Wikipedia:Deletion review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

If you think a review of a deletion discussion is needed, please list it here and say why. Users can then comment to reach an agreement on whether the community thinks the discussion was closed correctly, or the decision should be overturned. Each user can say if he or she wants to endorse the closure, or overturn the closure, with a brief comment, and sign with ~~~~.

A page should stay listed here for at least 5 to 7 days. After that time, an administrator will decide if there is a consensus (agreement) about what to do, and take appropriate steps. If the consensus was that the discussion was closed correctly, the discussion should be closed with a note saying this.

Archived requests are here

Current requests[change source]

Please list newer requests at the top.

DJ LYTMAS[change source]

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 (Boy Addi (talk) 11:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC))

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)
  • 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)

Wrinkle (skin)[change source]

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)

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)
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)
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)

Gabrielle Blunt[change source]

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

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

Cosmetic Town[change source]

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)

Olivia[change source]

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)

My talk page edit notice[change source]

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)

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)
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)
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)

Diamond Foundry[change source]

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)

Requesting Undelition DJ LYTMAS[change source]

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