Wikipedia:Deletion review/Archive 6

2024 requests

Adelaja Adeoye

RFD ENDORSED:

No consensus found to restore article.

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.

Note: I am moving this request here from Talk:Adelaja Adeoye. That talk page will be deleted because the main article doesn't exist (having been deleted). --Auntof6 (talk) 09:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I humbly want to ask for the undeletion of this page. I believe it was deleted without considering its amendments. @Ferien nominated the page for deletion stating that the subject's mention in the top 50CEOs was difficult to locate even though it was there (the last name); he said the list was too long. I provided more sources to solidify that claim but it was finally deleted by @Auntof6. Please, I solicit for the page to be restored so it can also be improved. Also, I apologise for the initial disruption that led to the blockage of my account. 2C0F:F5C0:620:685D:42D3:568E:1DE2:4C42 (talk) 09:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Originally deleted at an AFD - Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2024/Adelaja_Adeoye where three obvious socks all voted to keep the article. This feels like UPE / COI editing here. Sources have promotional tone, and questionable if the list itself is notable. Right now, I'm not in favor of restoration. Perhaps if they can get a draft accepted on enwiki where the main account (assuming it's only three accounts, main plus the two obvious socks). Ravensfire (talk) 21:26, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done No consensus to restore.--BRP^ever 06:05, 2 November 2024 (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.

Eloho Oyegwa

DELETION ENDORSED:

Article to remain deleted. A future improved article can be re-created in userspace, but must be reviewed by administrators before being created as an article.

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.

I wish to request for the undeletion of the page Eloho Oyegwa so that I can improve on it to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The page was previously deleted due to a lack of reliable sources, but I have since gathered additional sources that provide substantial coverage of the subject. Below are the references I have compiled:

- Source 1: [News Article] https://guardian.ng/news/empowering-through-tech-the-inspiring-journey-of-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 2: [News Article] https://guardian.ng/news/why-i-never-considered-joining-japa-bandwagon-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 3: [News Article] https://guardian.ng/news/webcore-nigeria-ceo-eloho-oyegwa-reflects-on-impactful-journey-in-nations-digital-industry/

- Source 4: [News Article] https://guardian.ng/business-services/oyegwa-shares-strategies-on-how-digital-businesses-can-survive-nigerias-economic-challenges/

- Source 5: [News Article] https://thenationonlineng.net/webcore-nigeria-leverages-expertise-to-develop-digital-solutions-for-companies-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 6: [News Article] https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/03/how-businesses-can-survive-economic-challenges-in-nigeria-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 7: [News Article] https://dailytrust.com/webcore-nigeria-has-created-impactful-outcomes-for-its-clients-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 8: [News Article] https://independent.ng/meet-webcore-nigeria-ceo-philanthropist-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 9: [News Article] https://dailytrust.com/how-transitioning-moved-webcore-nigeria-from-struggling-to-profitability-eloho-oyegwa/

- Source 10: [News Article] https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/02/how-we-maintain-loyal-customers-webcore-nigeria-ceo-oyegwa/

- Source 11: [News Article] https://thenationonlineng.net/why-webcore-nigeria-is-thriving-amid-harsh-business-environment-oyegwa/

- Source 12: [News Article] https://thenationonlineng.net/how-my-parents-shaped-my-personal-professional-values-oyegwa/

These sources demonstrate that the subject is notable, and I am ready to update the article with this information. Elohothedon (talk) 17:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC). Thanks![reply]

Why not remake the article in your user space and move it to main space when it's ready? fr33k man 18:12, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman: This is well noted. I will remake the article shortly. Elohothedon (talk) 21:05, 21 September 2024 (UTC) . Thanks![reply]

You were told to remake it in your user space THEN move it into main space and not just recreate it in main space. The subject is not notable. fr33k man 20:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done The original page was basically a promotion/advertisement of the subject. Feel free to create it in the userspace and consult the deleting admin for review.--BRP^ever 06:09, 2 November 2024 (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.

Muhammad Javed

RFD ENDORSED:

Article to remain deleted. A future improved article can be re-created, in article or user space, but will be subject to a RFD.

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.

The article was closed as delete by Auntof6 even though there was no consensus as no one voted delete other than the nominator. I shared a list of in-depth reliable articles about him and later Cactusisme was interested but never found time to review the references. I'd like to request the community to review this case of supervote by Auntof6 and restore the article. 185.182.52.104 (talk) 23:53, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never said that though, I just said I nominated it for QD and asked @Ferien to look into the comments. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:16, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a comment in the AFD about a lack of an article on enwiki - w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mudtoonz2012 is the reason for why it's been deleted over there - promotional editing from a the two accounts and a variety of IP's to push this person. Are they notable? perhaps, but a promotional article is not exactly helpful. Ravensfire (talk) 13:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to agree with @Auntof6. I see no notable subject here. fr33k man 01:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination was one !vote, Auntof6's decision to delete would have been two. fr33k man 18:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman: An admin's decision to delete is not a !vote. It is an evaluation of the discussion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True fr33k man 16:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done No consensus to restore. I would have liked if there was more discussion on the RFD, but this doesn't meet WP:ANYBIO due to high number of recipient and would also need to meet WP:GNG. I'd say this is still borderline case so if any user requests, the page can be restored in userspace for further work, or can be recreated with improvements which would then need to be discussed in another RFD.--BRP^ever 06:31, 2 November 2024 (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.

Mustapha Dassoukine

RFD RE-OPENED:

Article restored for improvement

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.

The page Mustapha Dassoukine was deleted via WP:quick deletion by Auntof6. The page included multiple significant coverage references that were reliable sources and independent of the subject. So according WP:GNG the person is presumed to be notable. Besides of that there was stated that the person is seen as one of the comedian pioneer in Morroco. So the article shouldn't have been quick deleted without a discussion. SportsOlympic (talk) 09:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note, with some English language sources I actually would like to expand the stub I started. SportsOlympic (talk) 22:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Id have to say with the line stating him being a pioneer of comedy in Morocco, the author does ''claim'' notability. It's thin but it's there. Overturn ''then'' RfD. fr33k man 01:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Restored and taken to RFD at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Mustapha Dassoukine. @SportsOlympic: Please feel free to expand and improve the article and comment on RFD during the discussion. Thanks,--BRP^ever 06:38, 2 November 2024 (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.

RFD ENDORSED:

Not overturned per consensus

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.

RobinRafan

This article was deleted by User:Macdonald-ross, reason (QD G5: Created by a blocked or banned user). But I am not a blocked or a banned user. Or have violated any rules. I want this article to be reinstated. Also the subject has multiple in-depth coverages which meets WP:GNG. Here are some of the links-

So I would like to request to reinstate the article. Thank you. Iccuggattu (talk) 08:58, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a careful look at some of those sources - [1] and [2] are pretty obvious paid/sponsored articles - over-the-top promotional in tone, formatting issues (especially the first one!). I suspect the rest are in similar. There's a reason the article is still a draft on EN - w:Draft:RobinRafan_(Obidur_Rahman). Ravensfire (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first article is from The Bangladesh today. It seems to have formatting issues, but I don't think it should be a solid reason to say that it was a paid/sponsored article.

Second one is from Daily Janakanta, a famous news portal from Bangladesh. Which is considered to be a notable news portal.

Here, most of the news sources are reliable. As,

9= Bangladesh Pratidin

All of the above are considered reliable, notable sources. As I have seen, if any article published by them is paid/sponsored, they declare these articles as paid/sponsored, directly or indirectly by saying, that is a subject generated or directly paid/sponsored article.

But in this case, I couldn’t find any affiliation declared in any of those newspapers. I have rechecked it. Even if the ill-formatted article link is removed, other sources are enough to establish notability.

And according to the deletion Admin, it was deleted for QD:G5 on SEWP. So notability or neutrality was not an issue here. So as the subject passes WP:GNG. It should be reinstated.

Iccuggattu (talk) 16:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes from the Dhaka Tribune article - "'RobinRafan,' a renowned content creator and musician, has seamlessly immersed himself in the dynamic realm of content creation and music, captivating audiences across various social media platforms." "His multi-niche approach sets him apart, as he actively engages in social awareness, tech, freelancing education, and music simultaneously." "With a goal to spread positive vibes in society, RobinRafan remains dedicated to creating diverse content that not only entertains but also contributes to the betterment of society.". That's pure promotional fluff and a sign of a sponsored/paid article. The south asia region is seeing more and more of this as news sites seek more revenue sources. The jamunaprotidin.com source - blatant sponsored/paid piece. This [3] from DhakaTribune - sourced to Tribune Desk and another clear promotional sponsored article. "His music creation showcased a veritable powerhouse of talent. RobinRafan has the ability to deliver creative storytelling content and has proven herself to be a force to be reckoned with." Really? Very poor quality sources like this is why the draft on EN is languishing and why this should not be restored. Ravensfire (talk) 17:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you strike out 1 or 2 news articles, that you have mentioned. There are still multiple news sources to support WP:GNG. Again quick searching on google, you can find news articles on him, as the person is well-known locally/nationally.Which is a very good reason to restore the article. Iccuggattu (talk) 21:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And those are the only bad sources? Hardly. I'm disinclined to do much further research when I quickly find three bad sources, and a glance at the translations of some others are equally bad plus the draft on EN is currently declined. I'd be much more inclined to see it here if the draft gets accepted on EN where there are more editors with time available to review. Ravensfire (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only the three that you have reffered might seem dull, but there are multiple sources that supports the notability according to SEWP GNG. And on ENWP the draft was rejected as per WP:NMUSICIAN. But till then, the article was modified, but not been posted for review again. So SEWP has strong reason to get reinstated. Iccuggattu (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The broad statements you make about enough sources is easily challenged by the number that a short review makes very obvious are NOT reliable sources. Add on that you've got a declared COI on this article, and I'm going to take your statements with a significant skeptibility. You haven't shown that you can do a good evaluation of the sources yet, in part because that COI makes you want the sources to be good. That's a problem, I hope you relize.

On EN, the article was rejected for more than just NMUSICIAN issues, it also didn't meat GNG there as that is ALWAYS a criteria for acceptance. So SEWP has mutliple good reasons to not reinstate the article. Ravensfire (talk) 01:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After it got rejected on ENWP, it was updated but not submitted for review. And as his brother I do have COI. But I have read all the criteria after getting rejected and improved the article and submitted on SEWP. And according to the guidelines, I believe and clearly can see that, this good to go again. I am not forcing, I am just showcasing the facts. Iccuggattu (talk) 02:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~endorse~~ incorrect deletion fr33k man 01:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fr33kman: Then I think you mean "overturn". "Endorse" means you agree with the deletion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's what I meant overturn fr33k man 02:09, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editor note: There is currently a RfD discussion for the page at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/RobinRafan.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 13:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And there was consensus to delete there, this topic should probably be closed and archived.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 12:43, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Per RFD consensus.--BRP^ever 06:40, 2 November 2024 (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.

Poshida: Hidden LGBT Pakistan

Macdonald-ross has deleted this LGBT related English film regarding diversity in the Asian world. Could somebody join in the discussion please to let us know if it should be review or Not? Thanks 80.2.6.163 (talk) 10:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP user any film in the world can be created however, unless it meets notability as stated at WP:MOVIE it gets deleted. If you read the notices you get when the QD tag is placed you will see why this was QD’d. It had nothing in it nor does it meet the requirements. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP user - only sign once at the end of your messages using ~~~~. That is four (4) tildes. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I don't want to change your text, but I'm sure you mean notability, not notoriety! -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it’s a pain in the … as you know when you do translations! I’ll fix it now. Thanks. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion: I looked at what was in the article. It basically just said that it was a documentary and said what it was about. None of that makes a movie notable. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion: As the editor who QD’d it. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what makes it notable? Jinglingzone (talk) CaptVII̟̠- 18:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

endorce deletion fr33k man 01:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not restored. No consensus to restore.--BRP^ever 11:25, 30 October 2024 (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.

polycristalline

I do not understand why it is deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LevelMeasurement6553 (talk • contribs) 03:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LevelMeasurement6553: The only things on the page were a link to the article "Crystal" and the category "Chemistry". That is not enough for a Wikipedia article. A Wikipedia article needs to have text about the article's subject, enough to explain what the subject is and usually something to show notability. Since this article didn't have that, I agree with the deletion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops it was meant to be a redirect, not just a link Harry (talk) 11:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LevelMeasurement6553: I see that you recreated it as a redirect to Crystal. We'll see if anyone else wants to comment, but I am fine with keeping it that way. -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion fr33k man 01:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC) Not restored. Looks like it exists as a redirect now.--BRP^ever 11:24, 30 October 2024 (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.

Abhishek Nigam

The article was closed as delete by Auntof6. I would like to request the community to review the article and consider restoration. I tried to improve and address the notability concern at User:C1K98V/Abhishek Nigam. You can also refer to the enwiki article Abhishek Nigam. Thanks for your consideration --C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 08:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Auntof6, it appears the article has improved in terms of addressing the notability tag since you closed that RfD in 2022. There was minimal participation in the RfD, with me nominating the page for deletion, C1K98V voting keep and it being closed as delete as it was not addressed at the time. I'm personally leaning restore, particularly considering the minimal participation in the RfD but I wanted to hear if you had any thoughts on this. --Ferien (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien: Well, I see that it needs a little copy editing and simplifying, but I think you wanted me to comment on notability. The userspace version definitely has more info, but that additional info just details the roles the person has played. I've never thought that the fact that a person acted in something showed notability by itself -- for me, there has to be a little more. WP:ENTERTAINER says, in part, "Has had important roles in several notable movies, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." The part of that that's missing here is that 1) the roles were important and 2) the production was notable. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ferien, Auntof6, First of all I would like to apologies that it took a little while to show the intent that I want to improve the article. Secondly, I would like to reiterate what an enwiki admin commented on the article per the enwiki policy WP:ACTOR which can be taken into consideration here - He has been in 233 episodes of Hero – Gayab Mode On, 93 episodes of Ali Baba: Ek Andaaz Andekha and 80+ episode of Pukaar – Dil Se Dil Tak, see here. So I assume and believe the policy WP:ENTERTAINER is satisfied. So, I would like to request you all to consider restoring the article. Thanks for your consideration. --C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 02:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6: @Ferien: @C1K98V: I’m voting to restore the page because the subject is notable not just for their body of work, but also because the roles they've played have been significant. The recent projects by Nigam showcase him in key positions, highlighting his relevance now. I agree that the page needs some copy editing, and it can certainly be improved. However, given the changes since the 2022 RfD, deletion isn’t necessary. Restoring the page would be the best option. ManaliJain (talk) 15:33, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— This user has made few or no contributions outside of this page. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

endorse delition fr33k man 02:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not restored. However, a new page can be created with improved content anytime which will need to go through another RFD.--BRP^ever 11:19, 30 October 2024 (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.

ABC's Rhymes

Hi, It was created by an user who was blocked and it deleted also for this reason. Can you review this page again? or can i create i newly? You can see page about this book on Vikidia. As https://en.vikidia.org/wiki/ABC%27s_Rhymes --Wikitakib (talk) 12:58 AM, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

@Wikitakib: You could recreate it if you can show notability. Nothing in the article either here or in Vikidia showed notability. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User is blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 12:54, 13 October 2024 (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.

Area code 712

Another unprocedural deletion by User:Macdonald-ross, deleted for the reason of "Area codes not notable in encyclopedia", which is not a valid reason to delete an article. Both in en and simple, the consensus has been that area codes are notable in wikipedia. Related evidence is seen in WP:Requests for deletion/Requests/2009/List of area codes in Canada and Category:Area codes. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 18:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC) *Overturn - If the article is notable for EN then it's notable for here.... close and shut case. –Davey2010^Talk 18:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen the article now (deleted when I commented) - Respectfully it should've gone to RFD and or it should have just been redirected to List of Iowa area codes. Either way my !vote still remains overturn now on the basis that "Area codes not notable in encyclopedia" isn't a valid criterion, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think individual area codes are notable. I would prefer if they were all redirected to a list. But that's no reason to delete a single area code article without the proper procedure, and keep the other ones. Hired Badge (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restored Some comments I would like to make:

Davey2010, as a slightly pedantic note from me: while our policies and guidelines are very similar and all policies on enwiki can be guidelines on enwiki, our community's interpretation sometimes varies and as a result, we do have pages that have been deleted on enwiki yet exist here and vice versa, so the status of the page on other wikis isn't often considered in RfDs/DRs.

Macdonald-ross, area codes were found not to be inherently notable in w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Telecommunications/Area codes RfC over on enwiki last year, they needed to pass GNG, but in 2007, it was more widely agreed that all North American area codes are notable. I don't expect anyone to randomly know this off-by-heart without checking or even to necessarily agree with it, it doesn't bother me, but you've just decided to quickly delete the article under your own criteria, again. There have been many times now where you have deleted articles for your own reasons, and it is an inappropriate use of admin tools. Even assuming you were following IAR, how would this action benefit the encyclopedia? – you deleted a referenced article, albeit a stub, that assuming very few area codes are notable, would still be well-known as the only area code in Iowa that has retained its original boundaries. You have deleted articles for invalid reasons or reasons that do not exist in policy many times now. I respect you a lot and I think you make a good admin overall but this isn't acceptable. The lack of acknowledgement of the community's concerns is also worrying. I do not think it is fair on others to have their articles deleted with little to no reaction on your end, even when it's raised at the appropriate forums. Therefore, I am informing you that I will be posting this to Wikipedia:Requests for de-adminship for wider community feedback the next time this occurs. --Ferien (talk) 12:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien That's a very fair point, unfortunately I have it lodged it in my head that "if it's okay for EN, it's okay for here and if it's deleted there it should be deleted here" however I recall being told some months or a year ago that deleted articles at EN are okay here, It's unfortunately something I constantly forget so my apologies for this, Thanks, Warmest Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 13:19, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, overturn. fr33k man 01:08, 17 September 2024 (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.

Shailendra Khanal

A few years back, Macdonald-ross deleted, undeleted, and then redeleted it. Today, I only learned about it while checking on Xtools, so I request WP:DRV. Shailendra Khanal has served as the 10th IGP of the Armed Police Force of Nepal and meets WP:GNG & WP:BLP. #QDA4, seriously? DIV IN E 23:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE I just did a search and the only things I found are that he was put into place as an IGP. That does not make him notable. What other sources do you have that would show notability? Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 23:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, he was the chief of the Armed Police Force of Nepal. The Nepal Armed Forces not only look after the security of Nepal but also contribute to the UN peacekeeping force. You can check sources provided below and also read WP:BLP & WP:GNG. These are just a few reliable sources, but in case you need more, there are a lot of such sources, including BBC and the UN.

[4][5][6][7][8][9] DIV IN E 00:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE I am familiar with the requirements. I will look at the sources and provide feedback for you. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 00:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE: Keep in mind that two things are required to show notability: sources and a claim of notability. So we should be discussing what makes the person notable before we worry about whether there are sources to support whatever that is. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before, when I created it, there were 3-4 reliable sources, I believe. Additionally, as the head/chief of the Nepal Armed Force, which is a government organization, there are enough sources to claim notability. DIV IN E 06:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Macdonald-ross restored the page then deleted again, although this was back in 2022. @Macdonald-ross: do you have anything you want to add? --Ferien (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien As it has been more than 12 days i personally believe that it should be restored. DIV IN E 18:05, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^{endorsing restoration}. I have seen subject on en wiki as well..... not sure why it is there if it is not allowed here? Jinglingzone (talk) CaptVII̟̠- 18:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IGP is considered very high level position in Nepal and in most of the cases is likely to meet GNG. I wouldn't say they are notable by itself, but since there are several news sources, this should be taken to RFD instead of being QDd imo.--BRP^ever 07:18, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restored --Ferien (talk) 21:35, 29 April 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

User is blocked/locked.

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.

Parvej Husen Talukder (poet)

Recently, this page was deleted by User:Macdonald-ross as a wrong by [G5]. But, User:PotsdamLamb was decided alone another reason for delete on Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Parvej Husen Talukder (poet) After all, it was a unwanted and unacceptable deletion and i am requesting to undelete it for that. GSEW^{Talk to me!}_{Special:Contributions/Genius sew} 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Genius sew I do not decide alone. Also, you just created your account and this is your only edit. So without any other comment, I will be submitting a checkuser account as a sockpuppet. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 04:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? It is my first account as this IP. You was decided alone. Actually, you telling non-true. Genius sew (talk) 04:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: For any admin - See logs at Parvej Husen Talukder. CU request opened. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 04:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note: User blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 05:28, 6 August 2024 (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.

status:Not done

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.

Puppy Bowl

Macdonald-ross deleted this page as "not notable". However, there's an enwiki page with several reliable sources, meaning it has a credible claim of significance/explanation of notability for A4. I recommend overturning. JustarandomamericanALT (talk) 18:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JustarandomamericanALT Just because they have it and we don’t is not a reason alone to request undelete. There may have been other issues with the article as well that we are not aware off. I didn’t request QD so I’m not sure of what else may be wrong. It could even be a complicated article. Who knows? Maybe an admin can chime in and let us know what they see. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there were other issues, but the deletion reason was clearly not right (there is a credible claim of significance based on reliable sources), hence the review. Justarandomamerican (t • c) 14:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree on this. Looking at the en article, there are sources that specifically cover the event itself, not just a puff piece on the results for a year. See yahoo news, archived NY Times piece, Variety for what I would consider good, in-depth sources that cover the Puppy Bowl itself, not a specific year. Ravensfire (talk) 16:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following statements about the Puppy Bowl were the only text in the article:

It's an annual program on Animal Planet
It's on Super Bowl Sunday
The names of the two teams
The date that it started

I don't see any claim of notability there, and there were no references. I think somebody starting over would do a better job. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 If that is all that was on there, I will restart it in myspace and any user has my permission to work on from this grouping #@Justarandomamerican@JustarandomamericanALT@Lee Vilenski@Ravensfire@Shoot for the Stars. Thank you for the update. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All - It can be found at User:PotsdamLamb/Puppy Bowl. @Auntof6 This is safe to close at this point I feel as it is in my user space, as seen above and we will work on it. Thank you again. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse reversal of deletion. I think if this article gets restored, it will meet our requirements to be in the encyclopedia. Also, I will recommend that there is nothing prohibiting restarting the article since it was not an RfD. More than likely not feasible if there was a lot of work done, but an option. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse reversal of deletion. Definitely meets notability requirements. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 05:31, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Macdonald-ross can you undelete this article please? Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural endorse I suspect if it was deleted, it was in poor shape, and most likely didn't make a good attempt to show it's notable. The topic itself is notable, so would endorse it being made visible, even if it's a case of reclassify. Ping me if it's in really poor shape and just needs cleanup Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb and Shoot for the Stars: Point of order: as per the notes at the top of this page, endorse means that you agree with the deletion. If you want to see the page restored, you can just say so or use the term overturn. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 Thanks for that. I never noticed it. I will keep it in mind. Someone else used it, which is why I used it as I typically do not agree with overturn on these. Thanks, and be well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:23, 8 April 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Non-notable and user is check-user blocked.

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.

Cheryl Jordan

Cheryl Jordan is notable because she is the superintendent of a public school district. Therefore, I think this article should be restored. 174.214.16.163 (talk) 21:31, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion. When considering whether a person meets the notability requirements for Wikipedia, you have to distinguish between someone who is locally known/respected/admired and someone who you could expect to find an article about in an encyclopedia. That second one is the standard on Wikipedia. Being a public school district superintendent doesn't make a person notable. There was nothing in the article that claimed notability, so the quick deletion was appropriate. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but I want the article restored so that I can do more research on this person to prove that she is notable. 174.251.161.1 (talk) 05:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Research can be done without restoring the article. By the way, I noticed that the article had no references. You would need references to prove notability. If you were a registered user, we could restore it to a page in userspace, but IPs can't have subpages. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion. I also can not find much of anything that would put her in the realm of being notable. Also does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: IP user was just blocked for block evasion. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:23, 31 March 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Non-notable and also removed from NLWP for same reason.

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.

Roy Van der Veen

Roy is a Dutch singer and this page should not be deleted. I made this page for a singer 2 hours ago, Someone already gave reaction on the page, It wasn't even done yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NandovanderVeen (talk • contribs) 20:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The article has been deleted from other Wikipedias and is at our version of RfD on the NL Wikipedia. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 16:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just checked NLWP, and they too deleted the article Roy Van der Veen as non-notable. Also, editor has not been active since the 27th of March. I will be closing this out as not done. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:33, 4 April 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Requester is CU blocked and also not notable

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.

Lyle The Kindly Viking

I think this article should be restored because it a Veggietales movie and therefore it is considered notable.174.251.161.157 (talk) 16:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was never deleted, it hasn't existed here before. -Djsasso (talk) 17:12, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has since been created and deleted. However, there was nothing in the article that claimed notability. Being a VeggieTales movie doesn't mean that it is notable enough for a separate article. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it is notable because there are some aspects of the film that make it notable. I would like it restored so that I can do more research and add stuff to prove that the movie is notable. 174.251.160.146 (talk) 05:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It will be easier if you create an account. Then you can have a user subpage. Kk.urban (talk) 05:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP user, as previously stated, this article was never created here, therefore it cannot be undeleted. You can create the article if you wish. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:01, 27 March 2024 (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.

RESTORED:

Requested restore by myself for bringing them back. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:22, 4 April 2024 (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.

2020 United States presidential election in [state]

I don't think these articles qualified for quick deletion as housekeeping. Kk.urban (talk) 15:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. @Fr33kman:, as the deleting admin, would you care to comment? -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I check to see if any other articles had been made for other years As there were not I thought that maybe these that are need while the election was on and deleted afterwards. If these are notable should there should't we have articles for all elections? fr33k man 18:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that we can have article for other elections. As for whether we should, maybe we should, but we get the articles that people want to create. No one is obligated to create any particular article. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6@Fr33kman@Kk.urban On 22 February, I requested these to be deleted and no one responded. On 8 March, I sent them to QD to be deleted. Everything that was on them was already in the main article (a specific section) for how each state voted. I did not feel (and still do) that we do not need these stubs as they can never be developed into a more robust article.

Also, going forward, I would like to recommend that if someone brings up something here, the original requester be notified. I happened to come across this to respond to another request that popped up in IRC. Otherwise, I would not have known and I would like to explain why it was requested. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:39, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb OK, I will notify the original requester in the future, if I can tell who it was.

As for the main page, 2020 United States presidential election, I don't see much details on each state, only a map showing the winner of each state. The individual state pages usually have the vote counts and percentages for each state, as well as a separate map for each state (for example, see en:2020 United States presidential election in Pennsylvania. I don't have a strong opinion of whether these are needed for all elections, but I don't think the QD rationale for housekeeping is meant for cases like this, where information will be deleted. Kk.urban (talk) 05:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban Since a lot of them are tables, they can be copied over to our article (with attribution). We did not have one for each state for that request. I can start on this tonight when I get home from work. These were very basic, with information copied over from en wiki. I think this would be the best way as we are simple and should not be sending our readers all over the place to read the results. Just turn it into a "one-stop shop,"¹ if you will.

^{An American term meaning everything in one place that one would need; similar to a Target or Walmart.} Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 12:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban I checked en wiki. They only have 3 states with the same title. Everything else is all in the main article they have. Is there anything in particular you want me to pull over as someone spent a lot of time on that article and they have all sorts of tables on it. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 03:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban Any insight yet as to what you would like? Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb It may be good to have the number of votes and percent of votes for each major candidate in each state. It would also be good to have a map of results by county (File:2020 Election Results Map by County.png), and a map showing the importance of each state based on population (either File:USA electoral votes 2020 hex cartogram.svg or File:2020 Scaled election map with Nebraska and Maine's differing votes.svg).

In general, I think the use of WP:QD#G6 here was not following the deletion policy. Kk.urban (talk) 19:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban I understand you rationale, however as previously stated, it was on the board for discussion for an odd amount of days (Start Feb 22 end Mar 8) and no one commented, so it went to QD. See the 5th statement from the beginning. Also, I will state that at any time an admin can restore these. However, I have noticed admins are not restoring things, especially when it is obvious like Puppy Bowl as they just want us to keep commenting. @Auntof6 @Fr33kman Please restore the articles deleted per this conversation. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 19:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the whole discussion and I don't see a consensus to undelete. Am I missing something? I'm happy to do the work but don't see the consensus. fr33k man 21:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman For Puppy bowl or for the states? For the states, I am requesting they be undeleted so I can copy the info over to the main article since I do not have the privileges' of seeing the info that was deleted and en wiki does not contain what we had. Sorry I should have clarified as the requester for it them to be deleted to have them undeleted. Sorry for that. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 21:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that housekeeping was correct, it was a mistake I made when scrolling through the options. fr33k man 21:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman Do you mean housekeeping was incorrect? :) If you want to restore them, you can put them as subpages under me so I can copy/paste then delete them. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 21:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was incorrect. Could you list the article titled below and I'll undelete them. fr33k man 21:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman They all start with the title of this thread and end with a varying state name. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 21:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was being lazy and hoped you put redlinks for me but I'll do the work and go to the log instead. :) fr33k man 01:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman I’m sorry. The good part is they were all deleted at the same time so you should be able to restore in one push. Here is one for you 2020 United States presidential election in Connecticut Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman Here look at March #s 1-51 User:PotsdamLamb/QD log Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, undeleted to main space fr33k man 01:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman I still see quite a few red links on my QD log. Can you double check please? I have been going through and removing my QD from them as they turn blue. Thanks and edit well! - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:55, 3 April 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Non-notable

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.

J Merlin

Hi there I’m requesting for the page, J Merlin to be undeleted. I believe this artist has potential to become notable. I keep gathering information about this artist on a weekly basis. Christoffheaney (talk) 15:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Moved from Wikipedia talk:DRV --Ferien (talk) 15:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving the request into this page Christoffheaney (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have managed to find sources about this artist from a reliable news article Christoffheaney (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide the sources here please? I have recently looked at the deleted page and it seems pretty unredeemable to me. fr33k man 19:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there after doing extensive research and discovering the artist other part of his full name the following came up https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/peckham/man-accused-of-possessing-sawn-off-shotgun-and-ammunition-in-peckham/

I understand discogs and music brains is not a reliable source according to Wikipedia however if you go on it you will see the artist full name. I also discovered the artist website which is the following https://jmerlin.mydurable.com/

You will also see the artist name of Instagram although it is just his first part of his surname https://www.instagram.com/merlin_made_it_bang

It’s very clear that this artist chooses not to use his entire full name due to the event that happened in 2015 however the artist needs to understand that entering the spotlight of the music industry, certain personal matters that are hidden will come to light eventually. Christoffheaney (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman hi there I’ve found another reliable source Christoffheaney (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Non-notable

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.

David Reese

David Reese is a college professor and therefore he is notable. Therefore, this article shouldn’t be deleted. 174.251.160.13 (talk) 00:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

College professors are not automatically notable. There was nothing in the article that claimed notability. See Wikipedia:Notability (people) for information on what makes people notable for Wikipedia purposes. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

College professors do research and therefore they are notable. I would like the article restored so that I can add more information to prove that he is notable. 174.251.160.146 (talk) 05:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor. I looked up the professor. Nothing I can find will make him meet any criteria that is required for GNG or Scholar. Sorry, as we know that is not the answer you want to read, but we have to apply the same criteria across the board. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:14, 27 March 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Deletion endorsed

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.

William Smith

William Smith is notable because he is a valedictorian. Therefore, this article should be restored. 174.251.161.1 (talk) 05:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion. IP editor, this is not a criteria to be notable, or else we would have thousands of valedictorians on Wikipedia for only that reason. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:28, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There’s other things that make him notable, such as being a national merit semifinalist and designing a unique science experiment in his high school chemistry class.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.251.161.1 (talk) 06:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse deletion. That still doesn't make them notable. I did plenty of science experiments in high school, does that mean I get an article on Wikipedia? Shoot for the Stars (talk) 06:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But he did a really creative experiment that few people have done before. Restore the article and let me do some more research on him to prove he is notable. Lopoduas541$ (talk) 06:47, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Lopoduas541$ is check—user blocked. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 03:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: IP user was just blocked for block evasion. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:23, 31 March 2024 (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.

NOT RESTORED:

Not restored per fr33kman A4

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.

Kourage Beatz NSI

Dear Wikipedia Administrators, I am writing to request the undeletion of the page "Kourage Beatz NSI," which was deleted on multiple occasions. The most recent deletion occurred on January 2, 2024, at 08:38 (UTC), with the reason cited as "Recreation of a deleted page with the same or similar content (QD G4)." Previous deletions also cited reasons such as advertising (QD G11) and creation by a user evading a block or ban (G5). I understand the concerns related to the content and creation history of the page. However, I am seeking an opportunity to address these issues and contribute a revised version of the page that adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. I assure you that the new content will be devoid of advertising, comply with notability standards, and will not be a reproduction of previously deleted material. I kindly request the Wikipedia community's consideration in reinstating the "Kourage Beatz NSI" page, providing an opportunity to rectify past issues and contribute meaningful content to the platform. Thank you for your time and consideration.Dushdoo (talk) 18:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC) endorse the article is clearly A4 and not able to be made notable. fr33k man 00:01, 27 February 2024 (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.

RESTORED:

Contested QD can always be discussed in RFD. An RFD has been opened.

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.

Separation of East Pakistan: The Untold Story

I created the article only earlier today with citations already in place. This article is about a documentary. Literally minutes after I created it, a tag for Quick Deletion was stamped on it. The "reason" given was that it was non-notable. I placed deletion wait tag underneath as well as a construction tag. I added over half a dozen third-party published citations as well as links to movie review sites such as Rotten Tomatoes and The Movie Database. I even opened a discussion on the talk page pointing to all the citations and pointing to General Notability guidelines, I received no response, including from the one who placed the tag. The article was then abruptly deleted without any proper review or response to the discussion I opened pointing to it's notability. I am seriously disappointed by the knee-jerk environment here. There's even more citations I added, but I added over half a dozen sources discussing the subject itself, which itself in turn is part of a larger history subject. I would like a full and just review of the situation. The original requester should have opened a discussion on a talk page to state his concerns or something of that sort rather than abruptly tagging it for deletion.--NadirAli (talk) 18:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@NadirAli: to notify.--BRP^ever 01:30, 28 March 2024 (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.

Momcozy

The brand obviously has a lot of independent references and information, and has won many awards. Doesn’t this also satisfy Notability? Please explain the problem in detail or provide corresponding modification strategies. --Carleyeta(talk) 16:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose undeletion. @Carleyeta: There was no claim to notability in the article, so it was deleted under A4 - no claim to notability. --Ferien (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done No consensus to restore. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:47, 28 March 2024 (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.

Coat of Arms of Bulgaria

I'm considering this article for un-deletion but would like some more input first. Deleted per A4 by @Macdonald-ross:. I know we've had a problem in the past with "X of Y" articles. National flower or bird or any other non-notable thing. However I think the official coat of arms of a country is perhaps a little more notable than those other cases. I think at an RfD, this would be kept. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. No response from Macdonald-ross and no other opposition to restoring. --Ferien (talk) 12:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done per Ferien Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:49, 28 March 2024 (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.

SpaceTIS

"Undeleted". I am requesting that the page "SpaceTIS" should be un-deleted. SpaceTIS is a well-known Aerospace and Defense company doing business and working with notable governments in Europe, the USA, Africa, and the Middle East. The company received multiple awards worldwide and it was named Top #1 Aerospace Company in North America and in the World in 2023. This Wikipedia page about SpaceTIS should not be deleted. Please UNDELETE the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramatou2020 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted because the page was deleted under A4, but there were claims of notability. However, the page may still be deleted as advertising because the tone is promotional, and it could also be taken to RFD. Pinging @Macdonald-ross: as deleting admin. -- Auntof6 (talk) 13:06, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed a lot of the promotional fluff and ended up taking it to RFD after a search for useful, secondary sources didn't turn up anything worth adding. Feels like some COI or UPE editing happening here. Ravensfire (talk) 15:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done No consensus to restore; No RfD opened. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:57, 28 March 2024 (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.

Broda Shaggi

Please I humbly request the undeletion of Broda Shaggi. Actually, the page was created recently with sources and notable citations and was deleted tagging A4. I believe it may be a mistake. Pinging deleting Administrator, Macdonald-ross. Best, Mastashat (talk) 14:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The usual reason is that the page does not tell us why the person is notable. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:25, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't think this page in question has ever been written in Simple English Wikipedia. Talking about your reply, I guess it's a clear misconception.

That page was cited by up to eight notable and reliable citations.

Per musician, the musics from meet google search was added.

Per actor, there was Selected filmography mentioning his notable movies.

Per other wordings, there are list of some of his awards (accolades). Using all these, what exact notability do the Nominator seek for the subject of the page. Best, Mastashat (talk) 14:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the page passed WP: GNG and it's addition from enwiki. So, what in details do your aspect of notability requires if not in WP: Notability. Best, Mastashat (talk) 14:31, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let the page be reviewed because I don't see how he doesn't claim notability when he has acted notable Nigerian movies, won awards for acting and some were listed on the page before deletion. Even if there is still doubt of notability, it should be rfd instead. Best, Mastashat (talk) 19:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfD In fairness, there was a claim to notability (that he won an award), but I'm not sure whether this article clearly passes GNG so I'd prefer this to be sent to RfD. --Ferien (talk) 19:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The subject has won many awards according to Nigerian sources credit to his movies. So don't we think having appeared on notable movies and wom awards for his movies. The page in question was created newly by me and just like Indo researches and add them one by one, I just saw it deleted per not notable. @Macdonald-ross deleted the page as if it was recently deleted. I request admins check whether it has been deleted earlier per notability. I guess Broda Shaggi is important to be included on this wiki. Best, Mastashat (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it clearly passed WP: GNG. I believe the page was in work before deletion but not even A4 because the edits already established notability while work continues. Best, Mastashat (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Requested restoration by a now globally locked account for cross-wiki spam. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 02:00, 28 March 2024 (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.