Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 83

Faye Resnick
reasoning -Allabtnews (talk) 03:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Reasons for undeleting page:

Critical person in the OJ Simpson trial.

Author or two books regarding OJ Simpson trial.

Also on the reality tv show, Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.


 * 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 needs more references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 21:04, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

DJ Matt Rees
I feel this page was deleted for the wrong reason and it was explained within the article why DJ Matt Rees was a significant person. DJ Matt Rees is an up and coming disk jockey in Burnley and for this reason we feel a Wikipedia page in his name is needed - DJ Matt Rees will soon be DJing in London's biggest clubs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SLowe 001 (talk • contribs) 09:02, 25 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. And once Matt is actually DJing in big clubs your piece will still not be the basis for an article here. --Tikiwont (talk) 21:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Michele Knotz
Article was deleted per A7 (subject is a voiceover artist in the United States and has plenty of credits to her name) and the article being "unsourced" was also cited, but this should not be the reason A7 was applied. -— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 15:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - The A7 one was just a mere sentence, but there was a previous version with the credits but still no real sources, that I've restored as a contested proposed deletion. --Tikiwont (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Given that the article had already been listed at AfD i brought it back there. --Tikiwont (talk) 22:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Trashy Bags
Contested PROD. The only visible part of the PROD rationale - the claim that the article was edited by people paid by the organisation itself - appears to be incorrect (although it is true that some COI editing occurred). From what I can remember of the article contents, it had at least some independent/reliable sourcing. ---Demiurge1000 (talk) 10:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Lectonar (talk) 11:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Demiurge1000. One of the article's editors was &mdash; Trashy Bags managing director. Here was the entire PROD rationale: "Read this article carefully; also see its history. It was first written, and is sometimes edited, by people paid by the Trashy Bags enterprise. It will forever attract spam from enterprise employees like and Prochaz.tom (t·c). The enterprise should discuss its good works and its products on its own site, not here." Demiurge1000, I wonder if you'd be willing to please re-PROD the article now? Kind regards, --Unforgettableid (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The COI editing I was aware of was by someone who claimed to be an unpaid volunteer. However, the existence or future likelihood of paid editing, however extensive, is not sufficient reason for deletion if the article is otherwise acceptable. Please take it to AfD if you feel it necessary. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Preston Toroidal Scale
external authors have found this article worth citing and spurred them on to new observations. No copyrights are violated by this material and it is not particularly controversial. -70.136.24.119 (talk) 07:07, 26 January 2013 (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. If the article is to be kept, it needs references, to satisfy the WP:Verifiability and WP:Notability requirements. JohnCD (talk) 11:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * sorry I don't get it, an IP makes a request stating "external authors have found this article worth citing" and it's reinstated without discussion? Yet it remains unsourced, not a single cite, zero reliable sources offered. What exactly is the point of prod then? Semitransgenic  talk. 15:08, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Try reading WP:PROD. If you thought it could be contested, then you should have gone straight to WP:AFD.  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The point of PROD is to save work at AfD for uncontroversial deletions. As soon as someone objects, it is no longer uncontroversial. Yes, there should be discussion, and that's what AfD is for. See WP:DEL: "Even after the page is deleted, any editor can have the page restored by any administrator simply by asking." JohnCD (talk) 15:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Tham Fook Cheong
reasoning -Junthree (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I would like to submit an article on a Feng Shui Master who is quite well known among the chinese in South East Asia. I really think he met the notability condition. Please help to check and advise. A lot of people would love to read more about this guy. Thanks!
 * ❌. An article about him was deleted at Articles for deletion/Tham Fook Cheong, PPT, and the deletion review at Deletion review/Log/2010 March 19 said that the article should not be re-created until an acceptable draft was produced. You had a draft in your user space, which is now at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tham Fook Cheong. What you need to do is, read WP:Your first article, WP:Notability, WP:Notability (people) and WP:42, and expand the draft to explain why he is important and significant, with references that confirm what you say. Then apply at WP:Deletion review, with a link to your draft. JohnCD (talk) 12:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Jill Meagher
reasoning -120.145.71.56 (talk) 05:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Jill Meagher, The reason for undeleting her page is as follows; The murder of Jill was a turning point in highlighting the dangers females face when walking unaccompanied at night. Her death bought the nation together in grief and outrage at how easily a women can be abducted and murdered in plain view of the public. Her murder was a huge wake up call for women throughout Australia.
 * The page has not been deleted, but redirects to Death of Jill Meagher, where the event is fully covered. The reasons for doing it this way are explained at WP:SINGLEEVENT. JohnCD (talk) 11:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * also it is the death of the person and the reaction by the community and the points that you mention that are specifically notable, and why the article is structured in the way that it is, and a redirect from the person to the event has been put in place. This process is not downplaying the significance. — billinghurst  sDrewth  14:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Razana
this my first article -Akhil.s.vijayan (talk) 07:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I see that rather than wait, you simply re-created it. A deletion discussion has een started that will last 7 days.  You are welcome to comment there, but please read notability and WP:DELETE first (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Simon R.H. James
As this is my Latin teacher and is a very good page about him. It marks his achievements and provides info about him. -2.25.68.13 (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done - this page has not yet been deleted. It has been turned into a redirect. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_R.H._James&action=history for earlier versions and reasons it was converted to point to a book he wrote. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

FolderSize
Reputable free tool is deleted as spam. Topic discussed with User_talk:RHaworth. Please restore this page. --Allancass (talk) 23:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done Rhaworth referred you to deletion review or AfC. I'd opt for the second one. This board here is only for uncontroversial stuff. -Tikiwont (talk) 09:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

vp-asp
This page was deleted back in 2008 with the reason that VP-ASP is a 'non-notable software package'. VP-ASP have sold over 60,000 licenses since 1999 and are definitely a company worthy of having a wiki page. I can supply references to support VP-ASP if necessary. -VP-ASP (talk) 03:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Requester was blocked from Wikipedia for username violation. Optakeover  (Talk)   03:43, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * We're certainly not going to undelete something that was deleted 5 years ago. If the company meets notability standards, someone unaffiliated with the organization can draft something (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Uruthikottai Vattagai Nagarathar
I do not know why this article has been deleted. This is unfair. Please restore the article -203.200.103.226 (talk) 05:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Normally, a recent WP:PROD can be undeleted pretty much on-demand. Unfortunately, not in this case.  This "article" is unsourced, and nearly-incomprehensible.  It's impossible to even know what the "article" is supposed to be about (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Filipino Turkish Tolerance School
reasoning -Alim.kocak (talk) 05:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Im still editing it by adding references, link and more.
 * But what about notability? Article space is not place to create a draft that doesn't meet basic requirements: try a userspace draft in your sandbox, or articles for creation (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Weingart
deleted out of boredom by some user, back in 2007 "1:25 10 nov 2007 Ctrl Z (discusión · contribuciones) borró la página «Wolfgang Weingart» (el contenido era: «Pruebasmay may may toy aki en mi instituto aburrido y pensando en un pato»)" -Rodrigoviolante (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, then you should ask for undeletion at es.wikipedia; we have no "jurisdiction" over them. Lectonar (talk) 16:04, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As per above AND for the fact that something deleted in 2007 certainly is not an uncontrovertial undeletion (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

AppLift
AppLift was taken down because it was deemed promotional, but to write it I took as a reference frame the article on Trademob ,which is a very similar company. If the article on AppLift was promotional, then that on Trademob should be as well. Thanks for your understanding. Thomas -Tomaso67 (talk) 15:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is exactly the type of argument to avoid. Feel free to nominate the other article for deletion if you feel it does not meet the notability, sourcing, etc standards (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:09, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi; for my own understanding, can you explain why the Trademob article complies with the standards and not AppLift's? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomaso67 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * See Articles for deletion/Trademob --Tikiwont (talk) 13:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Amapola Cabase
1=Amapola Cabase 2=Significant information has come to light  -Swiftscw (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As this was AFD'd 2 years ago, and then repetetive versions deleted twice since, there's no way to undelete it at this point. If the person does, finally, meet WP:NMUSIC, then draft something in your sandbox or use articles for creation (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This is now a redirect to the meanhwile created Maria Cabase --Tikiwont (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Ametek Inc
Will remove the text from Reuteurs site -Shyamutty (talk) 18:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * X mark.svg Not done The article is still at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ametek Inc; please wait for the review, and work on it in the meantime, following the advice in WP:Yourfirstarticle; perhaps you should also read WP:FAQ/business. Lectonar (talk) 09:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

File:H Grunwald.jpg
image of deceased article subject; there are no free images ; rationale can be added as appropriate -198.24.31.118 (talk) 22:12, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Please elaborate the Fair use rationale. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Category talk:Presidencies of the United States
This category talk page was deleted by a bot, but the category itself is still there. I'm confused. I don't understand why it was deleted, but it seems it was by an error in bot logic. I confess I don't quite understand the discussion that led to the deletion, which the deletion points to. Please restore this talk page, if it makes sense to. Maybe when I read it the discussion will make more sense. Oh, I see. The bot reacted to this request to "Empty then delete". Ah, I see. The public logs tell the story. Cydebot deleted the page, as it was told to, on 7 November 2012. But then on 5 December 2012, it was restored as "mistakenly deleted." Pls restore the corresponding category talk page, as it was obviously also "mistakenly deleted." -Wbm1058 (talk) 23:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done by Jc37. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Dutch Candies
reasoning -173.163.2.81 (talk) 20:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Lectonar (talk) 09:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

james hormel
This article talks about the home James Hormel lived in which i think is an important addition to the Hormel page. I am new to wikipedia and i have no idea why my article was deleted. I still do not know how to communicate using the talk page and i have received no messages as to why the deletion. Could someone please help me?? -Darkstar2000 (talk) 09:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * X mark.svg Not done The article is not deleted, someone just undid your addition to the article. You have a nice welcome on your talkpage, so just take the time and read all the information which has been provided. Lectonar (talk) 09:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Isle of Purbeck Aquarium
Fail to understand why this page has been deleted? We are a small public aquarium that is financially supported by the local council, local action groups and part of a rural development scheme.

On display are local species found within the River Frome, Dorset, as well as breeding projects most notably seahorses and cuttlefish.

We have excellent numbers of customer visits, and customers often ask why the wiki site has beeb deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.52.131.216 (talk) 12:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The "article" was deleted in 2010 as failing Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. I have reviewed the contents and agree that this is indeed a valid deletion reasoning.  You should note that this is an encyclopedia, not a list of tourist/travel destinations or museums.  It also requires extensive coverage in third party reliable sources.  There's no question that the Aquarium exists, but notability (not just local) is a core component of Wikipedia.  If people are asking "why was it deleted", I would be surprised (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

R204DESIGN
this is a reputable company doing major architectural works abroad; clients have equally reference this business as architects for their projects -108.178.166.190 (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2013 (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/R204DESIGN, 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  03:27, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Bruno Zanin
The actor himself has published his autobiography, a book called "Nessuno dovrà saperlo", where most of the things in the article are recounted in great detail. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nessuno_dovr%C3%A0_saperlo. Comments on the book are many. Here is one http://www.ildialogo.org/Ratzinger/pretipedofili/tobruno04082007.htm and here an interview with Zanin, where he also talks about his friendship with Melcarth, the photographer of the picture which is considered lacking permission http://laiciDOTforumcommunity.net/?t=5946287 (Please replace DOT with a real dot) The filmography can be found in Imdb, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0953025/?ref_=fn_nm_nm_1 I think there are enough proofs and sources to warrant the full restoration of the page 15:42, 30 January 2013 (UTC)Shantimar (talk) -Shantimar (talk) 15:42, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. But please find more reliable references, wikipedia. forus and IMDB are not reliabable. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:32, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

replace "john d. shearer"
documentation and new information at: http://ivytechbloomington.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/516/ http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=87386 http://www.prx.org/pieces/79272-feature-report-im-too-young-for-this http://www.wgclradio.com/2012/06/glass-houses-breakfast-audio-6-19-12/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.177.99 (talk) 18:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. see John D. Shearer. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Greek loanwords
The deleted category was one of a series of many categories by language and a sub-category of Category:Indo-European loanwords (it also includes Celtic, Germanic, Hindi, Iranian, Latin, Romance, Romani, Slavic and Urdu loanwords) which is a sub-category of the parent Category:Loanwords. The category was wrongly nominated for deletion, considering that it had valid categorization and was a significant part of a large series. -Macedonian (talk) 07:48, 31 January 2013 (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 Categories for discussion/Log/2013 January 15, 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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Yossi Piamenta
This guy needs a wikipedia!!! -24.43.74.214 (talk) 22:44, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Although it's an expired WP:PROD, it was deleted 20 months ago as an unsourced biography. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 01:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

incruit
reasoning -222.106.59.1 (talk) 02:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, wikipidia. I’m a Jang Jae-sup, PR manger of Incruit. Co. LTd. which the Best Korea Job info Company. And a few days agoe, I saw the your warning message about site delete below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incruit

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the Guide to deletion.%5B%5BWikipedia%3AArticles+for+deletion%2FIncruit%5D%5DAFD

We were embarrassed because we still serve much job information to Korean Job seeker, And we having advanced to Global Job market with our Job Solution, named ‘Nae-il Search’. Nae-in Search serve 50th country job info now. (http://naeil.incruit.com/)

We were delete the unused link and hope to maintain current Incruit page. (but yesterday, incruit page was delete!!!)

We always thanks your devotional activity.
 * 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/Incruit, 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 02:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Requtail
created for reference with permission from company -117.243.235.232 (talk) 07:24, 1 February 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 companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself.  Articles concerning companies will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:32, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandeep_Salwan
reasoning -115.248.235.69 (talk) 11:07, 1 February 2013 (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/Sandeep Salwan, 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 11:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

List of Hanna–Barbera TV shows on DVD
reasoning Dear Wikipedia please bring back this page it was a good guide if you are buying Hanna-Barbera DVD's so please bring it back TJASTA -TJASTA (talk) 06:48, 2 February 2013 (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/List of Hanna–Barbera TV shows on DVD, 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. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  11:41, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Michael Felgate
This Is Autobiography and 100% true. the article was wrongly deleted in the first place and every time it gets reposted its deleted it doesn't take long to look at the references to see that all information is true -Paralimni (talk) 08:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * We have very strict notability guidelines for encyclopedia entries. For footballers, this is additionally highlighted by WP:NFOOTY. These are not optional.  It doesn't matter if the information is true, it's that the person is not notable.  If you recreate it once more, you may find yourself blocked from this project (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Yashashri Mashurkar
my page was deleted because I could not provide reference for the biography. I am extremely sorry for this inconvenience and wish toi provide the material sources now -Sourjadeep111 (talk) 10:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Sourjadeep111/Yashashri Masurkar. Please do not return the article to mainspace until suitable sources have been added. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  11:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Fuyo Group
I think I collected some sources on that page which I want to review again for possible suitability for the expansion of Fuyo Group. ---  Toshio   Yamaguchi  13:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * might it be under some other title? There has never been User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Fuyo Group, or User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Fuyo group with small "g", and I don't see anything with "Fuyo" in your deleted contributions for the last six months. JohnCD (talk) 16:29, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There has been some confusion on my part. I thought about it and now I am relatively sure that I collected those links in a text file on my computer and not on Wikipedia in my userspace. I need to check the folders on the computer to see whether anything is there. Thanks for checking anyway. I wish I could check such things myself, since I often find that I need some deleted page in my userspace again. I am not sure whether that would satisfy the people at RfA though. :) --  Toshio   Yamaguchi  17:11, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Spagnos
I would like to show my ideas to others. This is my first article. Spagnos was deleted because it is not a real place; therefore, it was considered vandalization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyhorses21 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 2 February 2013‎
 * X mark.svg Not done and will not be done. Sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for your original fiction, see WP:No original research. You could try the Micronations Wiki, or you might find some ideas at WP:Alternative outlets. JohnCD (talk) 18:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar Open (Darts)
Can this page be restored please? I cannot find out why it was deleted and request it be reinstated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.208.216.250 (talk) 19:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Laurie Elyse
deletion was done with malicous intent -68.100.238.23 (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This was deleted after a discussion on AfD where no substantial references could be found. It is unlikely to be restored and this page is not the correct forum. Rmhermen (talk) 20:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ❌. Please assume good faith. The article was deleted after a deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/Laurie Elyse. If you think the discussion was wrongly decided, or you have new information, you should contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user . Then, if your concerns are not addressed, you may raise them at WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 21:23, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Various files related to Vanity Fair and incorrectly transferred to Commons






The file was incorrectly transferred to Commons and then got deleted there. Should be restored here and then tagged with the template above. /Lokal_Profil 21:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Gunday
The movie has been stated filming and first look of the movie already released, the article was originally deleted due to article was created before the movie's production started -86.151.150.214 (talk) 13:19, 4 February 2013 (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/Gunday, 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. Note that being released still does not generate notability (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:59, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Mister World
I do not think this page should be deleted. I do not understand the reason for the exclusion and wanted the opportunity to review and fix the errors that caused the deletion. When done editing, gave few details to others more knowledgeable on the subject could contribute. I want this decision to be reviewed. -Brenhunk (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not appropriate for undeletion by this process. Deleted after consensus reached at AFD. You should probably begin by consulting with the closing admin. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done (procedural) Lectonar (talk) 09:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Ziron
After wanting to confirm a feature of Ziron i found the page had been deleted for a lack of reliable independent secondary sources, but i believe with a correct "google search", results will turn up from even a university, http://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22Ziron+programming%22&oq=%22Ziron+programming%22&gs_l=hp.3...3241.4357.3.4484.12.12.0.0.0.11.196.1621.1j10.11.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.2.hp.UIDvDZkkpqk&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41867550,d.Yms&fp=bc1f469cdd946056&biw=1920&bih=1055 -78.83.46.47 (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * what was the title of the deleted page? There has never been an article at Ziron until just now (after your request) a very basic one-liner was created. That has been PRODded, but if you can expand it and add the references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources needed to show notability, please do. JohnCD (talk) 11:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The version created in Oct 2010 was a single paragraph about a property company, written by someone with obvious COI. Nothing worth saving, and nothing that suggests it's notable enough for an encyclopedia entry, and unrelated to software development (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. The COI company page version was a different topic. I have restored the deleted revisions on the software but not the company. Bwilkins likely looked at deleted revision after I restored some. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Kendra Morris
Article was rightly deleted due to AfD 4 years ago. She has since been signed, released an album and several singles, and is gaining attention due to a song in the upcoming film Dead Man Down. I'd like for the old revisions to be undeleted so that I can see if there is anything useful. At least I want to see why someone thought she was notable before she was even signed. Even if it's garbage, it won't hurt anything in the history. -▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  10:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. I have restored the earlier versions to the history. JohnCD (talk) 10:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * JohnCD, you always respond so quickly! Thank you. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  10:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Monsterland
unclear why it was deleted

12:13, 25 April 2007 Fuhghettaboutit (talk | contribs) deleted page Monsterland (Article about web content that does not assert the importance or significance of the subject. (CSD A7))

The deleted page referes to the band Monsterland which was an important part of the Connecticut music scene in the 1990's. The page is referenced in the existing Wiki page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thom_Monahan I have no way of knowing why it was deleted but I think it would be more fitting to include whatever further information needed to make the page viable than to delete. If the page returns I will attempt to add content.

Thank you for your time.-108.176.254.124 (talk) 04:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * X mark.svg Not done well the deletion note you found above (from 2007) mentions some web content and in fact the deleted page was not about a band but about a browser-based drawing game called Monsterland as well. If you think the band merits a page it still needs to be written. If you don't have an account you can try Articles for creation --Tikiwont (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Trinity School (Atlanta)
The article was deleted and the editing page and the talk page (explaining why the page was deleted) were also deleted. Trinity School (Atlanta) is a elementary school in Atlanta Georgia and is a well-respected school that should have a Wikipedia page. The school's webpage address is www.trinityatl.org -HMGIAL (talk) 02:23, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Photolarge.strausz-hupe.jpg
head shot of deceased ambassador; there are no free images ; rationale can be added as required. -198.24.31.118 (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:MartiequNYC14.jpg
this statue is Public Domain, no notice formalities as required by US law. if you don't believe me, or the Smithsonian Inventories of American Painting and Sculpture database, then read "Due to these requirements, statues and art installed in a place open to the general public prior to 1978 are likely in the public domain if they do not comply with copyright formalities." Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US, in addition another picture by Shankbone is in the commons. -198.24.31.118 (talk) 20:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Festus_Haggen
major TV show character in longest running show on television (Gunsmoke); part of American culture including popular song written about character (Festus Believe in Justice) -207.231.4.18 (talk) 03:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

axvault.com
reasoning -108.20.187.56 (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi AxVault is significant because it is not a for profit business yet and it has created a new use for the web. I wish we made money. This description may get to the essence of the new concept better. ’AxVault online guitar archive, introduced the concept of web based records for historical provenance and the idea of “virtual Provenance”: i.e. utilizing the crowd sourcing of the internet to help identify and create a web based pedigree for guitars and other collectibles.

maybe we are not wording properly. There is no website that is that has attempted this concept. I believe it belongs on Wikipedia. Our concepts are very original.

Regards,

Michael Keegan
 * ❌ that page is promotional as well as not making any clear claim to importance for the web site. I suggest that you logon and make a userspace draft instead. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Beinfield Architecture PC
Fix copyright information on images -Danielar2 (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done -The page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Beinfield Architecture PC itself has been deleted as copyright violation. The 'fix' here is to start from scratch and write every sentence yourself. --Tikiwont (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Joe Vaz
I have no idea why my page was deleted, according the reason given on the page it was due to "Not notable unreferenced autobiography. No significant coverage in independent reliable sources". I find this very odd since a) I am an actor working in major international motion pictures and television, and b) since the page contained links to my official website at JoeVaz.com as well as to my imdb page, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1978748/, both of which, I think, 'provide significant coverage in independent reliable sources'. Run a google search upon my name and you will find books, films, television programs, reviews and interviews about and with me. I do exist, and I am in the public eye, so I do not see why my page should be removed. -Fridgerat (talk) 02:16, 8 February 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. Your own website is not independent; and the IMDb is not considered a reliable source. Besides, lots of people in the IMDb are not notable: I ought to know, I'm one of them. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;  Talk  19:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with unambiguous advertising or promotion. I am a public figure, mentioned on several pages already on wiki with no wiki profile. Have some links. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Race_2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agatha_Christie%27s_Marple http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dredd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Boys:_The_Thirst http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something_Wicked_%28magazine%29 http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/177-0715763-8904069?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=joe+vaz http://www.horrorsociety.com/2008/08/25/interview-joe-vaz/ http://www.radiodramarevival.com/category/audio-groups/something-wicked/ And I hardly think 28 acting credits and 95 news articles on imdb is 'not notable' http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1978748/news I just find it a little odd that every one of the films I have worked on is on wiki, with my name in the credits, and yet you feel that having a wiki page for Joe Vaz is unnecessary. I thought the point of wiki was to be able to cross-reference information. I was obviously wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.132.180.69 (talk) 11:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

DPT Labs
I'd like to examine the article. The first AfD closed as keep per the sources and the second AfD was closed as delete without any source evaluation other than from the sole keep !voter in it. I'm requesting userfication of this page to User:Northamerica1000/DPT Labs for evaluation. - Northamerica1000(talk) 18:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ I also had to delete User:Northamerica1000/DPT Labs which was blank at the time. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

mindscape band
reasoning -Mindscaperussia (talk) 10:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

This is the individual that deleted my account with the band, unethically and inappropriately. We have been in compliance and everything was functional through 1/30/13

00:08, 31 January 2013 Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) deleted page Mindscape Band (G8: Redirects to invalid targets, such as nonexistent targets, redirect loops, and bad titles (CSDH))

From: Mindscape Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 5:17 AM To: Wikipedia Subject: Question about a deletion

Hello,

I was searching to edit content on Mindscape Band and it shows it as non-existent anymore. I am wondering if it was vandalized or removed by someone in an abusive manner. I can’t even find an instance of its existence anymore and appreciate any help one can offer.

Thank you for the support.

Creator, founder and copyright holder to all Mindscape material www.mindscape.ws

two users show as deleting the US bands page after over 8 years of ethical actvity and acceptable use and standards with Wikipedia. I would like to contest the deletion and ask that Wikipedia please reinstate the band's page. There are no known dead links, or invalid info that is linked to the bands page. Phantomsteve was notified of communication with Wiki admin support via PM, also unclear on why site would be deleted. Can support documentation with supports emails. It is all copyright protected info and validated information from cited sources in accordane with Wiki policy. Thank you for assistance -Mindscaperussia (talk) 11:22, 9 February 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 music. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself.  Articles concerning musicians or music groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Ol Parker
I don't see why he isn't notable. The guy was nominated for a BAFTA, has written the screenplays for plenty of movies, and is married to a somewhat famous actress. And now there's all this redtext where he was linked to! I never saw the page before it was deleted; was it poorly written? - The Savage  Norwegian  18:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It was simply a list of films, and no sources (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Farrah Sarafa
reasoning -68.175.11.52 (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Farrah Sarafa is a notable Palestinian poet, who has won awards and helped support justice, peace and understanding of the situations in the Middle East -- Iraq as well -- at large. There is speculation that article was deleted by a pro-Israeli propagandist--- trying to wipe out any mention of Palestine.

Please reinstate ==> shouldn't take down valuable references to a region in conflict .... Her poems are being studied in schools around the world and are present in textbooks.
 * ❌ We don't normally undelete pages that were deleted through speedy deletion criterion A7 here in any event, though I do question whether it met that standard—certainly I would have declined an A7 given the content—and it might very well be overturned at Deletion review if properly brought there, but note that even if this was a proper topic for undeletion here, such as a article deleted based on a prod, I would not undelete the article based on your request because it contains an unsupported, scurrilous assertion of bias as the basis for the deletion. We should never allow even an appearance that an undeletion request was carried out because it was in any part acceding to such uncorroborated rumor mongering, as granting your request might by viewed.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:46, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG)
Responded to "speedy deletion notice" with the significance of the article: documents the world's oldest continually-operated online forum. -AlphaVictorSierraIndiaGolf (talk) 21:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Paul Chamberlain
reasoning -173.183.69.145 (talk) 09:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Obviously, without a reasoning, it's hard to make a decision here (✉→BWilkins←✎) 20:54, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. (I don't think prod contesting even needs a reason, but it is certainly more motivating to have one here) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Tara Kleinpeter
subject's career is really taking off and the deletion is blocking my ability to correctly and appropriately create a page on the subject. The article was originally deleted because of lack of notoriety of the subject which has now changed. -Warchief1072 (talk) 01:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Deleted article is a copyright violation of the related IMDB page. You'll have to start from scratch, and, if you paraphrase the IMDB article that closely again, the result will be deleted again.&mdash;Kww(talk) 01:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

File:MartiequNYC14.jpg
sculpture is PD no notice ; in addition to FoP, deleting admins should check SIRIS for copyright fomalities. then, migrate to commons. -198.24.31.118 (talk) 21:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ❌ Freedom of panorama does not apply to statues in US. Artist died in 1973 and statue built in 1959.  At this point I am unconvinced by "no notice". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:13, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * lack of freedom of panaroma is not a license to delete. if you don't understand US PD no notice, then you have no business making deletion decisions. 198.24.31.118 (talk) 21:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Zan Perrion
I'd like to examine this article. The first AfD for the article resulted in keep based upon the availability of reliable sources. The second AfD resulted in delete, apparently based upon sources within the article, rather than the availability of sources. (See also WP:NRVE.) Requesting userfication to further check into this matter. If granted, please send me a note on my talk page about the location of the userfication. Thank you. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC) - Northamerica1000(talk) 13:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Userfied - the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Northamerica1000/Zan Perrion. You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact, the administrator who deleted the page, before moving it back to the article space.  Please see the criteria for speedy deletion and the relevant notability guidelines - articles that are not in compliance will be deleted. Yunshui  雲 &zwj; 水  11:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Javelin (band)
we are a still functioning band with a new album coming out 3/5. the page deletion was a result of lazy band administration. thanks -Bjornborgnine (talk) 20:29, 6 February 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 music. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself.  Articles concerning musicians or music groups will be deleted on sight if they are considered to be unambiguous advertising or promotion, or if they do not contain a credible assertion of the significance of the subject. Also, you have a self-proclaimed conflict of interest. Lastly, throwing unfounded accusations around is not really earning you any points. Lectonar (talk) 15:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

First Ladies of Disco
FIRST LADIES OF DISCO is an important book, the only one of it's kind on the subject, and IS scheduled for publishing by a major academic reference book publisher, McFarland. The date of publication is clearly listed as June 30, 2013 on Amazon.com, Link: http://www.amazon.com/First-Ladies-Disco-Discuss-Singing/dp/0786475811/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360539342&sr=8-1&keywords=first+ladies+of+disco. I have edited date in copy. I can supply a copy of the signed publishing contract. An ISBN # has been registered with the Library of Congress for this book which is 0786475811. Pre-orders have been taken and can be documented. Requesting this page be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ja2day (talk • contribs) 23:41, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Article wasn't deleted yet, was just PROD tagged. User jumping the gun by posting here. However, if the user wants to ask again a little while later when it IS deleted, then maybe that's ok. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 23:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have speedy deleted the article and closed the AFD. Our notability guidelines are not optional - this is an encyclopedia of notable topics, not a book listing service. See also WP:CRYSTAL (✉→BWilkins←✎) 00:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done (procedural) Lectonar (talk) 10:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

CalArts School of Film/Video
reasoning -Cyberpuke 06:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

I am interested in retrieving an old article titled "CalArts School of Film/Video" It was a article based on research that I know longer have on my own computer, since the hardrive has since crashed. I am intestered in re-writing the articles to be more lean, and put in on the main "California Institute of the Arts" page.

Thanks

Cyberpuke 06:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I have emailed you a copy of the deleted article. JohnCD (talk) 21:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Taga Mansalay Ako
This group is a charity foundation that has just started few months back from a simple chatgroup. The article is not done yet I was just on the introduction part that is why the context of the page is not clear and may violate the conditions of Wiki. I would like to make this article be restored because I want this group be known to other people so we can gather more support. Thanks -Bull3780 (talk) 15:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * X mark.svg Not done and will not be done "because I want this group be known to other people so we can gather more support" is totally in contradiction to what we do here. Wikipedia does not exist to promote your noble cause. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)