Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 81

limalama
reasoning -72.197.91.252 (talk) 07:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies, if I am violating the complexities of this procedure (I am unfamiliar with any of this). This page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_martial_arts#Asia) can not have a single entry for a Samoan martial art? There are so many relatively unknown others that will become generally known - thanks to Wikipedia. Samoa can not have a link and one page? There is so much room here. Here is the archived page (http://web.archive.org/web/20101111030840/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limalama). Please understand that it is very difficult to find European-style citations for a culture of oral traditions.

Thank you for pausing to consider our request that the efforts of our last king's son be recognised.


 * X mark.svg Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Articles for deletion/Limalama, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, 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. JohnCD (talk) 10:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

FINE MEP
There are too many independent sources mentioning and refering to FINE MEP. Just some examples are the following: http://www.buildingsmart-tech.org/implementation/implementations http://www.aecbytes.com/vendorhub/BIMforMEP.html http://www.youtube.com/user/FINEMEP http://www.intellicad.org/articles-and-press-releases/bid/111612/ITC-Member-4M-Releases-New-BIM-Suite-Version-Based-on-IntelliCAD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CAx_companies http://dwgcadsoftware.com/comparison-of-fine-hvac-with-other-mep-software http://www.intellicad.org/success-stories/building-design-case-study---elxis/ -Spiros4m (talk) 15:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. 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 (though if, as I deduce from your username, you work for the product's manufacturer, you should declare your WP:Conflict of interest in any contribution you make to a deletion debate). Please add some of your independent references. It was also help if the article read less like a manufacturer's brochure, with lists of features aimed at potential customers, and more like an encyclopedia article written from outside for the general reader. JohnCD (talk) 22:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Carol Resnick
Article was deleted through PROD the week that my husband went away to visit his dying father. I was too busy with my 2yo to review the article and correct any issues or even to notice the notification on my talk page. Article was PROD-ed based on WP: Notability, reportedly because references were primarily about her husband, a TREMENDOUSLY FAMOUS author. Being overshadowed by the primary subject of a reference work would not be considered reason to disregard someone's accomplishments except in cases like these, where the subject is a spouse. Faulty assumption that Resnick is not notable because her husband is highly notable and her notability pales in contrast. -Netmouse (talk) 21:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. 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. The article has been flagged for five years as needing better references: two of the three are deadlinks, and the one that works is entirely about her husband, giving only mentions of her as a collaborator on some works. No, her husband's notability should no overshadow hers, but it cannot create it, either. What is needed are references that show "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" about her. JohnCD (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: I see it has already been nominated: Articles for deletion/Carol Resnick. You are welcome to comment there, but first read WP:DISCUSSAFD. You are also welcome to improve the article during the discussion. JohnCD (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

CLIPSAS
I only need the history restored to the main page and the talk page. It was speedy deleted due to a copyright violation and I think that there was useful information in there that could be salvaged (particularly links and sources). -JASpencer (talk) 17:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Rather than restore a copyright problem, here are the links:


 * Sources
 * At a perpetual distance: liberal and adogmatic Grand Lodges
 * Clipsas and similar Masonic organizations
 * CLIPSAS (Bessel)
 * Paris Gilles, LA FRANC-MACONNERIE Un front commun contre les intégrismes, Le Monde, 22 Octobre 1992
 * Rollat Alain, ''Les convents maçonniques Le Grand Orient de France crée un comité Laïcité-République', Le Monde, 13 Septembre 1990


 * External links
 * CLIPSAS Website
 * Frauen und Freimaurerei (German)
 * The Strasbourg Appeal

Sources added by Users Editor2020 and Pvosta. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Would an admin be able to restore the history of the talk page please? JASpencer (talk) 08:21, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Triptych (Novel)
Deletion occurred as a result of a subjective opinion/data point of one -Scientiacoronat (talk) 03:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ? No such article. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  03:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There is Triptych (Slaughter novel) and Triptych (Frey novel). Triptych (novel) is a redirect to Triptych (disambiguation) Wendy Coakley-Thompson also wrote a novel with the name. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:06, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

File:SturbridgeMeetingHouse.jpg
This was my picture, I took it. I'd like to fix the description page so that it can remain -Martinde (talk) 02:33, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done please update the information template to confirm what you want in there, perhaps add your real name if you want. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:11, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

munir john randhawa advocate
reasoning -Johnjoefrazer (talk) 08:11, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I cannot see that such a page existed. You have no deleted contributions either.  So please check the name and post again. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:The Knowhere Guide
reasoning Please could the talk page history be restored? If it was there before. - (talk) 12:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

MobileDemand
MobileDemand has been on the Inc 500 list multiple times, and is the fastest growing manufacturer of Rugged Tablet PCs in the United States. Please restore the page. -Jmceachron (talk) 19:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Pasadena Town Square
Found a couple sources to salvage this article. - Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

NAv6
Improve external references -Sanjeev "ghane" Gupta 08:56, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

The article was created an year ago, by me. It was marked for deletion, citing lack of "notability". I can now cite external references to the Institution, the National Advanced Centre for IPv6 Excellence.

I request that it be undeleted to a subpage under User:Ghane. I shall improve quality and re-create.

Regards -- Sanjeev Gupta Sanjeev "ghane" Gupta 08:56, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Ghane/NAv6. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:10, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

east river crawler
the twitter source was that of Six Flag Great America's advertising and publicaffairs department, and was an official statement of the corporation. -Blhktpdude (talk) 16:21, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. 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. It will help if you can provide references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish WP:Notability; the Twitter reference is not enough. JohnCD (talk) 16:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Ben Meiklejohn
a quick judgment with little to no debate about the politician in question's "notable" traits. Locally elected officials are eligible for articles per the guideline if they have received significant press coverage. The person in question has appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, in USA Today, and has received considerable coverage for a multiple number of purposes. -Prtlndgrnlntrn (talk) 03:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Articles for deletion/Ben Meiklejohn, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, 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. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  06:08, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Vineet Saini
This page contains good source and used in some websites like Music Brainz ,Discogs also please do not delete it article has good ranking and article Should modified but not for deletion. thank you - musichimachal 03:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musichimachal (talk • contribs) 03:21, 23 December 2012‎
 * this article has not been deleted. Deletion is being discussed at Articles for deletion/Vineet Saini, and that is where you should comment, but first read WP:DISCUSSAFD. JohnCD (talk) 23:20, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Karl Denninger
Adimittedly I should have spotted this as a prod, but didn't. He's got a following and was one of the original tea party popularisers. If this really needs to be deleted it should go to AfD. Could it be restored so that I can try to improve it? -JASpencer (talk) 08:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. 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. The stated reason for the PROD was " insufficient notability and poor source quality". There is a string of references, but at a quick look most seem to be by him rather than about him - maybe you can find better. JohnCD (talk) 21:59, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Spider's Web: A Pig's Tale/Noelle North


I feel that the film and the actress meet at least some notability criteria, although the first article was deleted and salted on numerous Wikis.


 * Spider's Web's notability: two longtime anime voice actors (Peter Fernandez and Corinne Orr) were in the voice cast in major roles; widely available on DVD.
 * Noelle North: had major voice acting roles in several long-running 1980s cartoons, formerly an AFD, some commercial work (most notably for Subway sandwiches).

If either is undeleted, please copy and paste the text from any revision onto my sandbox. Mewtwowimmer (talk) 18:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)


 * ❌. Spider's Web: A Pig's Tale was deleted and salted under WP:CSD as an article by a sock of Bambifan101, a particularly pernicious long-term abuser. G5 is used where the community decides that the damage to the encyclopedia from letting the abuser think he can continue to contribute through sockpuppets outweighs any damage from deleting apparently good articles. I am therefore unwilling even to userfy this for you to work on; and in fact it would not be much help, because it is little more than a paragraph of rather childishly-written plot summary. The salting admin has retired, so what you should do is write a draft article in a user subpage and take it to WP:Deletion review, explaining the background, for permission to post it. Expect to be greeted with some suspicion, as Bambifan has a record of persuading others to edit on his behalf.


 * Noelle North was deleted after Articles for deletion/Noelle North so will also not be restored here. Its history is a mess of Scientology-related edit-warring and BLP violations; the article as deleted was only three lines. Once again, I think you would do better to start from a clean slate. Although this deleting administrator has also retired, the salting admin, user is still active, so you could show him a draft to see if he will unsalt the title, or failing that go to DRV with this too. JohnCD (talk) 21:45, 23 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I just saw the history of my userpage. A sock of Bambifan101 vandalized it during my indefinite block. It was on April 25, 2009. Mewtwowimmer (talk) 05:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

CFC-Youth For Christ
I would like to request the restoration of the "CFC - Youth For Christ" page on your website. It was originally deleted as an expired PROD by user:Peridon due to concerns of unimportance and general lack of notability. But this is not the case. CFC - Youth in short, is the youth "arm" of the larger group of Couples For Christ. Although the group was branched out from CFC, it has grown into to be a very independent ministry, evangelizing young adults all over the world. That is not an expression. The group is truly international and is even recognized by the Vatican itself. For more information, the website is here: http://cfcyouthforchrist.net/I would really like this page back up soon. Thank you for your time and Merry Christmas. -99.243.83.125 (talk) 19:01, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. 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. The only reference does not appear to mention the subject: the criterion for having a Wikipedia article is called Notability and requires references that show "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Sources need to be about the organization itself, not its parent. See also WP:42 and WP:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause. JohnCD (talk) 22:25, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Raymond Aaron
Subject is notable -71.176.5.49 (talk) 02:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Articles for deletion/Raymond Aaron, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, 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. GB fan 03:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

2012 webster new york shooting
reasoning -67.76.148.197 (talk) 23:18, 24 December 2012 (UTC) we still have freedom of speech and the press, Im almost as sick of this anti gun nuts as I am of the mentally ill people that do the shooting. when will we wake up to the realization that you cannot legislate morality. If you take God out of society, then the devil will fill that void, and just like in hitler's nazi germany, all the liberals{without the weapons to protect themselves} will be the first one's liquidated.
 * this article has not been deleted, so there is nothing to do here. Deletion is being discussed at Articles for deletion/2012 Webster, New York shooting, and that is where you should comment, but first please read WP:DISCUSSAFD. JohnCD (talk) 12:36, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

tussia
This page was deleted because it is a hoax. It is not something that the general public could ever take for fact because the contents are truly ridiculous. I created it as a joke between me and a friend, we had constructed, albeit crudely, an imaginary country which was a joke about her lineage. I decided that as a christmas present I would polish this idea and create a wikipedia article for her. I do not mind if it is deleted on the 26th December but the idea that wikipedia lacks a sense of humour, humility and justness to the extent that ON CHRISTMAS it should spoil the fun of two harmless friends for but such a short period of time is saddening. I hope that Wikipedia can find it in it's heart to reinstate this page for this short time so that my friend can actually see it or else it's going to have to be some form of knitwear for her replacement present. Not quite as memorable, I'm sure. Thank you for your consideration. Oliver Williams -Opwilliams357 (talk) 23:24, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌. You do not gain anything by posting your request four times, that is just annoying. Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia project, not a webhost for this sort of joke, but there are plenty of sites you could use - try Illogicopedia or Uncyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 12:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

vineet saini
Article contains good source -117.203.245.212 (talk) 05:49, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌. Please read what we keep telling you: this article has not been deleted. Deletion is being discussed at Articles for deletion/Vineet Saini, and that is where you should comment, not here. First read WP:DISCUSSAFD. JohnCD (talk) 12:32, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

File:N. M. Price - Sir Walter Scott - Guy_Mannering - At the Kaim of Derncleugh original scan.png, et al.


WP:FPC generally asks for complete documentation of a restoration, as well as print-friendly PNGs. All were provided in this case, but have been deleted. This is far from ideal. - Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:23, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done, all five files restored, as none of them actually met the criteria they were deleted under. — ξ xplicit  02:19, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Magdalenengarten
Two years ago I wrote a German article on an important sight of my home town, a baroque park called "Magdalenengarten". When I wrote an English summary of the article today I kept the original German name. I am the author of the original German article. The English text is not a literal or complete translation of the original German text. It is much shorter. I have already written several German summaries of English articles and vice versa. I also wrote several articles in English on various topics which do not have an equivalent in German. They were all corrected by native speakers. If necessary I can find an English name for the park, e.g. St. Magdalena's Garden. -Torbenbrinker (talk) 16:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * the artcle has not been deleted. It was wrongly tagged for speedy deletion, but the tag has been removed. JohnCD (talk) 16:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:American track and field athletes
an undiscussed category rename to Category:American athletes at, which violates WP:ENGVAR, and a preexisting CFD discussion without establishing a new consensus. The category contents per WP:CFD procedures should not have been moved without a renaming discussion even without the older CFD. Depopulating a category and then declaring it empty would be an out of process deletion. (Please also restore the talk page) -65.92.180.225 (talk) 23:26, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Tell me how this violates WP:ENGVAR? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:35, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Per American English M-W.com an athlete is a person skilled in sports, not a person who competes in track and field . "Athlete" is synonymous with sportsperson, not with track and field competitor. The usage followed by the undiscussed category rename which ignored an existing CFD, makes the category solely for use for track and field, and not the general use of the term as it exists in the United States (football), (all sports), (basketball), (baseball), etc. As seen, "athlete" does not mean "track and field" as the category is currently used, instead it means all sports. The use of "athlete" to mean track and field only is not that of American English. -- 65.92.180.225 (talk) 00:42, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Done Besides the emptying-out-of-process issue, this should not have been deleted because it survived the CFD that you link. WP:CSD permits speedy deletions of XFD-survivors under some criteria, but C1 is not one of them. Nyttend (talk) 01:40, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Category talk:Canadian track and field athletes
category page still exists so this should never have been deleted. -65.92.180.225 (talk) 23:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * canadian track and field athletes still exists, so as the talk page was deleted for having a nonexistent subjectpage, this is not the case, so the talk page should be undeleted. -- 65.92.180.225 (talk) 00:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Besides the emptying-out-of-process issue, this should not have been deleted because it survived the CFD that you linked in your refund request for the American category. WP:CSD permits speedy deletions of XFD-survivors under some criteria, but C1 is not one of them.  Nyttend (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Flying Pyramids, Soaring Stones
reasoning -184.189.225.249 (talk) 06:48, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. JohnCD (talk) 20:39, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

User:Toshio Yamaguchi/NFCC
I might need that page again, though I am not sure when exactly and I don't have the magic to undelete pages in my userspace. ---  Toshio   Yamaguchi  12:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Just note: it's been deleted and undeleted on request 3 times now - could you make a final decision one way or the other? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Mmh, okay, I'll try to keep it in my userspace then. Thanks for undeleting it. --  Toshio   Yamaguchi  13:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Akinbo A. A. Cornerstone, playwright 1994.
reasoning -Akinbo A. A. Cornerstone 21:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aareakinbo (talk • contribs) — Aareakinbo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * X mark.svg Not done - this article has not been restored because it does not appear to meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself.  Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;  Talk  21:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Evan Williams (actor)
The pre-existing Wikipedia page for Evan Williams (actor) should never have been taken down. This is a notable Canadian actor, who is constantly doing new work, and has a strong fanbase and following in the press. Currently starring in feature films in the USA, while concurrently having work available in theaters in Canada, on television across North America, and available internationally online. Numerous press articles name him specifically, and he is the recipient of at least one award in his field. In addition, fan-run fan pages exist for this actor (www.evanwilliamsfan.com), he has work listed in 'pre-production', 'filming' and 'post-production' on IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0930570/), and he is in the top 10'000 on the IMDBPro's StarMeter. Please reinstate this article. -184.64.78.228 (talk) 01:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Unified Code Count (UCC)
Deleted through the Wikipedia proposed deletion system; the Unified Code Count tool is the standard tool for counting SLOC (Source Lines of Code) used by the US Department of Defense. -japaget (talk) 01:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

UFC 157
Same reason as for Requests_for_undeletion: I am creating 2013 in UFC as an omnibus article. UFC 157 was deleted and I need access to its contents in order to incorporate it into the omnibus. If possible, please restore it to User:Oskar Liljeblad/UFC 157. Thanks in advance! Oskar Liljeblad (talk) 14:32, 28 December 2012 (UTC) -Oskar Liljeblad (talk) 14:32, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

BB Publications
I was still working on improving it to wikipedia standards. As I was working on it on the browser, I had not saved a copy. Dangerousrave (talk) 14:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ - article userfied for you to User:Dangerousrave/BB Publications. JohnCD (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Lawandorder01.jpg
This file is discussed in, and an agreement that this image is out of copyright has been reached. Therefore, I request that a high-resolution version be undeleted. -George Ho (talk) 15:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Reasons_Why_Wikipedia_Is_A_Bad_Source
reasoning -StopPrejudiceNow (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The article is meant for humor. It is meant to be satirical in purpose, I request undeletion.
 * Humour "articles" should not be created in article space. You have personal space for childish (and non-funny) essays such as that (✉→BWilkins←✎) 20:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

UFC 156
I am creating 2013 in UFC as an omnibus article. (See also 2012 in UFC, and my current work on User:Oskar Liljeblad/2013 in UFC.) Since UFC 156 was deleted I need access to its contents in order to incorporate it into the omnibus. If possible, please restore it to User:Oskar Liljeblad/UFC 156. Thanks in advance! Oskar Liljeblad (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC) -Oskar Liljeblad (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Oskar Liljeblad/UFC 156. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks but I can't see find it! I found UFC 157 but not 156. Oskar Liljeblad (talk) 07:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Tom Christiansen
This page used to be about the famous Perl developer and co-author of several books (including some best sellers). See:


 * http://98.245.80.27/tcpc/
 * http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/407
 * http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
 * http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/

And now it is about an obscure athelete. I don't mind covering the athlete, but the other Mr. Christiansen is also very notable. If the article had some issues, then I would be happy to improve it and remedy it. So why was it deleted? Shlomif (talk) 09:34, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. It was deleted because Telanis proposed it for deletion with an edit summary of "seriously?". See the history as I have now restored it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Da-Wen Sun
It is not self-promoting as contents are from reliable sources with detailed references provided -2001:250:3000:4B13:2CCD:C7FC:CC09:A0B9 (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Language like "research conducted by Sun and his research team is an important component in Food Process Engineering. The research has attracted the attention of quality publications including the prestigious New Scientist" made this such an odious exercise in promotion that it was deleted out of hand. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  03:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * As this can be fixed easily, I do not understand it must be deleted. By the way, this entry has been edited by many experienced Wiki Editors over the years2001:250:3000:4B13:21B7:C716:D328:74A4 (talk) 06:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC).


 * The article was deleted according to WP:CSD. That is outside the remit of this page. Challenges to speedy deletions like that belong at WP:DRV. Be advised that Orangemike's quote from the article indicates that the speedy delete seems proper, and I do not fancy the chances of a DRV nomination for this article succeeding.. Sjakkalle (Check!)  21:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Alexis Tembra Neal
reasoning -166.137.209.24 (talk) 02:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Alexis tembra neal. i was trying to edit capitolization in the title...this is my autobiography...not a hoax...I just wanted to fix the title.
 * No such article. See also WP:AUTOBIO. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Bravo TV.svg
This image is too simple, even with talk bubble shape, so it is ineligible for copyright. -George Ho (talk) 05:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * file has not been deleted - what action are you requesting? JohnCD (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Undeletion of prior versions; they may have higher resolution than current one. --George Ho (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. — ξ xplicit  01:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

lower level design
reasoning -203.99.193.60 (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done This page has not yet been deleted. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Jarnail Singh (journalist)
reasoning -194.138.248.79 (talk) 11:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Deletion REview team, The action taken by the Journalist is well recon in among the journalist comunity and sikh community. The act associates to a hisrtorical event in 1984 about sikh massacare. The journilst is doing great work to fight against the attack on comunities on the name of culture/ethinicity/sect/religion and appriciated world around. i wou;ld like to see the page on the Journalist.
 * X mark.svg Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Articles for deletion/Jarnail Singh (journalist), it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, 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. JohnCD (talk) 16:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Series by Sashkina
Please undelete the following works by "sashkina", permissions were sent by OTRS email. The list of works: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Antananarivo_street_2007.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mauritanian_bota_bag.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Togo_phosphates_mining.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Togoville_harbour.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Togoville,_Togo_view.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sanaa,_Yemen_view_evening_september.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sanaa,_Yemen_view.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maputo,_Mozambique_view.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Antananarivo_city_heights.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Senegalians_on_street.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rainbow_in_Antananarivo.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Central_mosque_in_Nouakchott.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Obama_in_Leesburg,_VA.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Obama_in_Leesburg,_VA_st.jpg 79.135.68.203 (talk) 01:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Since these are all on commons, we cannot help you hewe as this is the English Wikipedia. For OTRS permission we would await the OTRS volunteer to confirm the permission and ask for the restore. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've left a note at Commons:COM:ON. Nyttend (talk) 19:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Disability - vehicle adaptations
reasoning -Dbridge276 (talk) 09:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi admins, I am new to Wikipedia editing & contributions so please excuse me if this is in wrong area.

Today I added a sub topic onto the disability pages titled "vehicle adaptations".

I contributed this as a father of a severely disabled son who drives a heavily adapted vehicle.

Maybe I put tidiness the wrong area and maybe it should be a new subject article units own right with a link on the disability page, I am not sure and would like some guidance from you guys.

Other edits on the page have remained e.g. Updating the EFD name and inclusion of a paragraph in disability hate crimes.

So I am looking for guidance on why the Veh adaptations part was cut so i can make the correct contribution to help those who need to know about adaptations.

Regards & happy we yer David


 * Hi, there was no actual "deletion" here, only a "revert". I have added some more guidance on your talkpage. Sjakkalle (Check!)  19:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done because of what Sjakkalle says. Adding this template to ensure that this section be archived — will the bot archive a section with no template?  Nyttend (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Gracious!
Gracious!

This page should never have been removed, as Gracious! were an important 70s prog rock band who were an influence on many other acts. The page was used by many researchers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.133.37.146 (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  10:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

the ends not near its here
reasoning -98.249.139.78 (talk) 04:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Malformed Request - please use (replacing pagename with the name of the page you wish to have restored and reasoning with the reason for your request). Note that the page The End's Not Near, It's Here has not been deleted. Yunshui  雲 &zwj; 水  10:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Mobileye
reasoning -109.64.232.56 (talk) 11:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I am new to wIki and have never edited a page prior to this one. I work for mobileye and wanted to update the page as some of the info on it was old and wrong. when I was on teh page editor there was a notice message on the top which said that the page was lacking links to confirm the info, at least that's what I understood, and so I added links to the company youtube videos, I figured it was allowed as the page is about the company Mobileye. I then received a message stating that my page was going to be deleted as I infringed on WIKI laws and I proceeded to contact the administrator on his talk page, I tried my best to explain that it was an innocent ,mistake and I was not trying to do SEO of any sort. I just didn't want wrong information showing, taht was my main goal, the links I only added as a misunderstanding. I can see how it looks but that's the truth. I would very much appreciate it if the page was restored and I of-course wont add links like taht again.

Thank you.

Daniel
 * Although this is a WP:PROD, there's more than one issue at play here, and I will not be undeleting this "article". First, due to conflict of interest, you should not be creating this article.  Second, the article was wholly promotional - Wikipedia is not a business directory, it's an encyclopedia.  Third, the business itself does not appear to be sufficiently notable for inclusion (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Dragan Milović
reasoning -Dragan888 (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Becouse it is a real article. And don't delete it becouse I want to improve the article about Dragan Milović. Let me improve it before you delete it. I know now how to improve and use refrences in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragan888 (talk • contribs)
 * If you want to write an article about Dragan Milović, and you are not yourself Dragan Milović, then create it in a sandbox with a name like User:Dragan888/Dragan Milović. And in the meantime, don't vandalize other users' userpages. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note that the page Dragan Milović has been salted — in other words, only administrators can create it. If you write an article in a sandbox, like Orange Mike suggested, you'll have to ask administrators to un-salt the page.  Nyttend (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Mobileye part 2
reasoning -109.64.232.56 (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Not sure if this is how I am supposed to reply to your answer? I understand your point, however:

1. this page was created a long time ago,not by me. I only tried to edit it, I don't understand how a page can be deleted based on one editors mistakes, when I am not even the creator of the article? if I had edited the page of a different company would you delete those as well? I mean no offence I really am trying to understand how it works. 2. the page was not meant as promotional, it was mostly facts about the company, just like many other pages I have seen, such as "Nike". I do agree that by adding links to our YouTube videos that may bee seen as promotional, but it was unintentional and done by me, not the original creator. 3. as far as the companies notability, it was founded in 1999 and is very well known in its industry. it may not be as popular as other companies but it is very well known in the collision avoidance industry. If you wish to revoke my personal editing rights, this I could understand , but ?I feel it is unjust to remove the whole page just because I didn't know what I was doing.

I would greatly appreciate it if you would take this to heart and return the article as you see fit. I will not edit it again.

Thank you
 * X mark.svg Not done and will not be done Nobody said the article does not belong on Wikipedia simply because you edited it - it simply does not meet the criteria for notability.  Suggesting that your company is even remotely as notable as Nike is rather disingenuous.  If you disagree, you may take this to deletion review, but you will want to read WP:DELETE and other related policies first - the WP:COI one will be extremely important (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply

I never said it was as notable as "Nike", I said it was as notible in its own industry. if you go to Wiki search and write "mobileye", you will see for yourself many pages with our company mentioned on them, its a huge company... If I ahve to go through the other process I will, but I hope you will look and realize that Mobileye belongs on Wiki. Im not asking for much, just search for Mobileye in Wiki and if you still think the same, I will go try the other way you mentioned

Thank you  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.64.232.56 (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Chris Pearson (basketball)
reasoning -92.41.174.215 (talk) 12:58, 5 January 2013 (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 concerning people. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself.  Articles concerning people will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Without further justification as to how this individual meets the notability requirements for athletes, this almost 2 year old PROD cannot be restored (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Abney Park (album)
reasoning - I was looking at the Abney Park page and noticed that their first (self-titled) ablum was redmarked and, thinking it had somehow been missed being set up, decided I'd give it a try. Imagine my surprise to fin that it had not be missed but had been deleted. At first I thought there'd been a problem with the page move that had been done from the original page "Abney Park (Abney Park album)' since the page noted it was deleted as a redirect to an empty page, but instead someone did a PROD with no explanation as to why. If there are issues with this page, please put it back and enumerate them so they can be fixed. Thank you Blackfyr (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ as a contested proposed deletion. But the article is very stub-by. Sjakkalle (Check!)  18:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Woolrich
Improper Speedy Deletion of a stub by User:Arthur Rubin, who cited "notability" which is specifically excluded from Speedy Deletion criteria. At the request of User:Arthur Rubin, I am asking for this speedy delete to be reverted by another admin who is neither me nor Mr. Rubin. -Davodd (talk) 10:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done The initial referencing to gift blogs was poor but the interwikilinks and the later added facts and sources clearly indicate sufficient importance in my eyes. Nevertheless this board here is for uncontroversial stuff and while we on occasion simply revert deletions, it is not really the place for disputed decisions (DRV is) and definitely not for situations where one administrator already improperly restored an article where they are involved as creator and another then improperly reinstated the initial deletion that he already tagged (ANI and ARBCOM are). --Tikiwont (talk) 23:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Barry Charles Honig
The article's first AfD discussion resulted in a keep result with several participants in the discussion. The article's second AfD discussion resulted in delete after a nomination with only one !vote and two relistings. I'd like to examine this article. Requesting userfication as a subpage to my user page. - Northamerica1000(talk) 09:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Northamerica1000/Barry Charles Honig. --Tikiwont (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the userfication. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Palmerston Shopping Centre
I want to edit the page to make it fit the rules -Tomdingdong (talk) 05:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. please add references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Da-Wen Sun
As Orangemike's advice, I have carefully removed promotion quotes. Thanks for considering -Mayonglan (talk) 13:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC) Mayonglan (talk) 13:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ I disagree with the unilateral speedy delete for this article, so I have restored it. An AFD should be used by Sandstein if deletion is desired. However plese continue to improve the tone. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 19:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Steubenville rape cover-up controversy
Was deleted by speedy deletion. However, it is now a national story with multiple WP:RS covering it. One can do a Google news search to see that. While I did base the page on what was on the page of the High School, I was in the process of providing edits. I would ask for the article to be restored. -Casprings (talk) 05:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done There is already a paragraph at Steubenville High School; I do not see the need for a separate article for now. Lectonar (talk) 10:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Roderick Tye
This article was incorrectly deleted on the basis of copyright infringement, I was also not notified in time to be able to contest this speedy deletion and I would like the page undeleted. -Fraserjwood (talk) 10:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done - this page is a copyright violation. I also see a copyvio here; and please note that a notification in case of a speedy deletion is not compulsory, but you were notified on your talk-page, back in 2011 when the article was deleted. Lectonar (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Polarity therapy
Deletion involved undue bias. -24.250.161.190 (talk) 10:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it involved community discussion. You're welcome to take it to deletion review bu you'll want to read WP:DELETE first (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Randolph Stone
Deletion process contained undue bias. -24.250.161.190 (talk) 10:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Same as above (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaine_Green
The article may need improvement to move it forward but it does not violate the biography criteria to such a degree as suggested to merit deletion. The claims in the article are substantiated and well sourced and multiple people have contributed to the article over time inlcuding editors. Also, in terms of visibility of the information, I've been contacted by a journalist requesting a version to use. -83.244.252.5 (talk) 13:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ but I suggest you try to address the issues raised in the proposal for deletion. Lady  of  Shalott  15:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Tony Vitti
Hi there, Don't want to bother you all but, once again, it is just the biggest joke ever. The argumentation of the Administrator is amazingly empty.

=> "the encyclopedia's content, and consensus is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. " First sentence of the argumentation : "The result was delete. Vote count here is 5 delete to 4 keep". "LOL".

=> Critieria which has been clearly shown and demonstrated have just been adapted to the administrator's view. Like the "against the page" did for a week.

=> Everything else in the argumentation was based on a sentence in a local newspaper "100 autoproduced album".

PS : Thanks for the peoples that helped keeping this page. -Frenchytv (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Frenchytv (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Not done - As announced at the top of the page, this process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially and has no applicability to articles deleted after any deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted at Articles for deletion/Tony Vitti, it cannot be undeleted through this process. Nevertheless, if you believe that the consensus found at the discussion was in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, 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. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Nine Kinds of Naked
It appears the original page was deleted in 2007 before the novel was published in 2008. If this was the issue, it is now obviously moot. Pastordavid, the administrator, has not been active since 2009. -108.178.110.53 (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

It was deleted for being premature and spammy. The entire useful text was: "Nine Kinds of Naked is the title of an upcoming novel by Tony Vigorito, to be released in Spring 2008. It will be the second novel by the author; his first was Just a Couple of Days.

An excerpt of the book is available at the author's website"

This was accompanied by a link to the website inline and then another link to the same website in an external links section.

If you believe it is notable, then go ahead and recreate the article - just sure you include sources and write more than is above. Undeletion isn't really necessary in this case. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

. As per the advice that was already  offered to  108.178.110.53 earlier today  at  WP:EAR, in  particluar that  the subject  must  meet notability criteria for books at  WP:NBOOK which  according to some research I have done, is unlikely. Note that unless they create an account  it will  have to  be done through WP:Articles for creation. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Microsoft Office redirects
This redirect was deleted for an uncontroversial move request, but the move was subsequently contested and thus reversed. (A new redirect now exists due to the move reversal, but the original redirect's history has obviously been lost.) -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 19:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

This redirect was deleted for an uncontroversial move request, but the move was subsequently contested and thus reversed. (A new redirect now exists due to the move reversal, but the original redirect's history has obviously been lost.) -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 19:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

This redirect was deleted for an uncontroversial move request, but the move was subsequently contested and thus reversed. (A new redirect now exists due to the move reversal, but the original redirect's history has obviously been lost.) -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 19:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done All three edit histories are trivial, that is without any content other then redirects and are now visible again.--Tikiwont (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The Film Company
Even though the proposed deletion had been expired for over two years, I had just created a new article for a film they have produced, Goddess. The reason for the original PROD ("...a company that does not appear to have been active for several years") now seems to no longer be valid based on the production of this new movie. Would ask that it be restored and then we can go from there to improve the article. -Highspeed (talk) 20:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)