Wikipedia:Deletion review/Archive 3

2019 requests

Please list newer requests at the top.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

onomasiology

This article was deleted in 2015 but I see enwiki has an article. The creator of this article is Still active here, so why not allow this article to be developed? Ottawahitech (talk) 01:13, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted for being a dicdef (dictionary definition). If someone wants to write a more fleshed-out article, that would be fine as long as it's in simple language. When an article is deleted for that kind of reason, it doesn't need a deletion review to be recreated, as long as the deletion reason is addressed. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:31, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many articles start out as stubs and develop over time. I for one am grateful to the person who started this article in 2015, for bringing the topic to my attention. In my opinion it was a mistake to delete it when an enwiki article existed since 2005, and the original Simple creator should get the credit for it. Ottawahitech (talk) 04:46, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The users who created the RFD and gave input on it felt that it was a dicdef, rather than a stub. You may disagree, but the RFD had to be decided based on the comments given at the time. Also, existence of an enwiki article is not grounds for keeping one here. As I said, you are welcome to create the article again if you're going to write more. If you want the deleted version restored into a sandbox, I can do that (after my laptop maintenance finishes), but I don't want to restore it to mainspace in the form that was deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:16, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sportacus

was qd'ed because it's not notable, even though it's linked to from 3 different pages. would be better to rfd, or just restore/improve it. Computer Fizz (talk) 04:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I restored it, because I don't believe QD option A4 applies to fictional characters (pinging @Macdonald-ross:, who did the deletion). Note that the number of incoming links alone does not constitute notability or require RFD. It's also not necessary to have incoming links to justify a deletion review. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:23, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

XP School

XP School. Good afternoon. Less than few hours after this page has been created, already deleted with no discussion. I am too late to add "wait" on the talk page. 2A01:CB00:B51:3E00:9CDC:F6B0:8CC7:9D88 (talk) 10:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Mohammad Ghorbanpor

As far as I can see, this article was never discussed on RFD on this wiki, so QD G4 does not apply. The content does not appear to be blatant self-promotion either (QD G11). The subject does indeed have questionable notability, but such an issue falls under RFD scope. Chenzw Talk 20:41, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ben Shapiro

The page on Ben Shapiro has been deleted for being non-notable. I responded to the request for deletion by arguing in the talk page that the (in)famous Ben Shapiro is both prominent enough and controversial enough to be worthy of note. And I still maintain that there should be an article, or at least a stub, about Ben Shapiro on that grounds. I explicitly mentioned on the talk page that if this argument were refuted, I would have no problem with deletion. No counterargument has yet been produced and as such I would like the Ben Shapiro page to be reinstated until such time as rebuttal is offered. (P.S. I in no way wish to impugn the editor who deleted the Shapiro page as the editor in question has done some very good work in protecting the Adolf Hitler page from vandalism and has my great respect for that.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.200.115.29 (talk • contribs)

The issue wasn't that he isn't notable, it was that the article as written didn't show notability. Anyone is free to create the article again as long as they explain why the person is notable in the article. Just stating they are a commentator for example would not be enough. -DJSasso (talk) 18:49, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rada Radonjić

Hi Wikipedians. I made an article Rada Radonjić. It was deleted by the other Wikipedians because there were no sources. I added sources and some new piece of information. Now it is an article with information which are really confirmed with references. Please, I would like to know what I can change, add or something else if you wrote there. I would like to point out that is an article which is proven. It is about live person. So, please, if you could help me about this article I would be really happy. Thank you. --Anitelav (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2019 (UTC)Anitelav[reply]

For the reference, the RfD was closed a few days back, and is at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2019/Rada Radonjic. When I do a google search on the name, what I find is what looks like two self-published pages, facebook, and youtube on the first page of results. I don't know what you see as being notable, but what we want is reliable third-party sources for notability.--Eptalon (talk) 21:12, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Christian Atheism

My article on Christian Atheism was wrongly deleted, even though I specifically stated in my edit section when I posted it the 2nd time saying that I would simplify it whenever I have the time. I don't know if it was deleted because of that, or if it was deleted because of my sources, but it should not have been deleted. If it was put back into this Wiki, then I will find a way to simplify it. But until then, what has been done with my page is unfair, even though I said that I would find a way to simplify it, but also if there is something that needs to be fixed; then I will have time to fix it when I can. Take my words into consideration please. Sincerely, Chanman2019. (Written on April 12th, 2019 at 9:01 AM)

You can't just copy a complex article over and then leave it and say you will come back at some point. You have to simplify it when you add it. By the looks of it you were given about 5 hours to do so when it was last deleted. -DJSasso (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Chanman2019: When you plan to work on an article over time, it's often a good idea to put it in a sandbox in your userspace. There, you can take longer to get the article in shape for this wiki. As far as the deletion, think about it this way: if many people copied over complex articles without simplifying them, we'd have an awful lot of articles that didn't meet the mission of Simple English Wikipedia. That mission is to provide easy-to-read articles for readers: any articles that don't meet that are subject to review and/or deletion. We've had people argue that this wiki should be shut down because we don't fulfill that mission well enough, so it's understandable that we have the quick deletion option under which your article was twice deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6: Ok, understood. I am sorry if I caused any inconvenience or any drama. That of course wasn't my intention. Thank you for telling me about being able to use the sandbox to keep my Wiki page on here for a longer time. This is honestly my first time actually posting Wiki articles, so I am kinda learning as I go along. I have always been one to read Wikipedia articles; not one to post them, so this is kinda an experiment for me because I have always been fascinated with online encyclopedias like Wikipedia, Britannica, and many other online encyclopedias like those. So that is why I wanted to try this out to see what I can learn about making these kinds of articles. I hope that you can understand my situation. But besides that, thank you for helping me out with my situation, you have helped me learn something very helpful that I can use as a tool for learning on how to write Wikipedia pages. You are awesome for helping me out. 👍 Sincerely, Chanman2019. (Written on April 17th, 2019 at 9:14 AM CDT)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

NO ACTION:

No consensus to restore.-BRP^ever 13:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dr. Russell Surasky

A page was recently deleted for a physician named Russell Surasky. This doctor meets notability criteria and I think his work as a triple board certified neurologist and addiction specialist is highly noteworthy. Not simply because of medical credentials but because of the type of work he continues to accomplish. As per Wikipedia, "notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article". This article has "significant coverage", "reliable" information has been provided, "sources" are present, sources are "independent of the subject", and the article can be "presumed". Dr. Russell Surasky appears to show significant coverage on his chosen specialty. Addiction Medicine is one branch of medicine which is highly expanding. The provider has been published in highly accredited papers and articles. As stated above, reliable information has been found in the Long Island Press. This digital monthly news journal was founded in 2003, thus showing media coverage "independent of the subject". Also, there seems to be articles on Dr. Russell Surasky on Psych Central, Health News Digest, and Medium along with the Long Island Press.

It is my strong and sincere belief that this page should be restored both for its current content and the content which im sure will continue to expand. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ EARTHSCIENCETEACH (talk • contribs) 05:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse Deletion- Deletion review is to review whether or not the closer did a correct closure, not to rehash arguments brought forth in the deletion discussion. Given significant meatpuppetry, the closer was right to give lesser weight to their votes. There is also very little new sources given and just it meets GNG, to be fair the other side also didn't analyse the sources given. However, the delete arguments also include that it is self promotional article which is against WP:NOT. Hence, the delete arguments are stronger in thus case and the close was correct.--Cohaf (talk) 08:11, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse Deletion: closer acted properly. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:41, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article was deleted based on the community consensus. I myself do not believe any of the prior circumstances have changed (i.e. keep this article deleted). Hiàn (talk) 03:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Page: - I am not sure why this physician doesn't meet notability criteria. 1) Triple board certified neurologist and addiction specialist, 2) national speaker for Alkermes pharmaceutical company, 3) expert speaker for the pharmaceutical company USA WorldMeds, 4) medical director of Bridge Back to Life (OASAS certified outpatient centers across New York State). There are far less notable physicians listed on Wikipedia - here is an example - (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Szasz). I think that before this review is closed that we have other neutral editors take a look at the information on this page. The same couple of people who commented to take down the page are the same that are commenting now to keep it shut down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EARTHSCIENCETEACH (talk • contribs)

This user is the creator of this DRV proposal. Vermont (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We are a small Wikipedia, so it's often the same people commenting on various things. The only time that usually makes a difference is when the people commenting seem interested only in the article being discussed, as seems to be the case with many of the people wanting this article to be kept. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:35, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Page: - I'm not sure what the motivation of these couple of editors are who are trying to keep this physician off of Wikipedia. The doctor meets all criteria, in fact I would argue surpasses many of the criteria required of a Wikipedia entry. There are countless physicians listed on Wikipedia which are far less notable. I could provide numerous examples of this if requested. The more research I do on this physician the more items I find that were not listed in the initial Wikipedia page. His instagram account as 100,000 followers. His patient reviews online are in the hundreds, all as 5 stars with exceptional commentaries. In addition to the roughly 25 news sources listed in the original page, a basic internet search reveals many other significant sources. For example, Here is a video of Ed Mangano (Nassau County Executive) introducing Dr. Russell Surasky to deliver a public awareness campaign regarding new treatment for addiction. https://www.facebook.com/DrugFreeNassau/videos/1848059678756797/ If an editor still isn't convinced that this physicians page belongs back in the main space and requests more news articles/sources, I or anyone else could certainly provide many more. However the original page which was taken down in error already had numerous sources. Bmultani95 (talk) 09:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide these numerous examples. In regard to motivation, it is to maintain the quality of Wikipedia. I'm not sure what the motivation of the dozen or so new accounts that came around specifically to try and push this article; perhaps money, which would be consistent with what happened on enwiki regarding this subject. I will note such paid editing is against the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. Vermont (talk) 13:19, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion. If you see articles about physicians that you think don't show notability, you are free to nominate them for deletion. As for this case, I don't think any of the things people have mentioned show notability for Wikipedia's purposes. For example:

Reliable sources exist: just having sources doesn't show notability. The sources must support something in the article that indicates notability.
Number of Instagram followers: the number of followers on social media platforms isn't usually considered to show notability.
Patient reviews: These wouldn't be considered reliable, partly because patients would be closely tied to him.
The video that was linked above: I didn't see anything in the video that indicated notability of the person.
Being board certified: it is common, sometimes even required, for physicians to be board certified for various things
Having papers and articles published: Also very common with physicians and other scientists
Being a spokesperson for companies: having the job of telling people how good a company and its products are isn't notable.

I understand that many people might respect Dr. Surasky. Some might even consider him a hero if he improved their lives. Just keep in mind that notability on Wikipedia has specific criteria and is not the same as what might be notable to us in the general sense. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:35, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Barnett Furniture Company New Orly

I understand you had a lengthy article about Barnett Furniture Company in New Orleans. I cannot find this article. Has it been deleted? And if so, can it be undeleted?

The owner, Max Barnett, was my great uncle. And the store at one time was the largest furniture company in the south. Ellencleary (talk) 05:16, 26 February 2019 (UTC)you[reply]

@Ellencleary: I don't see that we had an article by that name. If you could give an exact name, we could look for it. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:06, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ellencleary:Could you response to the above. I don't think the article is deleted here, is it at the English Wikipedia instead. --Cohaf (talk) 02:03, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No need to ping them again, they probably left to en.wiki to find out after Auntof6's comment. We get these all the time and never hear from the people again. -DJSasso (talk) 12:47, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The article will remain deleted; there is no consensus to restore. Vermont (talk) 12:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Mr Puaz

Requesting the article page for Mr Puaz to be reinstated. With the fact more reliable sources are being added and more to be in-depth and reliable information to be added. Lastly kindly instead of deleting the page in just few hours after created give it time for writer to find the best way to grow it. Unless you guys u have draft kind of thing that's better. But someone is taking time to write something and it get deleted just like that for real its disappointing a lot. So am asking you guys to recreate the page again and while in discussion let the writers add more in-depth reliable sources and information. Machakusi (talk) 23:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question is Mr Puaz which was deleted a couple of weeks ago at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2019/Mr Puaz Only (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse DeletionClear lack of notability, and no new sources are given, repeated sayings it has are just simply inadequate.--Cohaf (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cohaf: Endorse is not usually a clear response here. Please clarify what you are endorsing: the request to restore the article or the earlier deletion. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:54, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clarified. Thanks.--Cohaf (talk) 00:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not going to comment on whether the article should be undeleted but there was a community disussion lasting a week, not a few hours which should have been ample time to clean things up. Hiàn (talk) 01:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Go search for the term on the internet, the best you come up with is an article in Swahili Wikipedia; this article looks close to the one that was deleted here a few weeks ago. I know that earning money with music is difficult, but yoi know the asubject is likely not notable if the first few hits on a search engine are Wikipedia, and social media sites. I see no reason to undelete this article...--Eptalon (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion Review Mystery Tribune

Mystery Tribune: The page did not include promotional material. Eehsani (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page not deleted. See Mystery Tribune.--Cohaf (talk) 13:24, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Eehsani:. Article is deleted at English Wikipedia. This is Simple English Wikipedia. Do file this DRV at here.Thanks.--Cohaf (talk) 13:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

2018 requests

NO ACTION:

Item remains deleted. Operator873^talkconnect 18:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion Review of Nicolas Tenoux

Article deleted in a second by Only (talk · contribs) without any review, comment, discussion, sources review, etc. POV. Please help. 118.201.150.4 (talk) 04:49, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need to explain why you believe that this article needs to be undeleted. How does the subject meet Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline? His role as a pilot and instructor does not seem notable. Only (talk) 04:52, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need to explain why you have deleted without any discussion, sources review, etc. A lot of sources was on this article. You also need to review the rules on Wikipedia, specially the ones concerning discussion, collaboration, no POV. How can other users can review the article if you delete it in a second? 118.201.150.4 (talk) 04:54, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(change conflict) I don't know what you mean by "deleted in a second". The article was created on December 14, and deleted on December 24, 10 days later. It was deleted in accordance with our quick deletion procedures, which do not require discussion. As I look at it, most of the things in the text do not seem to establish notability. However, the mention of the Civic Star might constitute a claim of notability, so I will restore the article. User:Only can start an RFD if desired. In the meantime, you might want to provide a reference to show that Tenoux actually received the award. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:03, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look carefully. The article has been created 1 year ago, not ten days ago. And a source is already provided. I will try to find a new one. 118.201.150.4 (talk) 05:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, you're right: it was a year ago. All the more reason not to accuse Only of deleting it too quickly. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened an RFD on this article. I searched for the award and his name (in both English and French) and only found his LinkedIn, his Instagram, and the Simple English Wikipedia page. I note that the IP has reverted all my removals of this article in various “notable alumni” type sections of our articles that were added mostly by the creator of the article. Only (talk) 05:17, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review of Template:Request block

A template called Template:Request block was deleted for (Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2018/Template:Block request) (thank). I want it to be undeleted because I want it to be used for a user to request a block on another user that is being disruptive. Notingnothing111 (talk) 06:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This template was not intended for that use. It would have been used if you wanted your account to be blocked. If you'd like to request a block be placed, you may do so on WP:ANI or, if it's a vandalism problem, at WP:VIP Operator873^talkconnect 06:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In case you want a second opinion, I concur with what User:Operator873 said. The template was for a user to request a block on themself. As for requesting a block on another user, using a template for that would require setting up some new infrastructure to manage such requests. Since this is a small wiki, and aimed at keeping things simple, we try to keep processes/infrastructure to a minimum. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep deleted. The template was not intended for what Notingnothing111 wants. Instead, editors can go to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress where admins will see the requests. I don't think it makes sense for a template to list other editors for blocking when we already have a page for that. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:50, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

NO ACTION:

Item remains deleted. Operator873^talkconnect 18:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion Review of Al Edwards II

I am seeking feedback regarding the request for deletion of following article: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2018/Al_Edwards_II

While researching the protocol/process for requesting feedback and reviews of deleted submissions, I noticed incidences of deleted pages being addressed with the dissenting editors to resolve issues and pages were restored to the Wikipedia site. The initial editor (Eptalon) recommended that the article be deleted as there were concerns regarding the subject's notability which were addressed during the "discussion" period; however, the article was still deleted.

Initially, the subject's national recognition and the regional broadcasts of the subject's notability and significance in his community and beyond had not been effectively communicated in efforts to keep the submission concise. The original submission also did not emphasize that the subject was not formally trained in the field of the notable impact which prompted the regional and national recognition. The original editor's feedback and recommendations for the improvement of the page/article were accurate in improving its presentation. Upon implementing those edits, it was anticipated that there would be an acknowledgement of the corrections and any additional feedback/further edits deemed appropriate would have been communicated.

I believe the observations and the subsequent edits improved the submission and there may have not been a chance to view the original article in comparison to the edited submission prior to deletion. Please advise regarding this matter as well as provide the process/steps to have the page restored.

--Bypgts15 (talk) 16:33, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed the deleted text. While I understand your points on this. This subject does not meet our minimum standards for notability. I am sorry, but I can not undelete this article. Other Admins could review this, and might be willing to, I am just not seeing appropriate criteria. -- Enfcer (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

NO ACTION:

Item remains deleted. Operator873^talkconnect 18:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion of Joél Filsaime

This page I created was deleted by a non-administrator, It was about a well-known rapper in Florida. Could please an administrator undelete this page so I can edit it ? THANKS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.11.21 (talk • contribs) 10:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually deleted due to a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2018/Joél Filsaime. -DJSasso (talk) 10:46, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And the user who deleted it is an administrator. Non-admins can't delete articles. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:58, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

NO ACTION:

Not the right project for deletion review request. Operator873^talkconnect 18:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion Review of Film director Linh Nga Nguyen.JPG

I am looking feedback regarding the request for deletion of following picture file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Film_director_Linh_Nga_Nguyen.JPG

There's a significant sign of vandalism related to the article and the artist, and someone (maybe trying to create multiple wikipedia accounts) to vandalize the article and related information. This picture is currently in used, positively, for the main article.

I am trying my best to keep everything right working on the article and related files. Please advise regarding this matter as well as provide the process to keep the picture as it is now. Thank you very much. Appreciate any help/support. -- (Homealone1990 (talk) 01:38, 29 October 2018 (UTC))[reply]

This page is for reviewing deletions of pages on this wiki. That item is a file, which we don't host here, and it's on Wikimedia Commons, not here. It also hasn't even been deleted, as far as I see. You need to discuss this on the Commons page that you linked. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:00, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

Deletion of Joseph C Kalimbwe

Hi, I created this page Joseph C Kalimbwe. The article was recently removed. However, I feel it must be on Wikipedia. My reasons are; first, this article was created some weeks back but very badly writted and was rightfully removed. However, having completely changed it, I see the need to have it here on Wikipedia.

The article Joseph C Kalimbwe just as is Mcebo Dlamini and Chumani Maxwelle which are similar in every way as i created them, is of southern African student and political activists who represent black African community underprivileged masses who are excluded from opportunities through some inherent Apartheid rules set to tilt education to a few minority in Fees Must Fall. The individuals don't just represent notable causes but are themselves notable. I thus came here in order to have the article Joseph C Kalimbwe after its changes be restored.

Regards MyPeople76 (talk) 07:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Oobi

This page I created was speedily deleted with the rationale "Complex article from another Wikipedia, little sign of simplification/conversion." However, it wasn't taken from a different Wikipedia and I only edited it once or twice. It was deleted before I (or anyone else) could work to further simplify it. Could please someone undelete this page so I can edit it? Thanks, RightFoalPowerWire (talk) 17:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restored as it doesn't appear to be a direct copy. -DJSasso (talk) 17:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Sithajn

I was away from my computer and a friend vandalised. I was editing while I left really quickly. I'm researching on this little known tribe. Very sorry! -Bewish

BewishBillenial are you referring to Sithajn? Have you tried asking at User talk:Macdonald-ross who deleted it? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Joseph Brown (artist)

Hello, I was just looking at Australian art & art collectors when I realised that the page for Joseph Brown was deleted, I think that this is unfair considering how important he is to Australian art and history for that matter. If I need to supply more reasons as to why this page should be recovered please respond to me.

THANK YOU. MVA33 (talk) 8:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@MVA33: It looks like this was done on a different Wikipedia. This is Simple English Wikipedia, but the deletion was done on English Wikipedia. It looks like it was deleted because the text was copied from another website. Please ask about it on English Wikipedia. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of brenwiki2017

Hi there, An image I uploaded was flagged for speedy deletion, I owned the rights to the photo but the meta tags still contained the photographers details so I was asked to have the photographers write to wiki commons to give permission for both myself and wiki to use and publish the image, I done exactly as I was asked and the photographers in question wrote in and gave permission to use the photo on Wikipedia but yet you have still deleted the image titled "brenwiki2017" from the page for Brendan Carr....WHY?

THANK YOU

Brendancarr (talk) 00:49, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Brendancarr: It doesn't look like there was ever a page called Brendan Carr here on Simple English Wikipedia. Could this have been on a different Wikipedia? In any case, this Wikipedia does not accept files: all files used here need to be on Wikimedia Commons. If that is where the image was deleted, then you need to ask about it there. If any of this did happen here on Simple English Wikipedia, please give more specifics so that we can check further. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hansen Natural

I noticed on the Energy drink page that one of the examples was Monster Energy. It is distributed or made by Hansen Natural. When going to the page for Hansen Natural, it redirects back to Monster. This seems to be an error in the sense that Hansen is the parent company. Not to mention that Hansen Natural sodas is well known/notable in its' own right. I am not affiliated to the company or working with them to get the page published in anyway, but I am sure if a short article was started, that more items would be added to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryanglanz (talk • contribs) 16:56, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bryanglanz: This page is for requesting that a deleted page be restored. The page you mention was not deleted, just redirected. (I see your point that a redirect in the other direction would be more logical.) A user had requested that the article be quickly deleted because it didn't show notability, but an admin redirected it instead. Anyone can change the page back to an article if they make it show notability, so I don't think any action is needed here. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hanson Natural (the company) was renamed to Monster Energy. -DJSasso (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2017 requests

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

DJ LYTMAS

An article I just created about DJ LYTMAS. has need listed and deleted according to (QD) policy.Pliz help undelete as I ask those good in Swahili to help in translation since the article was in the Swahili version on https://sw.wikipedia.org (Boy Addi (talk) 11:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC))[reply]

See the comments on your talk page, the article that you created does not meet the Wikipedia:Notablity (music) guidelines, which is why it was deleted.--Peterdownunder (talk) 11:18, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

this is the second request for this I’ve seen on this page, if there is a credible Swahili version of the article translate it and run it through AFC. If not the article probbablly wasn’t notable enough anyway. Kinetic bombardment (talk) 02:50, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wrinkle (skin)

I was not the page creator; I discovered Wrinkle (face) among recently created pages. Its small amount of text had evidently been copied directly from enwiki. I made numerous edits to simplify though without adding more content, performed a page move to a more appropriate name, made the interwiki connection in Wikidata, and added a Commons file to illustrate. Within ca. 18 hours I saw in "New changes" at 00:44 on 29 Oct 2017 User:Auntof6 had deleted the page per QD A3: "Complex article from another Wikipedia, little sign of simplification/conversion." I had not seen a QD template, nor did that page appear among the previous day's" My Changes" not unmarked as "current" so I'd know a subsequent edit had been made on a page that I'd worked on - my daily practice for over 10 years' WP editing (preferable to a Watchlist). It simply never occurred to me that a page I worked on would be deleted so quickly. With no challenge on notability, why was there no Template:Complex or other indication that the page needed further expansion and editing before deleting it - that way I'd have been alerted to return to it, prioritizing this before my ongoing editing in small WPs (zuwiki, ladwiki, pihwiki) and Wikidata, etc. I was beginning to understand how simplewiki operates (per my daily contributions since 19 Oct.), and heeded every indication when my various edits were found unacceptable, but frankly - this deletion is a setback, and discouraging. I'd appreciate an explanation. -- Deborahjay (talk) 19:29, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The issues with the article weren't introduced with the improvements you made: they were in the original version. The issue was that complex vocabulary hadn't been changed from the enwiki text. Specific complex words and phrases that remained include typically, immersion, promoted, habitual, hydration, and factors.

No "complex" template was put on the article because an admin, me, saw it before a non-admin user put a template on it. If an admin sees a quickly deleteable page, they do not have to first place a QD template: that would go against the idea of quick deletions. When I deleted the article, it was 19 hours old and hadn't been edited in seven hours. Both of those are longer than I usually wait for a new article to be in good shape.

If you want, the article can be restored for further work. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The considerations you state are helpful guidelines for me. To clarify whether I understand correctly:

placing a template message or two regarding the page's prominent deficiencies (e.g. ""complex language requires simplification"; or "wikify" as I just did for Pasty), indicates to the reviewing administrator that further active editing will be left to others;
only place the "in use" template if I myself am continuing to edit the page within hours;
the QD template process is how a rank-and-file editor signals an administrator to take this action;
if an administrator makes a deletion-for-cause, this will only show up in the "new changes" as a "deletion log" entry, the page and its talk page disappear, as does all record of it(?!) on "new changes" AND the previously participating editor's "my changes" as though none of it ever was.

These points summarize my conclusions of the past ca. 24 hours, and I'd like to be clear on these so my edits continue to be productive. And yes, I'll watch for the restoration of Wrinkle (skin) and shall continue improving it. -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:18, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page is restored. I see that another editor has made changes to it. Your points are mostly correct. A deleted page disappears from new changes but shows up under the creator's deleted contributions. If you are watching the page (which I know you said you don't do), your watchlist will show the deletion log entry for it. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:13, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gabrielle Blunt

The page was deleted for no apparent reason. Dopenguins (talk) 18:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was given in the deletion edit summary. The article was insufficiently simplified from (an earlier version of) the English Wikipedia article. The same was true of several similar articles deleted around the same time. They weren't the most complex pages we've had created here, but they needed to be simpler. There were also other issues not related to that. The author(s) of those articles might want to read our pages on how to write simply and how to copy from other Wikipedias. If you like, the article could be put in your userspace for you to work on until it's simple enough. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Requester was a sockpuppet and I have now imported the en version anyway. -DJSasso (talk) 16:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cosmetic Town

Hi, I'd like to see the deleted page for Cosmetic Town reviewed. Can someone let me know why it was deleted in the first place? Thank you!

There is no indication that this page existed here -- Enfcer (talk) 01:15, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Olivia

I had been working on it and was trying to simplify it but before I got the chance it was deleted, can we please undelete it so I can work through it? Thanks 2A02:C7F:DE4B:7100:6D2B:CDFD:DEC5:DFCB (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page edit notice

Could anyone restore the edit notice on my talk page as I want to change it to warn sockpuppets? ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 22:57, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you want to make a page that goes exactly against WP:DENY which you've already been talked to about. Only (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Besides that, how much good would a talk page edit notice do? The sockpuppets would have to edit your talk page to see it, and if they're known sockpuppets they'll probably be blocked and unable to edit your talk page. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:10, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Auntof6, do you remember posting this on my talk page? "There's nothing wrong with an edit notice that says "Don't vandalize this talk page," but you don't need to quote the vandalism or refer to specific vandals." Those sockpuppets were able to edit my talk page before getting blocked and locked. Anyways, I've made a notice that does not violate WP:DENY as per Only. You can see it here. If it is not any problem I will move it to the edit notice page. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 01:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Diamond Foundry

Diamond Foundry is America's largest producer of jewelry grade diamonds, funded with $100MM by investors including Leonardo DiCaprio, etc. The company is in national news all the time. It is fighting the mining cartel with all its abusive practices. Its entire Wikipedia page was deleted for no good reason whatsoever. Someone must have paid off some Wikipedia editor to do that. It's upsetting that this would happen on Wikipedia. Please restore the original article.

This is the Simple English Wikipedia. No article has existed here for Diamond Foundry. You'll want to go to the English Wikipedia for this one. Only (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requesting Undelition DJ LYTMAS

An article I just created about DJ LYTMAS. has need listed and deleted according to (QD) policy.Pliz help undelete as I ask those good in Swahili to help in translation since the article was in the Swahili version on https://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJ_LYTMAS

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:TheShadowCrow/sandbox 2

This is from a long time ago. i was wondering if the sandbox I created could be undeleted for just a day. I had its contents emailed to me at the time it was deleted, but there is info from past revisions that I did not get and really would like. If there is another way I could see the edit history without undeleting I'd be happy to do that instead, but if not all I ask is for one day so I can quickly copy down the content I need. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 19:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but no. We had another case like this where the request was denied because Wikipedia is not to be used to store one's own content. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was content for Wikipedia. Is there another way I can see the history, or explain my situation to someone that might have the power to help? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 16:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Huey P. Newton

While studying for my black history course, I was doing research on the Black Panthers and happen to find that wikipedia has absolutely no information on the creator of the movement, Huey P Newton. He was one of the most important civil rights pioneers of the 1960's and one of the most politically divisive pioneers of the 1960's and 1970's. He once had a page here but it was removed or deleted by racist. Wikipedia must protect or lock pages of black civil rights personalities. Please restore the page of Huey P Newton and lock it from abuse. — This unsigned comment was added by 24.216.48.8 (talk • changes) at 20:16, 10 March 2017‎.

It doesn't look like we ever had an article called Huey P. Newton, so there's nothing to restore. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Walt Koken

Please excuse this as the inexperience of a new user. I created a page in honor of Walt Koken, one of the most widely respected members of the American Old Time Music community. (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Koken) I posted it here in the Simple English Wikipedia. I then saw that it did not appear in the Wikipedia itself, so I deleted my entry and reposted it in the Wikipedia. However, now that I understand the distinction between the two sites, I realize I should have left my original article here, given its subject matter and the simple language used to write it. Would the administrators kindly restore it for me? — This unsigned comment was added by ‎ Rosebythedoor (talk • changes) at 15:21, 27 February 2017.

@Rosebythedoor: The page has been restored. It does need some work to simplify and wikify it. If you want, it can be moved to your userspace to work on. Otherwise, someone might nominate it for deletion because it's a copy of the English Wikipedia article. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Overcoming Obstacles

I created an article for the non-profit organization Overcoming Obstacles that gives away free life skills curriculum. The page was deleted due to its "promotional tone". We tried to edit the content in order to just provide relevant information on the organization as well as multiple sources but the page keeps on getting deleted. Can you give us specifics on how we can restore the page. All we want is to have a place where users can read about the national organization. Let us know what we can do. — This unsigned comment was added by 2603:3008:206:d200:c8f6:5cd0:6195:7161 (talk • changes) at 16:37, 2 February 2017‎.

I think you are on the wrong Wikipedia. It doesn't look like there was ever an article with that name here on Simple English Wikipedia, but I see that one was deleted on English Wikipedia a couple of times. You need to pursue this there. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hanummanthappa Koppad

I have create an article Hanummanthappa Koppad. Talk:MBlaze Lightning proposed this article for speedy deletion due some violation of policy (reference related). After that i have remove that content from the page. Now I can not find this article on wikipedia. IT IS DELETED ????? It was under discussion process. The Link redirecting to other article. If its deleted then why not notified to me. WHERE IS DISCUSSION PAGE FOR DELETION NOMINATION. WHAT IS THE PROPER REASON FOR DELETION. Please clear me. सुमित सिंह (talk) 06:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are on the wrong site. This is Simple English Wikipedia, and it doesn't look like you ever created any articles here. Maybe this article was on a different Wikipedia. @MBlaze Lightning:, can you shed any light on this? --Auntof6 (talk) 06:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's on English Wikipedia, and he's asked several people there about it and been given explanations. Only (talk) 11:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Majuli

I created article Majuli.Someone had deleted the article completely. Majuli is one of the largest riverine island in the world.How it doesnt meet the rules of this wiki. Even in english wiki there is a big article about it. Please do consider this and i want my article back. I will atleast make it larger.--wiki tamil 100 (talk) 04:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki tamil 100: The article was deleted because it wasn't simplified enough for this wiki. I see that it also needed some copy editing. If you want, it can be restored it to your userspace so that you can work on it there. Let me know if you would like that. I can also give you links to pages here that have information that can help you do the simplifying. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Chopper (movie)

This notable film about notable criminal Chopper Read was wrongly deleted through QD. Please undelete it. Jim Michael (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A user has recreated it. Please note that the only indication of notability is the vague, unreferenced statement that it has a cult following, so it could be qd'd again or even rfd'd. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Iveta Mukuchyan

Iveta Mukuchyan is one of the most famous singers/models in Armenia and Germany. Also, she took part in a song contest run by the European Broadcasting Union. Why was this page deleted? --Harut111 (talk) 19:49, 06 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Harut111: The page was deleted (back in October) because it was copied from English Wikipedia without being simplified (or not simplified enough) for this wiki. If you want, it could be restored to your userspace so that you could work on simplifying it. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.