Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 268

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 265Archive 266Archive 267Archive 268Archive 269Archive 270→Archive 275

Darz (artist)

The article was soft deleted because of no response. They stated my references were not notable but the blogs I've referenced are top music industry blogs. Specially from the location that the artist lives in. We also included link to official music outlets like Itunes and Spotify proving that Darz has in fact worked with these big artist's — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarzOfAudioDripz (talk • contribs) 17:03, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@DarzOfAudioDripz: Because you have a conflict of interest (read WP:COI for guidance) your only viable venue for submitting an article about yourself is Wikipedia:Articles for creation. The article is unlikely to survive another deletion proposal, so I have moved the article to Draft:Darz (artist) to give you time to work on it. Please submit it for review rather than moving it back to main space. And by the way, "worked with" notable artists doesn't mean you're notable, because notability is not inherited. We also need more than blogs as sources. See WP:MUSICBIO for inclusion criteria. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research

|1= National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research (NICPR) |2= This educational article was created for the global readers to know more about the topic in detail. This article was still in editing process and have had to go several updation also. Preliminarily the content of this article was partially taken from the website as the article has direct link to the website. I request you to kindly restore the article and allow me to change/edit the article to resolve any violation of copyrights caused(if any). —Kay Cee10 (talk) 19:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Kay Cee10:  Not done. Sorry, but there is no benefit to the Wikipedia project in restoring a copyright violation. Exposing the Wikimedia Foundation to potential liability isn't a decision that any volunteer here can make (and administrators are all volunteers).
If you are associated with NICPR, then you have a conflict of interest. Please read WP:COI and start over again in draft space, for example Draft:National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research. In draft space, you will have more time to work on it without worrying about someone coming along and deleting it (except if you violate copyright again). When you are satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines and inclusion criteria, go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instructions to submit the article for review by another editor who has no connection to the organization. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dan Israel

I, Cyberlib, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Cyberlib (talk) 19:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Cyberlib: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored on request. Please edit the page to address any issues raised, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Michael Ross George, userfied request

Article was soft deleted because of notability issues. I would like to improve the article. Can it please be userfied or emailed to me? Thank you. —xcshells@icloud.com (talk) 03:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Freyja10:  Done. There was some duplication between that deleted article and a draft that already exists at Draft:Michael Ross George. I have merged the histories together in the draft. You will find everything there. The edit history of the deleted article will be the edits between 18 March and 17 April. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

User:AtErik1/List_of_Unicode_Ligatures_Homoglyphs,_Part_1_of_2

It was deleted during i was working & improving it, i need a copy of content/data, to transfer into a different website. By the way, I created this 1st in main-space, and only i worked on to improve the article, but few users didn't "like" & decided to "delete", then i posted under my usersapce, and only i worked on page, but again users decided to delete! —AtErik1 (talk) 19:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Most frequent k characters

I'm not familiar with this term, but ran into red-links to it in a number of other articles, so it appears to be a necessary/useful piece in the puzzle. Regarding notability (the PRODers concern), perhaps the subject is better known under other names. Please undelete. Thanks. —Matthiaspaul (talk) 22:31, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. --Matthiaspaul (talk)

National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research (2nd request)

I, KayCee10, request the undeletion of this Article ( National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research) for creation submission deleted under G12. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it and I would like to improve the article more. Thank You. —Kay Cee10 (talk) 02:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Did you not read the section above where this is discussed? G12 is for copyright-violating material and will NEVER be restored on request because it places Wikipedia - the material's host - at risk for a lawsuit. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Oswaldo Oropeza, el compositor de Latinoamerica

I, Caribana10, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Caribana10 (talk) 23:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

information Administrator note The page is Draft:Oswaldo Oropeza, and it is being discussed on my talk page. Please note that this draft was first created in July 2013 and has been deleted as abandoned three times, with no forseeable development of this page. ℯxplicit 00:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Draft:Oswaldo Oropeza · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]
    Declined pending further information. This was undeleted over six months ago with a pledge that it would be worked on, but no edits were made to improve the entry for resubmission. Articles for creation is not an indefinite hosting service for material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia's article mainspace. We may be willing to restore it again, but only if you provide a definite assurance that you actually intend to work on it and provide a short description of what you intend to do to improve it to meet our policies and guidelines. Please advise. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Streamtime Software

I, I drink and I know things, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. I drink and I know things (talk) 04:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I have more reliable sources (this was the reason it was deleted) and would rather not re-write the entire article —I drink and I know things (talk) 04:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Please edit the page to address any issues raised, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Example

(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.) Drwhomark09 (talk) 11:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Please edit the page to address any issues raised, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Primefac (talk) 12:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Centre Square Kochi

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below —122.174.199.170 (talk) 10:04, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done. The history is restored, but the current version is a redirect. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Off Plan Emirates

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below —Zulqarnain 11:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC) Hello, This is not a promotion contents and is for the general audience benefits. Kindly do not delete.

Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criteria for speedy deletion A7 and G11. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user Acroterion (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Elite.pikachu

it was a good article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elite.pikachu (talk • contribs) 15:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done and will not be done. No it wasn't a good article, it wasn't even an article at all. Please don't waste the community's time with stuff like this. Familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies and guidelines first. WP:Golden rule would be a good start. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Godless Bitches

I want to improve the article and will be working with Megalibrarygirl to do so. I have rescued deleted/nominated articles before. —Bri (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bri: We can't override an AFD decision by request on this page. Please ask the deleting administrator Jo-Jo Eumerus to consider restoring it, preferably to draft space so it doesn't get speedily deleted as a recreation of an article already deleted via AFD. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:48, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Whoops, thanks - Bri (talk) 18:53, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
I've userfied it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:03, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Crunchy Data Solutions

I, 98.176.134.60, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 98.176.134.60 (talk) 19:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Declined pending further information. This was undeleted over six months ago with a pledge that it would be worked on, but no edits were made to improve the entry for resubmission. Articles for creation is not an indefinite hosting service for material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia's article mainspace. We may be willing to restore it again, but only if you provide a definite assurance that you actually intend to work on it and provide a short description of what you intend to do to improve it to meet our policies and guidelines. Please advise.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Yoshiro Taniguchi

@C. Gelber: Done - as an Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Please edit the page to address any issues raised, and re-submit it; "Articles for creation" is not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jason Olen Bishop

I, Imcobarn, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Imcobarn (talk) 15:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Imcobarn: Not done - this page is a copyright violation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:51, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Sunil Pandey

I, Lakhanlal mechanical, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Lakhanlal mechanical (talk) 04:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done. The draft was a copyright violation, infringing content copied from here and here, if not others.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

User:ActuallyIceCube

Don't know why it was deleted because it was alright and it was not a test page. It was to introduce people to the right page for Ice Cube. —DIRECTIVEA113 (talk) 00:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

This is not your userpage, so why are you worried

about restoring it? Legacypac (talk) 08:07, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Not done It looks like it was deleted as a test page. One of the edits claimed that this was an account created by Ice Cube and gave a link to a video, which is now a dead link. (I found a different link to the video, however. Funny thing is, he never made the edits to his page, rather through some vandalism to other pages.) In any case, users should not create a userpage for another account except in very, very specific circumstances, such as sockpuppetry, tagging an account as a student account, and so on. There is no requirement to tag a celebrity account as an account. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Kyara

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below —Prof. KSP (talk) 07:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC) Dear Ladys and Gentlemen, I have personally studied my research on the topic kyara for over 12 yrs. now, in field. I insistingly forward this protest, since this bears scientific evidence for future study's of University's all around the globe of this subject. Please handle this matter with the subject respect as professional as possible. With best regards, to whom it may concern, yours, simply Gen.Sc.Prof. Peter

  • Not done The most recent deletion was for WP:COPYVIO, as it contained information taken from here. To add to this, you could argue that the page could be potentially seen as relatively promotional in tone, especially as it's content you posted on a page that is selling this item. This will not be restored and I've also blocked this user per WP:NOTHERE. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Joan_Kee

I, 0www1, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 0www1 (talk) 17:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Shifuji Shaurya Bhardwaj

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below —Shifuji s Team (talk) 13:49, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

That Thing with Rich Appel

Hello -- I would like to see the recently deleted article, "That thing with Rich Appel," moved into either a "Drafts" folder or the "Article Incubator" section. The article represents an international radio program which receives significant airplay. While independent media coverage of the program is limited at this point, the show has a very loyal following and is steadily increasing in popularity due to a resurgence of interest in the show's content (classic hits/oldies music). Having access to the original text is important in order to further develop and nurture the article as new material becomes available. Thank you very much for your consideration and assistance. - JGabbard (talk) 12:39, 30 April 2017 (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/That thing with Rich Appel, 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 Kurykh (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.

Draft:Karnabharam by Bhasa

I, Margieparikh, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Margieparikh (talk) 04:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I was relocated and could not complete editing work due to new work load. I am back now and wish to complete the article. —Margieparikh (talk) 04:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:DJ WilSAF

I, MassiveYR, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. MassiveYR ♠ 09:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

page undelation

Dear Mr. Kleuske I am going to place a most popular company information in Wikipedia. If there have any error can you please help me regarding this matter? —202.4.111.114 (talk) 10:46, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

this is an unreasonable page name. We don't make whole sentences into page names. Legacypac (talk) 07:58, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

CAC Mid 60

PROD-ed with one reason being that it "appears to no longer exist"; Index does still exist (see Index home page) and we have Category:CAC Mid 60 and Template:CAC Mid 60 —UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:49, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Akshay Bardapurkar

The deletion of this article was a result of ignorance of a user of Wikipedia and the mal-practices of that user. Apart from that, the subject of the article has shown notability to be on Wikipedia. The subject of the article has references and citations on main-stream, trusted and different publishers from India and related geographic areas. Improvements can be made in terms of quality, grammar, references on this article. So, it should be restored/undeleted. —Conflictoreditor (talk) 13:25, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) This article was create protected after being created multiple times by socks of a blocked editor who blatantly and knowingly violated Wikipedia policies - and the subject is clearly not notable. --bonadea contributions talk 15:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Not done and will not be done I've left a COI notice on his talk page. I'd warrant that he's likely a paid editor and if so, is probably unrelated to the prior sockpuppeteers that created two of the pages they requested. Either way, the COI notice will let them know they have to be transparent with their editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:53, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


Phoebe Lin

Before I would cite a source for the article it was speedy deleted —✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 05:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Patrick_Hopkins

I posted a few reasons why this page shouldn't have been quick deleted but it appears the admin didn't read any of it and simply hit the button to delete. I am going to run through each statement from the deletion discussion from April 18, 2017 and explain why they are false and why Patrick Hopkins should be undeleted. He already has a page on the Swedish wikipedia. [1]

"he has not received significant coverage or played in a fully pro league" - This is false. Hopkins has plaid in 3 fully professional leagues, 2 in Sweden and 1 in the USA. He played for Ljungskile SK in the Superettan, which is the 2nd division in Sweden and fully professional. He then played with IK Sirius Fotboll in the Superettan, the second division in Sweden and won promotion to the Allsvenskan, the first division in Sweden, both fully professional. He now plays for the San Francisco Deltas in the North American Soccer League, also professional. In terms of "significant coverage," he's been featured in Sweden quite a bit and more recently in the USA now that he's with the Deltas. He has also been announced a few different mediums: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

"Fails NFOOTY as has not played or managed senior international football nor played or managed in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG." - This is mostly addressed above in terms of playing in a fully professional league. If the Superettan isn't considered a fully professional league, then you may want to also consider changing that as every team in the 2nd division of Sweden is a fully pro team. The North American Soccer League is definitely considered fully professional though.

"fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL" - Already addressed.

"per nom." - Don't even know what this means.

"TOOSOON at the very least" - hardly constructive and hardly a reason to delete if new information is provided.

"non-notable soccer player" - Already addressed.

I hope you take these into consideration when reviewing whether or not to undelete this page. I have included references to the additions I made the page. I am working to make the San Francisco Deltas page as complete as possible and that includes the players who are currently with the team. There are other players who have less of a resume than Patrick Hopkins and still have a page accepted on Wikipedia, so I believe his page should also be allowed. Thank you. —21:07, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Sovielus SF (talk)

References

  1. ^ https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Hopkins
  2. ^ https://medium.com/sfdeltas/team-news-player-announcement-227d8775def2
  3. ^ http://www.nasl.com/news/2017/02/07/deltas-make-four-more-signings
  4. ^ http://blog.sfgate.com/soccer/2017/02/10/bay-area-soccer-roundup-sf-city-fc-holding-open-tryouts/
  5. ^ http://lsk.se/default.asp?do=document&docid=5006
  6. ^ http://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/patrick-hopkins-at-ljungskile.1987924/

Fig Tree Hall

Please let me retrieve my writing about Fig Tree Hall. This article was different to the previous one. I have not been given a chance to dispute the deletion request. —Salomėja Nėris (talk) 02:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Busan International Foreign School

Article written on the name of this school was still a stub and it could have been improved by other expert users of Wikipedia who know more about schools of this country. So, i think, it should be restored and suggestions by other users/expert users should be asked and this can help to improve the quality of this article. —Conflictoreditor (talk) 12:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. See messages below regarding use of this page, and that (with one rare exception) we do not undelete pages here that were deleted after discussion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:10, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern Fuhghettaboutit (talk). As I am new here, I was not aware that these problems will come up later. Now, I will prevent myself from doing such stuff. I could figure the reason for not restoring this article. Conflictoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab

The parent organization handling this reality show has enough widespread presence and so does this reality show named PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab. Still, this article is in its initial phase of development and it can be edited and improved along with time, but for all of this, presence of the article is must and for this I want to restore this article and add up to the Wikipedia. —Conflictoreditor (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done Two different request by you to undelete content created by two different sockpuppets. This is not looking so good.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: I've relayed my suspicions to SPI. --Finngall talk 22:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern Fuhghettaboutit (talk). As I am new here, I was not aware that these problems will come up later. Now, I will prevent myself from doing such stuff. But I cannot figure the reason why this page cannot be undeleted, although this falls under the ambit of this undeletion form/request page. Conflictoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Jordy Waelauruw

This article was deleted due to lack of notability but upon my google search and by searching the name of the subject of the article on other search engines as well, i was shown with a search showing good amount of notability to the person. And beyond this, this article can be improved with good amount of references to it. —Conflictoreditor (talk) 12:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Conflictoreditor: this forum has instructions at the top of the page, summarizing some of what is within and without its ambit. It is only for uncontroversial undeletions, where an article was deleted on an uncontrovesial basis and so may be restored without overturning a considered exercise of judgment – generally for pages that were deleted by prod, or under a speedy deletion basis that does not call to an inherent problem with the page, such as CSD G13. The fact that your "first" edits to Wikipedia are to request undeletion of multiple disparate pages here (above and below this thread) is itself a bit concerning; and most of your requests are for pages outside the ambit of this page. This page is not a substitute for Wikipedia:Deletion review. I will post below the canned rejection template message we often provide for articles that were deleted, as this one was, under CSD A7.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)
Not done - this page was deleted in accordance with criterion for speedy deletion A7. If you believe that this decision was made in error, or that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, please contact the administrator who carried out the deletion, user Mojo Hand (talk · contribs). If you have already done so, your concerns can be taken to deletion review.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern Fuhghettaboutit (talk). As I am new here, I was not aware that these problems will come up later. Now, I will prevent myself from doing such stuff. I will be contacting the concerned admin shortly for this article. Conflictoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Anjali Ameer

The reason for the deletion of this article was notability and one event news coverage but upon my google and other search engine research, it comes up with a valuable notability for the article to be on Wikipedia. A good number of Indian trusted publications have citations and references for the subject of this article. It should be undeleted. —Conflictoreditor (talk) 12:31, 28 April 2017 (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/Anjali Ameer, 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 Kurykh (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.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern Fuhghettaboutit (talk). As I am new here, I was not aware that these problems will come up later. Now, I will prevent myself from doing such stuff. I will be contacting the concerned admin shortly for this article. Conflictoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Manmohan Vaidya

The result of deletion of this article was not enough notability and less of references. But upon my research, there are enough references and citations present on different and trusted publishers in India. The subject of this article holds to be on Wikipedia and the article quality can be userfied for the improvement of the article. —Conflictoreditor (talk) 12:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

See the answer to your request above. This too was deleted after discussion and so will not be undeleted through this forum.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:41, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern Fuhghettaboutit (talk). As I am new here, I was not aware that these problems will come up later. Now, I will prevent myself from doing such stuff. I have searched and will be contacting the concerned admin shortly for this article. Conflictoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Milind Tandon

The reason for deletion was notability and at the time of deletion, the article was just in the initial phase of it's edits and improvement, just like a stub. The subject of the article shows notability upon being searched on Google News or any other relative/alternative search engine. This article can be improved with quality, references, citation etc. if restored —Conflictoreditor (talk) 12:46, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Based on the irregularity of your making numerous, serial requests, and other indicia that these requests are not done for a valid purpose, I am not going to undelete this one either, though it's the only one that is within the ambit of this page..--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern Fuhghettaboutit (talk). As I am new here, I was not aware that these problems will come up later. But I do not think so that new users are treated like this. I have already apologized for other mess created but if this article falls in the ambit of this page, I would request you to have a look once again. Conflictoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Olga Prokopova

I'm doing the translation of the page. And i did everything according to the rules. But I was not allowed to finish, deleting the page marked with the appropriate templates —Marino Asler (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

You made a good effort, but you didn't understand the rules that explain how a person is considered notable on Wikipedia. That is why, after an extensive discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olga Prokopova, during which you had ample opportunity to provide examples of significant coverage and failed to do so, the article was deleted (only yesterday). Because it was deleted via a deletion discussion, it is ineligible for restoration by request on this page. You may contact the deleting administrator at User talk:Seraphimblade to request reconsideration, and if the admin declines, you may take the case to Wikipedia:Deletion review to determine if the deletion decision was proper. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Josh Stimpson (artist)

because this page is under going work, i am adding reliable sources as we speak. and then click the "Save page" button below —ItsMagic35 (talk) 07:56, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

User:TheJoebro64

Requested deletion simply while I was taking a break. —TheJoebro64 (talk) 22:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64:  Done, but I suggest that in the future, you put a {{wikibreak}} template on your page instead, so that administrator intervention won't be needed. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:List of maritime science fiction works

The publication of this draft essentially depends on it's parent article: Maritime science fiction. But like the parent article it was saved as a draft and I was citing a number of lists for the draft. Since this draft page is a list, not an article, most citations are going to be lists. I was also going to add an external link. Like the parent article, I did NOT attempt to publish the draft without proper citation and pre-publishing review submission. I was improving it like the parent article. But because of sudden deletion, I have no access to draft and can no longer improve it. Please let us have the draft —Taeyebar 18:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Dunk Elite

I, Primestarsports, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Primestarsports (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@Primestarsports: Please do two things first.
1. Go to WP:CHU/Simple and change your username to something that represents only you as an individual person. You can call yourself "Joe at PrimeStar" or something similar if you want to retain a connection with your employer, as long as it's clear that the username belongs to one person, not a group. Companies, as well as roles (like "Marketing at PrimeStar") are prohibited from having user accounts on Wikipedia.
2. When you created an account here, you made a legally enforceable agreement to abide by Wikimedia:Terms of Use, which requires that you disclose your conflict of interest. See WP:PAID for instructions on this disclosure. I recommend you do it on your user page.
Come back here when you've done those things. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:ENVI-met

I, 87.171.59.21, request the undeletion of this Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. 87.171.59.21 (talk) 07:49, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

no chnace to edit withn 24 hrs after notice —87.171.59.21 (talk) 07:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Declined pending further information. This was undeleted over six months ago with a pledge that it would be worked on, but no edits were made to improve the entry for resubmission. Articles for creation is not an indefinite hosting service for material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia's article mainspace. We may be willing to restore it again, but only if you provide a definite assurance that you actually intend to work on it and provide a short description of what you intend to do to improve it to meet our policies and guidelines. Please advise. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

NVR, Inc.

Contesting PROD: we will certainly be able to demonstrate notability of one of the largest homebuilding companies in the U.S., a member of the S&P 400 stock market index. —UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:06, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@UnitedStatesian: Would you please explain who is this "we" you refer to? ~Anachronist (talk) 22:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
The global community of English Wikipedia editors. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@UnitedStatesian: OK, fair enough. It's a standard question asked here to assess COI, when someone refers to "we" as if the editor self-identifies as a member of an organization.
Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Maritime science fiction

I was still working on this draft until it suddenly got deleted yesterday without warning. I was going to add more reliable academic source besides just lists (there are only two lists cited there) as well as external link from the Encyclopedia of Science Fiction but was unable to do so because of the deletion. Other users were also working on it (see history of the page). Also I did NOT attempt to publish this draft until it was properly sourced and submitted for review. Other users also contributed but I was currently also adding my input and cannot do so because of sudden deletion. Please let us have the draft thanks.--Taeyebar 18:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC) —Taeyebar 18:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

  • It looks like this was salted by Orangemike because the page was repeatedly recreated. I'm going to ping him so he can come and weigh in on this and the other request you made. Since both are related to two AfDs that were closed by Sandstein, I'm tagging him here as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
  • No opinion here.  Sandstein  17:30, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Tokyogirl79, like I mentioned before, the article was deleted, so we produced a draft from it. I had requested User:Fixuture who contributed to the article to save a draft to the article and the list and if I'm not mistaken he already had drafts saved for the article and list since there was an AFD. We NEVER published the drafts nor were the drafts ever deleted prior to this. Please read carefully. Thanks.--Taeyebar 23:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Taeyebar, I understand that, however since this was deleted at AfD and the articles salted (including the draft), any recreation of this article could be seen as controversial - even in the draftspace. REFUND is really only meant for uncontroversial restorations. It's fairly rare that a draft article is salted and in most cases this occurs when a situation is seen as controversial. My reason for pinging Orangemike and the others is to see what the story is here. At the very least this doesn't seem like it would really be suitable for REFUND given the situation, especially as Orangemike has responded with a decline response and Sandstein has stated that he has no opinion. Sandstein, are you willing to restore the article? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:57, 2 May 2017 (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/Maritime science fiction, 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 Sandstein (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. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

But isn't it a draft, not an article? Could you please restore it? User:Orangemike at worst case you need to notify the draft-creators first before deletion so that they can take any useful/constructive content elsewhere (e.g. Wikia or simply on their PC). --Fixuture (talk) 19:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Tokyogirl79, the story was simple: There was a AFD. By two or three votes there was a consensus to delete the article and the list.There was no controversy involved, only a consensus that were were not enough reliable sources- and I agree, which is why I was adding more sources in draft format (including from The Encyclopedia of Underwater and Maritime Archaeology and The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction). Fixuture already had the drafts prepared before the article & list was deleted. Then suddenly without any warning, about two days ago, both the drafts were deleted. So how can I add more reliable sources if I have no access to the drafts? If I create the article again- especially after AFD- I will probably get blocked. If I submitted a draft for review after it's ready, then that is the right way to do it. We are NOT asking for the article and list, just their drafts, which was deleted without warning And there was nothing controversial about this article. The argument was there was not enough reliable sources, so I am adding more of them, but in draft format. How can a stub article be a controversial topic?--Taeyebar 22:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

First Merit Tower

The page was incorrectly deleted for technical reasons. It should be restored and then moved to the name Huntington Tower, as that is the building's current name. Then, First Merit Tower should serve as a redirect to Huntington Tower. —Piguy101 (talk) 12:13, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Piguy101: The deleted file is just a redirect, originally to FirstMerit Tower. Feel free to recreate it. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Ronald K Sable

Ricks333 (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

this seems to be a promotional CV. without any 3rd party references. DGG ( talk ) 23:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I agree. @Ricks333: what is your association with Ronald K Sable? ~Anachronist (talk) 23:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Anuradha Bhattacharyya

Enter your reasoning here and then click the "Save page" button below —Atul Bhattacharyya (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC) Request for undeletion of Anuradha Bhattacharyya page

as significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page;

2 years ago I had created a page 'Anuradha Bhattacharyya'. She had 5 published books to her credit. However, there was no mention of her name in any newspapers then (except in The Hans as a participant poet in a poetry festival). Now she has 2 more books. The novel One Word has won a government prize in her state. All the newspapers in English, Hindi and Punjabi mention the 'Chandigarh Sahitya Akademi honour for writers/authors'. In the photograph, she is standing in the middle. Her name is spelt 'Anuradha Bhattacharya' which is a sub-editor's error. Bengalis do not spell it wrong; Punjabis do. Still there are 3 distinct sources which say that Anuradha Bhattacharyya has received the Chandigarh Sahitya Akademi Award for Best Book in 2016 for her novel One Word. I think this makes her notable. Please publish the page I had created. Here are the links:

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/chandigarh/education/sahitya-akademi-honour-for-writers/384418.html

http://www.thecitizen.in/index.php/NewsDetail/index/7/10416/An-Author-and-a-Poet-Speaks

https://kitaab.org/tag/anuradha-bhattacharyya/

http://lifeinchandigarh.com/news-views_and-the-award-goes-to#.WQRucyYBzMA.whatsapp

http://www.bhaskar.com/news/UT-CHD-HMU-NES-MAT-latest-chandigarh-news-020003-2501637-NOR.html

Thank you AtulAtul Bhattacharyya (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@Anthony Appleyard: based on the above, any objection to restoring the article to draft space? If it were restored to main space it would likely get tagged with a {{db-g4}}. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:58, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear Anthony @Anthony Appleyard:, I have no objection to restoring the article to draft space. In any case these citations and new informations have to be added to the page first before publication. AtulAtul Bhattacharyya (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you @Anthony Appleyard: !! Now I will edit it, make the necessary changes. AtulAtul Bhattacharyya (talk) 11:05, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I have made the necessary edits. Please see. If it's okay, publish the page. Thank you. AtulAtul Bhattacharyya (talk) 12:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. AtulAtul Bhattacharyya (talk) 08:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

privacy in social Information Access

this topic is concern about only the privacy issue in social information access and it is a part of course project i am taking this semester —Azizsalim (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Has your instructor gone thru WP:School and university projects? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 16:43, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

CoNetrix

I would like to try and re-edit the CoNetrix page and submit again. We have more links to prove it is reputable. It was previously deleted by OrangeMike in 2009.

Thanks! —Prlandru (talk) 12:36, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

The history of this is now at Draft:CoNetrix. ~ GB fan 17:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

I want my page back

Can I please have my FC Bayern Munich (seniors) back? I miss it so much! GermanGamer77 (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@AustralianRupert: Pinging deleting admin so that they may participate in this discussion. ToThAc (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Given that there was basically no content (other than "Please add content, it would very much be appreciated!") on the page when it was deleted per A3, I'm not sure that there is much point in me restoring it (although, if another admin feels it is best to restore it, I won't object). @GermanGamer77: are you intending to write the article? If you have content to add, please just simply recreate the article yourself by clicking on the redlink: FC Bayern Munich (seniors) and then creating it as if it were a new page. But please only do this by adding substantive content about the subject, otherwise it will be liable for being speedily deleted as lacking content again. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:26, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Alright then, AustralianRupert. I'll visit your page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GermanGamer77 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

ice_poseidon

Well written page with numerous sources was deleted instantly with no discussion. —Jimmybobbyson (talk) 18:17, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: The page was deleted under speedy deletion criterion A7, indicating an article that did not explain or prove why the subject was notable. A7 deletions are not overturned here; try contacting the deleting administrator (Acroterion (talk · contribs)) instead. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Novara Media

Whilst in 2015 Novara Media may not have met the notability guidelines the organisation has grown significantly since and senior editors of the site regularly appear as pundits on British television. It has a significant social media following and has had over 1 million views on YouTube. —Garymysz (talk) 17:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. Since notability is not inherited, how does the company become notable just because its staff members have appeared on TV? Also, YouTube views are not a valid criterion for notability on Wikipedia. You might ask the deleting admin Spartaz to consider restoration to draft space for improvement, if you can demonstrate that the company meets WP:CORP requirements (which are not media appearances by staff or YouTube views). ~Anachronist (talk) 14:13, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

CoNetrix (2nd request)

I asked for the CoNetrix page to be restored previously and the page itself was, but none of the content with it. Is it possible to get the latest version deleted of CoNetrix restored to my user page? —Prlandru (talk) 13:49, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

@Prlandru: Above, the history was restored to Draft:CoNetrix but then that draft article was speedily deleted by Seraphimblade after it was tagged as unambiguous promotion. As such, it is ineligible for restoration now, unless you can convince Seraphimblade to restore it to draft space for further improvement. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:16, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_268&oldid=1138664364"