Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 150

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 145 ← Archive 148 Archive 149 Archive 150 Archive 151 Archive 152 → Archive 155

King Price Insurance

I, KingPrice, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. KingPrice (talk) 14:21, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done. This was a blatant advertisement: "With their fiery advertising, no-nonsense cover and royal service, King Price is fast becoming one of the most talked about insurance companies in the country" etc. Wikipedia is not a free advertising noticeboard: anything like that is deleted at sight. JohnCD (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: requester username-soft-blocked as company account. JohnCD (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

please I want my "jezrealgizzy" to be undeleted

Jezrealgizzy is the name of the userpage.

The reason why my page was deleted was because I was trying to create an article page when I am having a userspage, I dint give information about myself And dint notes wiki admin that i was creating an articles page. so my "jezrealgizzy" userespage was deleted because of copyright of myself. Please I'll be glad you guys can help me undelete my "jezrealgizzy" page

Thank you.

  • Done. See User:Jezrealgizzy. Take a look at our guidance on user pages when you get a chance. I don't think there's anything on the page which really runs afoul of that guideline, but it's worth a look. Protonk (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Vikrant Koul

Was not able to add references somehow. Many of them exist. The person in question is an actor and has recently appeared in a supporting role in a leading bollywood film -Ramita.k.singh (talk) 18:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done. @Ramita.k.singh: Note that because this article is a biography of a living person it must contain reliable sources. I've restored the article and replaced the deletion tag. If sources are not added within 7 days the article will be deleted again. If you need help finding sources or removing the tag once you've found them let me know. Protonk (talk) 18:22, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Guido_Vrolix_in_his_studio.jpg and few others

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

per OTRS ticket:2014082510014282 Ankry (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

8 prime spirals

the 8 prime spirals are a significant advancement in primality, sieve of atkin is based on the 1995 work and recent prime algorithm tests in pyprimes confirm it is a significant advancement in prime number theory -Drprinceton (talk) 18:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I requested deletion because the article was written as an argument for the significance of the theory and as a dismissal of its detractors. Wikipedia articles must be neutral and cannot take the form of an advocacy piece. Besides that, Wikipedia topics need to be notable, which doesn't mean "important", but does most typically mean that one ought to be able to find plenty of independent significant coverage of the topic in reliable sources. I can't find anything like that for this theory, not even enough to cover Wikipedia's requirement of verifiability for any assertion in its corpus. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
@Drprinceton:  Not done. Largo Plazo's points are valid: see also the policy Wikipedia:No original research. Read it all, but note particularly that it includes:

"If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery."

JohnCD (talk) 22:09, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Isaac Haller

I explained who i am, in my music production and good it's going on Youtube. There's no reason why it should be deleted. Absolutely no reason. My other page, Sketch17ify, got deleted because of some Mythical creature that can see fairy's. So, I've been getting false claims on speedy deletion.I, Isaac Haller, would like this page brought back up, under the FALSE claim of CSD A7. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sketch17ify (talk • contribs) 03:25, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done We typically do not undelete WP:A7 articles. You can try asking User:Bbb23 to restore it, but there's another issue beyond the whole WP:A7 thing that will likely keep him or any other admin from restoring it. The article as a whole was also fairly promotional in tone, which would also prevent us from restoring it. Finally, please be aware that notability guidelines are very, very strict. I honestly can't see where you currently pass notability guidelines for yourself or for your channel. Please understand that this isn't to be mean and isn't randomly done: notability guidelines require that you and/or your channel receive coverage in independent and reliable source (WP:RS) like newspaper articles and the like. I can't see where you have received any of that. On a side note, your statement here can come across as you being insulting towards the admins who deleted the page and/or the people who nominated them. That's not a very good way to ask for someone to do something for you. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VezTek USA

I, AmandaBro, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. AmandaBro (talk) 05:08, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • On a side note, I removed the word "prestigious" from the article. It comes across as a WP:PEACOCK term and should be avoided. Although I do have to warn you: BBB ratings don't count towards notability for Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Clement

I, Bookspro, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Bookspro (talk) 02:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Steelbro

I, 131.203.63.202, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 131.203.63.202 (talk) 02:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. JohnCD (talk) 12:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alex Paul Menon

I, Trvpb, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. This page is about a pro-poor, pro-development person who is trying to change the face of the dynamic underprivilege. I wasn't able to update due to personal reasons. Please undelete so that i can update. Trvpb (talk) 10:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nouf Mohammed Al-Marwaai

I, Mannukoshy, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Mannukoshy (talk) 12:03, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DIISSC Orchestra

I, Reibou, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Reibou (talk) 13:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tawon Car

I, Gsarwa, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Gsarwa (talk) 13:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Protonk (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Windows Calendar

I am requesting history-only undeletion for this page (and the corresponding talk page); that is, for the page history - this page is currently a redirect but was previously an article - to be restored. Please see the very strong argument for restoring this page's history made by User:Unscintillating: User talk:RoySmith#Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windows Calendar (continued) -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 16:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • I'm not seeing an argument to restore the history there. I'm seeing an argument from Unscintillating that the article shouldn't've been deleted in the first place. In general, articles which happen to have titles that are useful search terms are deleted and replaced with a redirect, the reasoning being that enforcing the deletion outcome is a lot easier if reversing it requires more than reverting to a previous page version. Why should the page history be restored? Protonk (talk) 17:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @User:Protonk: Okay, if you want an argument for that specifically, here's one: the content could be useful at Features new to Windows Vista (the current redirect target) and also List of Microsoft Windows components. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 17:08, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
      • @RoySmith: any objections to my restoring the history behind this redirect? I don't see a major problem with it, but you've declined to restore the history, so I wanted to rope you in. Protonk (talk) 17:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
        • IMHO, it doens't seem in line with the consensus of the AfD, but, I certainly have no objections if you feel it is appropriate. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:25, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks. My guess is it doesn't really hurt anything assuming the article isn't later restored. I've added the page to my watchlist so hopefully I can keep an eye on that. Protonk (talk) 17:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

@User:Protonk and other interested parties: please see Wikipedia talk:Deletion review#History undeletion underneath redirect for some background on this type of undeletion request. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 17:13, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done I've restored the page history. I don't see a reason to restore the talk page history so I'm disinclined to do that. Protonk (talk) 17:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Aditya Bhat

Aditya Bhat is a big name in bollywood industry, he is the writer and the director. some of his popular work is Rakhi ka swayamvar which is the most popular TV reality show in India, I have even submitted the link. Its not for promotion, We are a fan group of Mr Aditya Bhat, kindly undelete the page -InstaServ (talk) 19:05, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. @InstaServ:, the article had a strongly promotional tone, including meaningless peacock terms like referring to someone as "esteemed". Try Wikipedia:Articles for creation next time, since you clearly have a conflict of interest about this subject. Furthermore, your use of the pronoun "we" in your request implies that the account "InstaServ" is accessible by multiple people. Is that correct? ~Amatulić (talk) 20:41, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/College Admissions Counselors (CAC)

I, 24.182.38.90, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 24.182.38.90 (talk) 18:31, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I, Urcollegeworld, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Urcollegeworld (talk) 18:37, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I intend to work on the page and make the necessary changes -Urcollegeworld (talk) 18:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

It looks to me as though you may have a conflict of interest here. Your username is very like their url, www.yourcollegeworld.com - and given the promotional nature of the first version, I'm dubious about doing this but I'll leave it to the regulars here to decide. Dougweller (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
no Declined. @Urcollegeworld: your username is a violation of Wikipedia:Username policy. Please read it, and go to WP:CHU/Simple to change your username to something that represents only you and not an organization. Until then, I see no reason to restore a draft that is clearly intend for promotional or publicity purposes. It would be a good idea for you to review and comprehend WP:CORP and WP:NPOV also, before even considering restoring this for submission. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Futz! (TV series)

The original reasoning for (speedy) deletion no longer applies, so this page must be restored according to my understanding of policy. The deleting administrator has refused to do so without providing valid reasoning: User talk:RHaworth/2014 Jan 11#Restore request -Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • No. Protonk (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Why? Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 21:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
      • For the same reason RHaworth gave months ago. It's trivial to create a talk page and fill out a project banner. Protonk (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
        • I want the history of the page back - in case it isn't obvious already. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 21:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
          • No, it's irrelevant, the history has only one edit, consisting solely of a tag for WikiProject Television. You can re-create it yourself quite easily without arguing about it, but I don't see any reason for that redirect to have a talk page at all. no Declined. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

hegemon_group_international

This page was the start of a company profile. There was no advertising whatsoever. I just started the article. It looks like it was deleted in 2012 as well, but I did not write that and have no idea what the content of that article was. If you review the article that I created yesterday, you should agree that it was nothing more than a basic company profile. -Realmofanonymity (talk) 01:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

The phrase "building upon the success of..." sounds pretty promotional to me. Is there any reason why you can't just expand the article Hubert Humphrey (MLM), which already has far more detail about Hegemon Group International than the article you created? ~Amatulić (talk) 05:00, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Bubble Beat

The last version of this article is marked speed delete as too much content looks like promotion purpose, I'm sorry for that, I'll re write and submit a new one from scratch, but mean while I'd like to have that one back, because I don't have a backup yet, thanks. -Ianluo (talk) 06:37, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 07:06, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

AAVP Ashram

Creating more content to upload -14.96.128.80 (talk) 09:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

  • What do you plan to add? Anyway if you want this could be restored as a draft, but otherwise there is no indication of any importance in what is there. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Swami Visheshanand Ji

Creating more content for upload -14.96.128.80 (talk) 09:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

  • What do you plan to add? Anyway if you want this could be restored as a draft, but otherwise there is no indication of any importance in what is there. This was nominated for deletion as well as speedy deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Swami Alkhanand Ji

Creating a content for upload -14.96.128.80 (talk) 09:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

  • What do you plan to add? Anyway if you want this could be restored as a draft, but otherwise there is no indication of any importance in what is there. This was nominated for deletion as well as speedy deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Radical Islam in Australia

Reasons for un-deletion request

  • 1. Article received a number of "delete" votes prior to article expansion including a large number of edits affecting the articles coverage, tone and structure. Had the vote taken place after this significant changes were made, the result would have been in favour of "keep."
  • 2. Voters who requested deletion did not respond to arguments in favour of "keep."
    • 2.1. Arguments were made for keeping the page (e.g. why the article topic was valid, etc.). This arguments were not discussed prior to deletion.
    • 2.2. Arguments made for "delete" received comments and responses which pointed to logical flaws in citing particular WP policies as cause for deletion (e.g. WP:Fork). It was argued that these policies do not apply to the article under discussion. No response or further discussion was made.
  • 3. The final cause for deletion was not specified. This is especially concerning as WP policies cited as reasons for deletion may have been irrelevant to the discussion or not sufficiently demonstrated how they applied in this case.

I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 14:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical Islam in Australia, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion. After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Protonk (talk) 14:50, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Noting the updated arguments: @I.am.a.qwerty: REFUND still isn't the place for this. If you feel the deletion discussion was improperly closed your route is to speak to the closing admin and if they aren't willing to reverse it, take it to DRV. This board is only for deletions which can be uncontroversially reversed and AfDs like this one are explicitly not covered here. Protonk (talk) 15:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Obscure_(Band)

This is prominent band from Dhaka Bangladesh. We need to upload this information at wikipedia as an world wide accepted database. Please visit www.obscurebd.com or www.facebook.com.bdobscure. I am a member od the band. So I am authorized to provide the information. So please allow Obscure_(Band)as a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raajuesheikh (talk • contribs) 19:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: Of the speedy deletions this article has, the most recent deletion is a A7. Articles meeting this criterion are generally not undeleted either because they require a complete rewrite or they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. This page has been protected against creation due to repeated deletion and creation, and so you need to provide a very compelling and policy-compliant reason for it to be undeleted regardless of the A7s and G12. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 22:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 Not done. See WP:BAND for inclusion criteria, and explain exactly which of those your band meets. Furthermore, as a member of the band, you have a conflict of interest (read WP:COI for guidance). You shouldn't be writing an article about yourselves at all. You can try submitting it using the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process but you shouldn't be posting it to main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Malou22/sandbox

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Malou22 (talk) 21:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jaryn Satterfield

(This user used the preload form for AFC undeletion, but did not specify the name of the AFC draft they would like undeleted. Consider checking their deleted contributions.) Jpfthebest (talk) 03:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: Fixed report to point to correct title; remember that all page titles on Wikipedia are case-sensitive. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:50, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

James Cox and Sons

The article is about a well know californian company, owner of which was the inventor of Rolling thin film oven, which is now widley used by bitumen testing laboratories across the world. The invention by this company led to the present day ASTM and AASHTO test standards for rolling thin film oven test -217.41.41.130 (talk) 15:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Probably referring to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/James Cox and Sons. --Finngall talk 15:26, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Raksha Changappa

I, Polymath0, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Polymath0 (talk) 12:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. This needs independent sources about the person. Also the famous coorgs site is now dead. A cite to a newspaper should not point to a blog hosting a copyright infringement, but to the original paper. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:59, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Buddha was born in Nepal Campaign

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Buddhanepal9 (talk) 16:45, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


Please undelete "Buddha was born in Nepal Campaign".

This is the sentiments of 1,000,000 Petition signers from all over the world. Enough evidence was provided with the links.

Thanks a lot.

 Not done. It was nominated for deletion in accordance with WP:CSD#A7 (lack of notability) and deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#G11 (unambiguous promotion). It doesn't appear to be eligible for restoration by request. Contact the deleting administrator FreeRangeFrog, but you should also know that petitions are not relevant on Wikipedia for assessing notability. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:45, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Young Republicans of Free State High School

We are apart of the Kansas GOP and work with many people such as senators and reps and I am going to add on to it everyday the person who did this is bias. -Colton1755 (talk) 02:46, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion A7. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. As has been explained to you on your talk page, you need to prove notability first. I would also suggest reading WP:What Wikipedia is not to get some idea of what a Wikipedia article should not be. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 06:45, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Offhand, I'll say that you're likely to have trouble getting this restored because there really isn't anything to show that your school's organization is particularly noteworthy. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by having an association with notable persons or organizations. Most school clubs/organizations will never gain enough coverage in reliable sources (WP:RS) to merit an article. Most don't even get enough to merit a mention in the school's page. I don't see where this was the result of a bias and to be honest... I'd actually recommend that you not make any edits on articles that you have any sort of personal conflict of interest with. I see that you've made several edits that were "authorized by Connie O'Brien", which smacks of WP:OWNERSHIP. While I do think that the blanked section should be removed, you've got to understand that O'Brien does not own the page and saying that you're making edits that she authorized gives off the impression that she is controlling everything on that page. So far the edits haven't been particularly bad and you have divulged your COI, which is good, but I am somewhat troubled by your accusations of bias (because of the deletion of your school organization's page) and by the "authorized" statement. I'd personally recommend that rather than directly edit the article and make substantial edits to articles for politicians you're personally representing (in any shape or form), that you look into getting someone from one of the applicable WikiProjects to do it for you. The thing is, while you can still edit with a conflict of interest (WP:COI), it's still heavily discouraged and in this instance I think that it'd be best if you tried to work with a more experienced Wikipedia editor without a conflict of interest. While the likelihood of someone coming in to look at the article for this particular politician is low, the last thing anyone wants is for someone to see that an intern/representative of O'Brien is editing the page. That's led to more than one newspaper voicing concerns of bias and manipulation. I don't mean that to sound harsh, but that's why we recommend that people with a COI (especially a strong one) not make large amounts of edits to pages they're involved with. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm the admin who deleted the page, and I can explain why the page was deleted. The notability guideline for organizations begins, "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." This article had zero sources -- not even unreliable sources, non-independent sources, or primary sources. Furthermore, the article said that the organization has been in existence for only three months (since May 2014) and has only 5 members, which also suggests lack of notability. Finally, WP:BRANCH says, "As a general rule, the individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not considered notable enough to warrant a separate article - unless they are substantially discussed by reliable independent sources that extend beyond the chapter's local area." You can take this article to Wikipedia:Deletion review if you want to, but I don't think it has much chance of getting restored unless this organization becomes a lot more notable. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Nggaunt/sandbox

I, Nggaunt, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Nggaunt (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I would like to amend the submission.

subst:Refund/G13|User:Nggaunt/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nggaunt (talk • contribs) 18:15, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done I'm sorry, but the article has two major, major issues. First off, it's a copyright violation (WP:COPYVIO) from this site. We cannot accept copyrighted materials unless you are willing to give up the content as fair use. However even if that is done, there's still another issue: the article was written in a very promotional manner. We cannot have promotional material on Wikipedia regardless of whether it's copyvio or not. However that said, you can still write a new version of the article in your userspace as long as you write it in a neutral point of view and in your own words. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:19, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Advanced Deposit Wagering

I, Moonviper, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Moonviper (talk) 00:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


This topic is one that is very big in the horse racing industry, and websites which use Advanced Deposit Wagering are one of the most quickly growing in the industry. -Moonviper (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Moonviper (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Michael Aquino

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -23.123.225.76 (talk) 02:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

While I know he requested a deletion, and it was allowed, we are talking someone who founded a church, headed another, made himself the face of Satanism in the 80s and is continuing to publish books and interviews as recently as last year. Kind of hard to agree with his basis for deletion.

  • Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Aquino, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Wizardman (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:33, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • On a side note, I don't see where he's really all that notable outside of his time with the Temple of Set, where he's already mentioned. Given that he personally requested that his article be removed, you'll have to really show a lot of proof of his notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:40, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

MilkyTracker

This is a software that has been around for quite a while and its notable enough to have useful citations associated with it. It currently referenced as a red link on FastTracker 2 and could potentially be linked on several related articles. There are articles that exist about software less or equally notable to this. The page has been deleted and recreated multiple times, which shows that multiple people have found this article useful. -Secondplanet (talk) 00:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Secondplanet (talk) 00:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MilkyTracker (2nd nomination), it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Scott MacDonald (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I do have to warn you that being useful (WP:ITSUSEFUL) is not a reason in and of itself to retain or re-create an article. At WP:DR you will have to show how the software has been the focus of independent and reliable coverage per WP:RS. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

D. A. Blyler

The page for author D.A. Blyler was an established Wikipedia page since 2006, meeting the approval of many established Wikipedia editors. No idea why the page was deleted in March of this year. -223.204.248.35 (talk) 15:36, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

  • The reason for deletion isn't on that page because it was a redirect to the actual page which was deleted following this discussion. You can read the reasons for deletion there. Protonk (talk) 16:16, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D. A. Blyler, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user King of Hearts (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:47, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakti_Mohan

earlier the references were not added when the request of deletion was made , but now the references have been successfully added -Indiantellyfan (talk) 09:16, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • This page has not yet been deleted. Please visit the page to find out how to object to the deletion request. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

abhishek rajdan

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -112.79.37.246 (talk) 09:17, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/Epistemological Certainty - Knowledge

I, SumOfwHoly, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Normall Bean (talk) 13:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please note that you never submitted the entry for review. When you are ready, you need to click the green notice in the template at the top of the page that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:43, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Neurim Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

I, 80.74.107.152, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 80.74.107.152 (talk) 14:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Officers (band)

I, Domsphere, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Domsphere (talk) 18:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Lusocoin

The editors that deleted the page have a conflict of interest and are practicing censorship -2001:8A0:DC29:2901:C1E1:17E8:B9E:A950 (talk) 12:38, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was deleted as a result of a deletion debate. Admins will not undelete pages that were deleted with discussion here; go to WP:Deletion review instead. Accusing those who participated in the deletion discussion and the actual deleting administrator of being biased or censorious never works. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Not done - this Requests for Undeletion process is only for articles that were deleted uncontroversially, and does not apply to articles deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the article you are here about was deleted after a discussion took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lusocoin, it cannot be undeleted through this process. However, if you believe that the outcome of the discussion did not reflect the consensus of the participants, or that significant new information has come to light since the article was deleted, you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion, user Hahc21 (talk · contribs). After you do so, if your concerns are not addressed and you still seek undeletion, a request may be made at deletion review. There was no support in the debate to keep this. Also I can see no evidence of any COI there either. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Syed Ahmed Kabir

I, Sfeb405ip, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Syed Farrukh Ehsan Bokhari (talk) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. You are going to have to find more supporting references to get this accepted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Tarantino/Rodriguez Universe

Deleted as "blatant hoax" (G3). Both sourcing and numerous references in articles outside Wikipedia suggest this does not meet the criteria for this and should have at least gone to AfD. -tomasz. 02:45, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment: I can see where some are talking about it, but I would like to see some sort of coverage in reliable sources before this is restored. The IGN link talks about Tarantino's universe, but does not discuss it in relation to Rodriguez's universe. At best, this comes across as original research (WP:OR), which doesn't really belong on Wikipedia either. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not 100% on the sources either, i just thought there was more indication of includability than a G3 implied. Userspace'd be great while i check it out. Thank you Tokyogirl79. tomasz. 16:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Feral Five

I think the article about these guys was removed because it was deemed to be something non notable. I totally respect the community and would like the opportunity to correct the page, find and add the notability citations which show they are credible. With respect. John -JackSparrow1984 (talk) 23:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Chris Dominguez

Was PROD'd a few months ago, but is now notable after receiving call up to MLB -Yankees10 01:33, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I've moved it to your userspace at User:Yankees10/Chris Dominguez, so you'll have more time to provide sourcing for his notability. Feel free to move it back once you've done this, cheers. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Samueljellis/sandbox

:*Completing a malformed request by User:115.70.234.45 Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:55, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done I'm sorry, but the article was written in a very promotional manner and would potentially have been speedyable under WP:G11. It was also so short that removing the promotional material would require deleting the entire thing, so there's no true reason to restore. I'm also concerned over the notability of the blog, as I can't really find where there is any coverage in reliable sources to show how it or Muel would pass WP:GNG. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Computer Maintenance Agency

i am chandra sekhar. i am the employe of the cma company and i am working as a team leader. i have official mail id of my company is (Redacted). We are establishing more branches. that's way we are doing this thing. -Chandra sai898 (talk) 19:49, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Guys, in future if a requestor provides an email address can we please {{redacted}} it out for their sake? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 08:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

User:80.44.255.40/2008–09 Algerian Championnat National 2

I, Wbel, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Wbel (talk) 22:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Isr devil

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below -Isr devil (talk) 15:59, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion A7. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. Please see WP:Autobiography. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pattamukkil Family

I, Jowinvp, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Jowinvp (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address the issues raised when it was declined, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. I have restored all revisions, including the ones you asked to delete earlier, Let me know if if don't want that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

How to use an Article

How if the abandoned confused to edit and then he have nothing to do is to vandal. Like me I'm not Vandalising I am just guessing if you wish to speedy delete it it's Okay, I m not a perfect person so if you think I am vandalising pls. Wish to delete

Useful Encyclopedia (talk) 21:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

If this is regarding Facebook mobile · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions], Note: The page was speedily-deleted under criterion A7. Pages deleted under that criterion are generally not undeleted because they require complete rewrites to be viable encyclopedia articles or because they violate our biographical or fair-use policies. If not, I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:56, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 Not done as not article requested to be restored. I will add these remarks: A7 was invalid for Facebook mobile as this was not a company, secondly this was nominated for deletion too fast. Lastly it was not vandalism. But for Useful Encyclopedia I suggest that you edit a draft: Draft:Facebook mobile, and this will give you more time to develop your page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_150&oldid=1141881595"