-worker in his field is not, by any means, automatically satisfying the notability here. Also, simply because apparent changes were overlooked in favor of deleting, actually means there was still consensus at that listing for Delete, therefore consensus it was not satisfactory. SwisterTwister   talk  18:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * SwisterTwister the issues in question regarding this page were addressed. Based on the past discussion regarding deletion there was an assumption made by editors that was incorrect causing the push for deletion. This text regarding a specific credit listed on the page was reworded to eliminate the previous confusion and furthermore citations and reference were provided to prove the claim. Additional past concerns about the language used within the article were also address as this article is new in its entirety and should not be penalized by outdated reviews of a previous article. We ask that you reconsider and reinstate this page. thank you.   --Voleares195 (talk) 15:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Agneya Singh
I am a film curator and created this page of an Indian Independent filmmaker after a great deal of research and citing many reliable sources including NPR -FilmForum61 (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * To state the concerns, he was not satisfying WP:PROF and merely suggesting he is notable now even though it's only been 5 months is still questionable. Like with any request, it helps to show us how exactly he satisfies the needed notability. NPR alone is not a convincing sources unless the contents are substantial, interviews, press releases and other self-published information is unacceptable and will not be considered for an article. SwisterTwister   talk  18:57, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I was the admin who deleted the page. Essentially, it was because I agreed with the editor who tagged it, in that it was too promotional in nature: it was too close to something the individual might write about themselves. The language was far from neutral. FilmForum61: If you wish to work on it in your userspace, I'm happy to provide a copy, provided you commit to fixing the issue before moving it back to the article-space. Vanamonde (talk) 03:50, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, please provide a copy for the same. I will try to fix the issues. Thanks Vanamonde — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilmForum61 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * How can I access the code copy in my user space Vanamonde? Please let me know the procedure. FilmForum61  (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 11:20, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Can anyone provide the deleted copy so that I can edit it accordingly? Can you help me SwisterTwister? Thanks! FilmForum61 (talk) 17:04, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Utilitywise
our brand page came under attack from a malicious character - and whilst i did try and amend the pages to how it should be - the malicious attack continued to happen. Because information is pulled from wikipedia through to our profile page on google results page i had no other choice but to blank the page - are you able to put the page back to how it was before all the amends started to happen - i.e. prior to August 2016. -Benjamin bicker (talk) 14:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have restored this to Draft:Utilitywise because (a) you have a conflict of interest, so you should be working from draft space and submit the article for review via Articles for creation and (b) the article is not in a state of readiness for main article space. Given that it doesn't show the minimum requirements described in Golden rule it is unlikely to survive long in main space anyway, so the safest place for it is draft space. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Akshay Agrawal
Wrote a new draft for it. Was suggested by another experienced editor u|Robert McClenon (the one who read the draft) to look at the previous deleted version of the article and to justify how the new one is an improvement over it. So kindly temporarily undelete the page so that I can follow up on 's suggestion -ThomasMer (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2016 (UTC) ThomasMer (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. I verified that your draft was a significant improvement over the deleted version, so I went ahead and moved it over to main space myself, and undeleted the old history. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:53, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * u|Anachronist Thanks a tonne *Cheers* ThomasMer (talk) 18:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Benjamin's Field
Cap603 (talk) 19:42, 23 November 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. Draft:Benjamin's Field restored. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Brandon McCuien
''I, Webmercials, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Webmercials (talk) 21:09, 23 November 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) 21:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Constant Regulating Diode.png
I drew this in Paint, so there is no copyright issue. -Plaasjapie (talk) 08:21, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done I have marked this PD-simple. Are you happy about that or do you want to release with CC-zero or another free license? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

PD-simple is fine, thanks! Plaasjapie (talk) 01:53, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Jose Carlos Gomez Taylor
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Ana65s (talk) 01:00, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Why was this deleted?


 * @Ana65s: No such page has ever been created. —C.Fred (talk) 01:11, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you are on the wrong site. It was deleted off the Spanish wikipedia site: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_carlos_gomez_taylor --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, if so, SpanishWiki will not restore it even if you asked because it was explicitly deleted as "Unsuitable materials" and then deleted again because of the first deletion. Please consider WP:What Wikipedia is not. SwisterTwister   talk  05:35, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Milk_Crate_Theatre&action=edit
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Milk Crate Theatre (talk) 05:41, 24 November 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. Firstly go to WP:CHU and pick a new username. Users here cannot represent organisations.  They must represent an individual person. I have restored Draft:Milk Crate Theatre which you wrote. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:18, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Real Vision
Real Vision's Wikipedia page was live throughout 2016 and conformed to Wikipedia guidelines but an editor erased all page content in November, and replaced it with unformatted, promotional text. It was quickly deleted as per G11. I have re-created the Real Vision Wikipedia page and am attempted to revert it to an original version which I had archived, but would appreciate if there was a way that it could be salvaged from a previous approved version. -Shomar103 (talk) 23:12, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. Valid deletion as blatant advertising. Guy (Help!) 00:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , for your info, as the deleting admin, I restored an earlier, less blatantly promotional version to Shomar's user space for improvement, particularly with regard to notability, and asked for a formal COI declaration. The article may well fail on notability grounds, but we'll have to see what eventually emerges. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me?  11:49, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * s/may well/patently does/ ;-) Guy (Help!) 12:42, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Vintage Polly Fashion Doll. Jr. Miss Fashion.
my article doesn't show nothing that violates wiki's guidelines its very informative and helps people know what fashion doll they had in their collection please don't delete my page. -WikiLovesManny29 (talk) 01:17, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It hasn't been deleted, its been nominated for deletion. You can discuss it there.  Search Amazon for books mentioning it, find a newspaper, magazine, something that talked about it.    D r e a m Focus  02:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Pocket Aces (Company)
The article is about one of India's leading digital content creators and includes facts. It does not contain any promotional activity. The page was compared with pages of similar creators and was found to be similar, if not less ad like and then click the "Save page" button below -AnubhavRao (talk) 10:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Definitely contains promotional text: "talented" "intelligent, differentiated" "garnered" all sound like press-release speak. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:57, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It's ineligible for restoration by request anyway, having been deleted in accordance with WP:CSD and WP:CSD. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:40, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Above my paygrade
The article creator, that's me, was not told of the prod. I believe there was enough valid referenced content to justify the article's existence. -  D r e a m Focus  02:03, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:47, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Zein Obagi
31.7.49.31 (talk) 23:21, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Created by a sockpuppet, and an IP address with no history is requesting undeletion? Why? ~Anachronist (talk) 03:44, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ the why is orangemoody scandal. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Coats of arms of U.S. Infantry Regiments
Article deleted as being more appropriate as a Gallery on Commons. Requesting userification so that can be accomplished. -Hammon27 (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC) Hammon27 (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅, article userfied to User:Hammon27/Coats of arms of U.S. Infantry Regiments. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * . Thanks so much!  I have incorporated the info into the correct page in Commons.  I don't suppose you might be able to do the same userification for Articles_for_deletion/Coats_of_arms_of_U.S._Cavalry_Regiments? Hammon27 (talk) 14:43, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Swpb/sandbox
Had projects-in-progress, self-tagged by mistake -— swpb T 20:58, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done I don't think you tagged it for delete, but it may have transcluded one from User:Swpb/assess table Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:25, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

liam crawley
a valid article with an unwarranted deletion. About to be updated along with a number of other pages linked to rugby league heritage numbers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.241.45.130 (talk) 15:58, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * First, is he actually satisfying WP:Notability (sports)? SwisterTwister   talk  20:37, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Skippa da Flippa
Page was deleted without any form of prior discussion taking place, two moderators who disliked the musician used their power to make sure the page got deleted while making sure nobody who contributed to it had a chance to discuss. Both users claimed they searched the artist to try and find articles claiming notability, I did this (after the page was deleted) and I found said articles in the FIRST PAGE of results on Google. Not only this but the artist has contributed to multiple viral singles, which is just one of numerous ways this article claims notability. I was under the impression that WikiPedia was a COMMUNITY effort, not just a few blokes doing whatever they please with no repercussions. Them not liking the artist isn't what bothered me, but the fact they refused to even listen to other users who might have conflicting opinions (so much so that they didn't even give the opportunity for them to express it). Cheetoburrito (talk) 03:20, 21 November 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/Skippa da Flippa, 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) 03:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not entirely true. This page is for pages which were deleted uncontroversially, even if it had a deletion discussion. This deletion discussion only had 2 comments, both to delete. RedPanda25 20:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * "Uncontroversially" means that the article was deleted for maintenance reasons, or if the only author requested deletion, or if it was deleted via WP:PROD that went uncontested for a week or so. It went to AFD instead, because deleting the article outright, without discussion, might have been controversial. Therefore, this wasn't uncontroversial. That is why we don't norrmally overturn any article deleted via AFD &mdash; particularly when the judgment was unanimous to delete among all participants (in this case 4, the nominator, two respondents, and the admin who deleted it). The process for getting the article restored is described in Graeme's response above. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2016 (UTC)


 * This literally doesn't makes any sense at all...I'm supposed to go to the person who is abusing their authority about trying to get them to stop abusing their authority? The deletion of this page was NEITHER CONTROVERSIAL NOR UNCONTROVERSIAL, because it took place in abnormal circumstances that WP policy doesn't seem to properly adjudicate (doesn't really do it at all, let alone properly).  In addition to all of this, the page in question is heavily sourced and had numerous sources claiming notability, pretty much all of the evidence here points to undeletion (at least from my POV, I strongly urge a logical counterargument as this whole situation has been quite the head-scratcher). Cheetoburrito (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Your personal attacks are unwarranted. Please assume good faith that the administrators involved in the deletion are simply following procedure. The deleting admin, Sandstein, has had zero involvement in that article other than to delete it after more than a week's discussion at AFD. There was nothing "abnormal" about the circumstances of the deletion. Given the normal circumstances, you won't find an administrator willing to overturn that decision unless you follow the process already described to you. Convince Sandstein of the topic's notability and perhaps get it restored to draft space, and if he refuses, have the deletion decision reviewed by the community at WP:DRV &mdash; but I expect the best result you can hope for there is for the article to be relisted at AFD. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:03, 25 November 2016 (UTC)


 * You assuming my genuine concern is a "personal attack", is in itself a personal attack. I have yet to post anything unbiased to this page, while you're being extremely rude.  Deleting an article with where only two posts have been made on the discussion board IS AUTHORITY ABUSE (literal definition), especially considering you can go through the two users activity and can see they've collaborated to delete numerous pages without just cause.  Cheetoburrito (talk) 22:12, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No, it was not "authority abuse", and SHOUTING doesn't make it so. It was not deleted "without any form of prior discussion taking place" - the deletion discussion ran for a week, three people thought the subject was not notable; you had the opportunity to contribute, and you did, but nobody agreed with you. The closing administrator correctly assessed that the consensus was to delete. After that, you don't get to just post the article again because you disagree. First, discuss with Sandstein (politely, without telling him that he is abusing his authority or assuming that he is motivated by dislike of the artist). If he does not agree, then WP:Deletion review is where you need to go, but once again, abusing everyone will get you nowhere. What you need to produce is references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources that meet WP:MUSICBIO. JohnCD (talk) 23:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

arvind singh
The page has been deleted without any valid reason -180.151.218.143 (talk) 00:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. See Articles for deletion/Arvind Singh. The correct venue to challenge deletion is deletion review, but your request would need to have a much better rationale or it will be just as speedily rejected. Guy (Help!) 01:27, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Highgate Private Hospital
Factual article about a substantial hospital which is notable. Not in the least promotional. -Rathfelder (talk) 21:28, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * As I believe, I was the second tagger, and having 2 deletions within the same month for G11 is going to be too questionable hence it may be best to restart anew (if at all), notifying for his interest.  SwisterTwister   talk  21:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I restored in earlier after a A7 deletion, as the  contributor said they could improve it (normally in such a case I'd restore to Draft, but they are an experienced contributor)  Unfortunately, it has now become even worse, with highly promotional content  added: " is dedicated to providing outstanding healthcare to the local community." and a list of all the medical specialties it serves (which, as usual in such articles, seems to be most of the usual ones)  was there from the start, but it now says also "welcomes all patients whether Insured, Self-funding or NHS funded."   "complimentary onsite parking" The only refs are 2 local papers. Where this belobgs is where the contributor  first moved it, a redirect to the parent company.  Frankly I do not see potential for an article.  DGG ( talk ) 06:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. Valid speedy deletion process was followed, this page is for uncontroversial undeletions -you need to take this to deletion review (where it will probably fail as the article was blatant advertising). Guy (Help!) 01:31, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Fire River, Ontario
Article deleted by Admin User:Skier Dude with log entry "2011-11-05T23:05:23 Skier Dude deleted page Fire River, Ontario (WP:PROD: Nominated for seven days with no objection)". Have not received a response from Skier Dude seven days after making request on that user's talk page, and so am unable to discover the underlying cause for the deletion. There is an identified place, a railway point, by that name in Ontario, Canada, per Fire River at the Geographical Names Board of Canada database, an authoritative, reliable source for geographic places in Canada. -papageno (talk) 04:10, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Please add your references to this article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, have done so. --papageno (talk) 06:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Matthew William Knowles
The issue concerning the cause for deletion were addressed. Clear annotations provided. Editors perceived that this page was a duplication of a prior page concerning the same subject, but they were in error. The content on this page had been completely re crafted to address prior concerns, furthermore the speedy deletion was contested prior to the deletion of the page and further review should have been provided. Please restore this page as soon as possible.Voleares195 (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2016 (UTC) -Voleares195 (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, the contested deletion statement failed to address the notability concern raised by in Articles for deletion/Matthew Knowles(Actor). I'm willing to restore this to draft space. There is some coverage in the Chinese press, nothing useful in English (press releases don't count), and I find a claim of significance in that he is the first white actor admitted to the Beijing Film Academy.
 * Since you deleted this, do you object to draftifying this article? ~Anachronist (talk) 18:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I do not.  MBisanz  talk 20:37, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done see Draft:Matthew William Knowles Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I have no problem with this being draftified. He has to resolve the issues of notability and while he wasn't the one who had created the prior article, just be careful with how you phrase things - the last editor to create this phrased somethign in a way that made it come across far differently than what had actually happened. It might not have been on purpose, but just be careful about this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:59, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:St. Carmen Sallés School
''I, JohnelCamilanDimco, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' JohnelCamilanDimco (talk) 09:25, 27 November 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) 11:34, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Harold Burnell Carter
I would like to complete the article ready for submission and hopefully approval. Previously the photo we had included was rejected due to the fact we could not provide copyright, whereas we now have a photo with a copyright -Benito Cartero (talk) 11:59, 27 November 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) 16:22, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Louis Jean Baptiste Bergeron
''I, WikiTraube, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' WikiTraube (talk) 19:17, 27 November 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) 20:01, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

delta phi lambda
First time experiencing seeing this page being consider for deletion, and did not provide suggestions on how to resolve it. -63.124.79.253 (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The deletion notice was on the article for nearly a month. Anyone was welcome to comment at Articles for deletion/Delta Phi Lambda. And it wasn't deleted; the discussion closed as redirect to National APIA Panhellenic Association. The edit history on the redirect page is still all there. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:31, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Community magazine
''I, Jacomatic, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Jacomatic (talk) 19:48, 28 November 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) 20:09, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

MangoApps
No marketing content is present, the page has been referred appropriately, no promotion of the organization is present it is general information about the company no reference to individuals are found -Alankritg (talk) 05:52, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * . First you should disclose your paid editing relationship somehwere, preferably on your user page. Second, see your talk page for an explanation of why this was deleted. Please use Articles for creation to submit articles on topics with which you have a conflict of interest. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:36, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

DMO
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -173.19.238.222 (talk) 23:21, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * . Malformed request. The article DMO already exists as a disambiguation page. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Benita Hill
''I, Janiemarie22, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Janiemarie22 (talk) 02:49, 29 November 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. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Community Justice/Meeting
Please restore this page. This page has a talk page that is fully protected, obviously for historical reasons. (Most likely, when this page is restored, it will need to be marked Historical.) - Steel1943 (talk) 22:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅, page restored, and protected as well. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Aftab Yusuf Shaikh
''I, Ayshaikh, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Ayshaikh (talk) 09:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Shaikh ... article content removed ...


 * 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) 11:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Ashesh Shah
page was deleted because of no references. Please give me an opportunity to give references. -corporate, industrial and panoramic photographer 11:15, 29 November 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/Ashesh Shah, 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. I suggest that your write at Draft:Ashesh Shah. independent references would be required. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Ghidawikiphoto.png
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Lalsulaiman (talk) 13:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. The image file was deleted because it did not have a license to show that the copyright owner agreed to release it. Since the image is of a living person, it cannot be accepted in Wikipedia as a "Fair Use" image; so it should be on Wikimedia Commons which will make it available to all the Wikimedia projects.


 * The file had actually been transferred to Commons as Commons:File:Ghida Fakhry.png (a better descriptive title) but was deleted for lack of license information. You can request undeletion there at Commons:COM:Undeletion requests but, unless you created the image entirely yourself, you will need to get the actual copyright owner (normally the photographer) to give permission as explained at Commons:COM:OTRS. JohnCD (talk) 15:06, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

GESTR ROOMS
Hi, I'm the article creator. Here are some points I'd like to highlight. Happy to discuss further.
 * In light of this AFD submission, the article has been edited and tightened up as of 29 Nov 2016. A full list of references has been reinstated. Language has also been edited to be more objective. References provided in the article are purely editorial in nature from reputable media organizations.
 * The article talks about a company.
 * Facts provided in the article reflect on the service provided by the company. It intends to provide an objective view of the nature of business. -Sra30 (talk) 13:29, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * What is your relation to the company? — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 01:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Benita Hill
''I, Janiemarie22, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Janiemarie22 (talk) 17:32, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I want to start editing the page again to include sources so that it can be resubmitted for publishing. I had started this project last year, and it had been rejected due to lack of sources. I want to try it again. Plus, my aunt has recently written new songs for country singer, Garth Brooks. It would be nice for her to finally have her own page. -Janiemarie22 (talk) 17:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✔️ by User:Anachronist Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:14, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Piero Bittolo Bon
Piero Bittolo Bon is an internationally renowned avant-jazz saxophone player, I added many reviews that prove that and external references as well. I would like to understand why he doesn't deserve a page in english. Moreover, the fact of not being known in the press in a determined language (that is not the case for Piero Bittolo Bon in English) means that the subject can't get a page in the same language on wikipedia? So no pages in most of the languages if the subject is not known previously in the press written in those languages? - Askid (talk) 13:19, 30 November 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/Piero Bittolo Bon, 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.


 * References do not have to be in English, but must be from a published source independent of the subject. JohnCD (talk) 17:00, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, Piero Bittolo Bon must meet at least one of the criteria listed in WP:MUSICBIO before he merits an article in the English Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

M.S. Dhoni: The Untold Story (soundtrack)
Please undelete this page as their is no soundtrack listed in the main article.It is a movie's soundtrack. -L.D. White (talk) 19:13, 30 November 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M.S. Dhoni: The Untold Story (soundtrack), 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. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Drag965
''I, Immu 01, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Immu 01 21:12, 30 November 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. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

sean macias
Sean Macias is a well-known Hollywood lawyer. Proof: http://sip-trunking.tmcnet.com/news/2008/08/14/3602449.htm.

http://perezhilton.com/tag/sean_macias/#.WD96TLIrKM8

http://www.law360.com/articles/574213/14m-adam-carolla-podcast-biz-a-handshake-deal-jury-told

http://www.juryverdictalert.com/jury-verdicts/item/wrongful-termination/entertainment-company-macdonald-v-ascent-media-group

http://www.thegrouprep.com/LadiesNightLawsuit.asp?Link=4

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/12/23/california.contestant.reward

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1109/27/pmt.01.html (michael jackson commentary) -49.151.149.153 (talk) 01:37, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I will note that if restored, this will certainly go to AfD for deletion once again, simply because the ones above are literally trivial mentions and quotes, none of that actually means anything of notability in Wikipedia policy. The PRODer's comments still apply in the case that none of this establishes actual independent notability. See WP:What Wikipedia is not. Who said that?
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. It's in Sean Macias Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Davidng913
I may as well retrieve my user page. Don't even know why I deleted it in the first place. -Davidng913 (talk) 00:12, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done history restored Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Pocket Aces (Company) 2nd request
The article didn't contain any false or self promotional language -AnubhavRao (talk) 06:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * First, are you explicitly aware WP:What Wikipedia is not explicitly states advertising is not and never will be tolerated, the first user deleted it because it was sheer advertising and Wikipedia is not, by any means, an advertising webhost. Any further attempts at advertising will surely have it deleted again. Also, when asking for undeletion, it's necessary to show how you will actually improve it, rather than asking for restoration. Also, as for the article, it explicitly contained The company is technology-driven....portfolio of youth-focused brands that create original digital content...." among other things, thus that was clear advertising. It's also necessary to state WP:PAID if you are a paid employee of this company, especially considering your talk page has consisted of nothing but to aertise the company itself. SwisterTwister   talk  07:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Second ❌ since the article was speedy deleted with G11 and A7, you should consult the deleting admin user talk:DGG instead. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:04, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Third restoral was already declined earlier on the page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Neve-selbert/sandbox
Is it possible to restore the version that was deleted on 12 November? Retrospectively, I made a mistake in requesting deletion, and I much regret my actions. ---Nev&eacute;–selbert 21:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC) I should have just blanked these two subpages instead of requesting its deletion. I went more than slightly haywire after Trump's victory, but I'm composed now. ---Nev&eacute;–selbert 21:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * both ✅. Welcome back to the land of the composed! JohnCD (talk) 22:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Henry Elkins
''I, Jake.hackl, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Jake.hackley (talk) 19:05, 1 December 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) 22:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Entity Registry System
''I, Nealmcb, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' ★NealMcB★ (talk) 20:57, 1 December 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!" JohnCD (talk) 23:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Born a Crime
The article was deleted under "G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban". I believe the subject is notable though, and so should have an article. Here is a list of reviews in major newspapers for the book. I don't remember the contents of the page, and am not sure what the blocked/banned user's violation was. I would like to request either the page be restored, or if there was a CoI or other reason for the which the contents may be suspect, either the page emailed to me or userfied. Thanks. --Odie5533 (talk) 22:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The article was created by a long-term abuse sock account who has a history of sourcing and copyright issues. You are a prolific content creator; would you like me to send you the deleted content via email so that you can review the sources and recreate the article from scratch? That way we can ensure that any potential sourcing and copyright concerns are addressed.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * That would be perfect. I have my preferences set to enable email from other users, so hopefully should work. --Odie5533 (talk) 22:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, on its way to you now.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thank you very much! Will take a look at it and make a new article. I opened a discussion here because I didn't want to impose if this weren't an area you work on. Thanks again for the help. --Odie5533 (talk) 23:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Pia de Jong
''I, Boomer1946, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' There are newsworthy developments about Pia de Jong (she is publishing her memoir with WW Norton in July 2017. I will have substantial secondary references. Boomer1946 (talk) 21:38, 1 December 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) 23:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Parim Infocomm Pvt. Ltd.
Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Sanjujdp (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * (copy-paste of article removed)
 * . As the admin who deleted the article, any request to restore it would defer to me anyway, and I decline the request. The article made no assertion of significance whatsoever, and it contained advertising text. Therefore it cannot be kept on Wikipedia and was deleted in accordance with WP:CSD and WP:CSD. You are welcome to try again in Articles for creation, but be sure you read WP:PAID first and disclose your conflict of interest on your user page. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Neha Sargam
This article was previously deleted per WP:BLPPROD, which I have then recreated. I would like the deleted history of the article as well as the talk page to be restored to see why sources were removed that led to BLPPROD. - GeoffreyT2000 ( talk,  contribs ) 05:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Since the current article has sources, I don't see why we can't restore it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Wijalles
Wijalles is the topic of a new humanitarian thought that is under development. It will include and link to other related topics. Ingridwood5 (talk) 10:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC) -Ingridwood5 (talk) 10:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If you want to have this topic I suggest that you write at Draft:Wijalles and say what it is. The deleted article is very obscure. The two online references do not mention it, so perhaps someone just made this up. You should ask the deleting admin User talk:Fabrictramp if want it converted to a draft page, but really I think it needs to start again from scratch. (A1 certainly applies, A7 may not apply as it may not have been an organisation). Graeme Bartlett (talk)

MultiCharts
Our competitors deleted it. There are no advertizing on this page. The pages of the similar desktop applications and companies are present on Wikipedia. Please help us -194.84.116.138 (talk) 12:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. User:RHaworth proposed this for deletion, and I am pretty sure not one of your competitors. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft:HATE DRUGS (band)
''I, Mprasser, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it.'' Mprasser (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Recent increase in relevance -Mprasser (talk) 18:30, 2 December 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) 22:46, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Highland Upward Bound
Jeremy Warneke (talk) 22:23, 2 December 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. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Manilal Desai
Deleted due to lack of verifiable reference. Now I had a book from which I can add reliable source. He is a Gujarati poet with short life but very popular songs are written by him. Very few references in English are available about him. Admin who closed the discussion is now retired. Ref -Nizil (talk) 13:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Rather than store to article space, I have put it at Draft:Manilal Desai. Note I cannot read you source. But also, sources do not have to be in English, so if you have Gujarati sources, use them too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * , thank you. I will improve it before moving to mainspace.--Nizil (talk) 06:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)