Wrongfully deleted per WP:CRYSTAL at AfD, despite the game coming out 6 months ago. The article was a few lines of unsourced plot information. After deletion I recreated the article from scratch using the proper MoS with sources, game-play and reception info and etc but it was deleted shortly thereafter via CSD when I went to bed. Undelete that version. Norse Am Legend (talk) 02:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn and keep the newest version. Per WP:CRYSTAL"Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented." - the game is already released in Japan and will be covered by the Japanese press (WP:N), it has been picked up for release by Atlus, a publisher which attracts a lot of attention from gamers due to the niche-market titles they release, a western release has been announced and noticed and it even has a home page in English already. There are several initial sources on DS Fanboy and Siliconera like: [1][2][3][4]. I'm not sure why AFD participants dropped the ball with this particular game, but it's easily reversible and I'd suggest doing so and letting Norse get on with it. Someoneanother10:16, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn. This article is sufficiently different from the AFD'd version to not be an G4 speedy and it obviously doesn't fail CRYSTAL either since it is already released (meaning the original AFD was in error). Article needs a ref section so the refs in the text actually show, but otherwise this looks fine. - Mgm|(talk)13:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse the AFD closure as it could not possibly have been closed any other way, but overturn the G4 as the second article had additional information and as such was not subject to G4. Stifle (talk) 21:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
Undeletion and unprotection for the page Christian Schoyen. Previous entries made the page appear to be spam or advertising related. I have written a new biography with proper citations and references to the person's book and film work, w/ a short objective biography has been written and is in complete accordance w/ all of wikipedia's rules and regulations. It shows him as a notable figure and is befitting a wikipedia page. I have no received any word from the deleted administrator which is why i bring this up to you. Spyglassent (talk) 22:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No undeletion is needed to post a new article, unless you used from the previous version. Did you? Also, please post the article you're talking about to userspace so we can see if it's ready to be posted to mainspace. - Mgm|(talk)13:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The current state of affairs is that Christian Schoyen is deleted and salted, while the article has been recreated at Christian Schøyen. As far as I can tell, the name was mutated to sidestep the page protection, and not the subject's real name. This state of affairs is inconsistent and highly undesirable, IMO. I'd be much happier with any of the following:
