Cortney Tidwell and Cortney Tidwell (singer) – restored by the deleting admin, nothing more for DRV to do here. NAC. – Tim Song (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
Cortney Tidwell (talk`\|`edit`\|`history`\|`logs`\|`links`\|`watch) (restore) Cortney Tidwell (singer) (talk`\|`edit`\|`history`\|`logs`\|`links`\|`watch) (restore) I have a perfected article for Cortney Tidwell, however I cannot add because the page is now protected by deleting admin. This admin is out to get me, my most-current article is in wiki format, notable and does not advertise (the reasons why Cortney Tidwell pages were deleted) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncerlan (talk • contribs) 21:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Comment: malformed DRV fixed. While it's probably not G11, I can't find any indication of importance in the article. Tim Song (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Cortney Tidwell is a recording artist with three albums. She is on tour with other famous artist. She has a county singer for Mom. Her whole family is associated with the grand ole opry. Is that the kind of importance your looking for or do you mean something technical? like a link or citation (im bad at those)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncerlan (talk • contribs) Can you please explain: How Ms. Tidwell meets your choice of criteria at WP:NMG? Why you chose to repeatedly recreate the page, including recreating at a different title to circumvent page protection, rather than engaging with the administrator who deleted the page or seeking to improve it? Thanks in advance. Stifle (talk) 09:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] I have deleted a further recreation of the article at Cortney tidwell. Stifle (talk) 15:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] The above questions were answered at my talk, viz: Tidwell has coverage from reliable sources. MSNBC and The Guardian [1] [2] She has 2 albums from two known labels. She has been on tours with other famous artists and some of her music is collaborated with members of the famous band Lambchop (band) Its not against Wikipedia's rules to repeatedly create a page if you make improvements upon it. Wikipedia is never a final copy article. I am prepared to !vote permit recreation on the basis of the above, on condition that there are no further circumventions of process, i.e. you should wait until this discussion is closed by an administrator before attempting to recreate the article at whatever title. Stifle (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Overturn deletion as deleting admin. Where were those reliable sources before? I've restored Cortney Tidwell and added the sources to the article. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] I take it this can be closed now?—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 17:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

Cortney Tidwell and Cortney Tidwell (singer) – restored by the deleting admin, nothing more for DRV to do here. NAC. – Tim Song (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.

I have a perfected article for Cortney Tidwell, however I cannot add because the page is now protected by deleting admin. This admin is out to get me, my most-current article is in wiki format, notable and does not advertise (the reasons why Cortney Tidwell pages were deleted) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncerlan (talk • contribs) 21:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: malformed DRV fixed. While it's probably not G11, I can't find any indication of importance in the article. Tim Song (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cortney Tidwell is a recording artist with three albums. She is on tour with other famous artist. She has a county singer for Mom. Her whole family is associated with the grand ole opry. Is that the kind of importance your looking for or do you mean something technical? like a link or citation (im bad at those)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncerlan (talk • contribs)
Can you please explain:
1. How Ms. Tidwell meets your choice of criteria at WP:NMG?
2. Why you chose to repeatedly recreate the page, including recreating at a different title to circumvent page protection, rather than engaging with the administrator who deleted the page or seeking to improve it?
Thanks in advance. Stifle (talk) 09:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted a further recreation of the article at Cortney tidwell. Stifle (talk) 15:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above questions were answered at my talk, viz:
1. Tidwell has coverage from reliable sources. MSNBC and The Guardian [1] [2] She has 2 albums from two known labels. She has been on tours with other famous artists and some of her music is collaborated with members of the famous band Lambchop (band)
2. Its not against Wikipedia's rules to repeatedly create a page if you make improvements upon it. Wikipedia is never a final copy article.
I am prepared to !vote permit recreation on the basis of the above, on condition that there are no further circumventions of process, i.e. you should wait until this discussion is closed by an administrator before attempting to recreate the article at whatever title. Stifle (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn deletion as deleting admin. Where were those reliable sources before? I've restored Cortney Tidwell and added the sources to the article. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I take it this can be closed now?—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 17:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

The Rampage Trio – Deletion endorsed but ask me if you need this userfied – Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
The Rampage Trio (talk`\|`edit`\|`history`\|`logs`\|`links`\|`watch) (restore) I'm a bit baffled by the deletion of the Rampage Trio (Band) page, simply because I cannot find an associated reason or administrator. I also do not see, in my Oaken13 section, that I ever created a page (no creation history), yet the Rampage Trio page has existed for quite some time. I also cannot find any evidence in the deletion log. I have searched using multiple case formatting, and just performed a general search and looked through numerous pages, all to no avail. Any ideas? This seems like a larger administrative issue than just a simple deletion. Oaken13 (talk) 17:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] I think you are looking for The Rampage Trio. Tim Song (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] I have corrected the title. Cunard (talk) 05:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] ...which was deleted in February as a non-notable band. Stifle (talk) 09:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Thank you Tim Song. I have contacted jclemens concerning the matter; I'm waiting for a reply on his talk page. Scarian is no longer a member of Wikipedia, so I imagine his A7 comment no longer counts. I thought we had resolved the non-notable problem because the page was only removed recently. It was not removed back in February, though that is when the complaint was logged by jclemens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.223.109.101 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Endorse deletion A Google News Archive search returns only passing mentions / trivial coverage. There is no indication that the deleted article would pass WP:CSD#A7 or the notability guidelines for bands. I recommend, Oaken13 (talk · contribs), to ask for userfication at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion if you can find significant coverage in reliable sources about the band. A well-sourced creation would not require another deletion review since this article has not been deleted through a deletion discussion. If you need any help, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Cunard (talk) 05:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

The Rampage Trio – Deletion endorsed but ask me if you need this userfied – Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.

I'm a bit baffled by the deletion of the Rampage Trio (Band) page, simply because I cannot find an associated reason or administrator. I also do not see, in my Oaken13 section, that I ever created a page (no creation history), yet the Rampage Trio page has existed for quite some time. I also cannot find any evidence in the deletion log. I have searched using multiple case formatting, and just performed a general search and looked through numerous pages, all to no avail. Any ideas? This seems like a larger administrative issue than just a simple deletion. Oaken13 (talk) 17:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are looking for The Rampage Trio. Tim Song (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected the title. Cunard (talk) 05:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- ...which was deleted in February as a non-notable band. Stifle (talk) 09:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Tim Song. I have contacted jclemens concerning the matter; I'm waiting for a reply on his talk page. Scarian is no longer a member of Wikipedia, so I imagine his A7 comment no longer counts. I thought we had resolved the non-notable problem because the page was only removed recently. It was not removed back in February, though that is when the complaint was logged by jclemens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.223.109.101 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion A Google News Archive search returns only passing mentions / trivial coverage. There is no indication that the deleted article would pass WP:CSD#A7 or the notability guidelines for bands.
I recommend, Oaken13 (talk · contribs), to ask for userfication at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion if you can find significant coverage in reliable sources about the band. A well-sourced creation would not require another deletion review since this article has not been deleted through a deletion discussion. If you need any help, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Cunard (talk) 05:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

Eimantas Paltarackas – deletion endorsed – Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
Eimantas Paltarackas (talk`\|`edit`\|`history`\|`logs`\|`links`\|`watch) (restore) Hello, Please, accept my apology for disturbing you but more than a week ago one of my articles has been deleted by the user called Renata3. Under the deletion it's been stated as "No indication that the article may meet guidelines for inclusion: total advertising". By the user Protonk (On "request undelition" page) I have been told that "In order to meet our inclusion criteria, a subject must be covered in significant detail by multiple reliable sources". Since I wrote this article I wasn't trying to advertise anything. Whole time I was concerned that this article would have to meet the Wikipedia guidance, including the inclusion criteria In this article I have provided a short biography about the radio and tv personality, outlined as Wikipedia:Notability (people). I read the list of what classifies as a people and there I'd found exact criteria that would subscribe to my article as "Creative professionals - journalist, entertainers". Speaking about a subject who suppose to be covered by multiple reliable sources, there are many independent public media sources that clearly states about the identity and status of the subject from my article. Most of these sources are in native Lithuanian language, whatsoever, most of it can simply be translated into English. Please, find the links bellow. Information about the subject at the biggest Lithuanian daily news paper The completed entertainment projects, ideas (Note: Information at the bottom of the page). Official "Yearly city days" website supported by the local government Eimantas Paltarackas are the author of these all printed reports and interviews (The main news source in Lithuania) And there are many other independent sources, entertainment awards that the name of Eimantas Paltarackas appears on it. Currently, the person that I wrote this article about is working in United Kingdom, into the broadcasting industry. Including British Broadcasting Corporation, well known as a BBC. However, legally I don't have the approval to provide you yet with the information about this work with the BBC as it is the upcoming tv show project. Time by time he does cooperate with various Lithuanian media too. Again, I honestly do apologise if this article has appeared as a totally advertising. But please, can you look at the details that I have provided and review this article. I only wish that providing the story of someone's life from the Creative professionals sector will be accepted and available to the public. Thank you so much for taking your time on this matter, deep down I really hope that you can help me. Regards, Sean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean Todd Lewis (talk • contribs) Deleting admin notified. Tim Song (talk) 18:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] No apology necessary, though next time please try discussing this with the deleting admin first - you can see their name from the deletion log. Can an admin restore it temporarily for non-admins to review? Thanks a lot. Tim Song (talk) 18:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Tim, thank you so much for your responds. Please, accept my apology as I did used it just to say "sorry, I didn't had any intention to disturb any of your time for such reason". I only felt disappointed about this deletion as I really had made an effort to write this article. It took me time to prechecked all the details and compare it to the reality, so this article could provide true information to the Wikipedia users. I still wish to thank you for giving me a chance to stand by my removed article. Sorry for my mistake as I did not contacted the deletion administrator. Should I still do it or wait for the review? In regards to your question "Can an admin restore it temporarily for non-admins to review?" I am not sure what the whole procedure will be. I do wish that this article has been undeleted but can it be restored before the review? I really don’t want to cause any troubles while waiting for the reviews, I mean the temporary restore that you'd suggested. What will you say? Please, I will appreciate any of your help or advice. Thank you again. Regards, Sean. Sean Todd Lewis (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 20:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC).[reply] You can still do it now. My question was directed to any admin who might come and see it, not you. Tim Song (talk) 21:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] I am deleting admin. I deleted the article not only because I believe it does not meet notablity requirement, but also because it was writen as an advertisement & personal website/essay. I do not have time to investigate. I am traveling and my Internet time is limited to 15 minute count-down in an Internet cafe. I will have Internet access starting Monday. Gotta run, sorry. Renata (talk) 17:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Uncertain Like Renata, I tend to use both criteria when I think they are both applicable. In this case I am not sure about the A7 --the only thing that might serve as an assertion of notability is " hosting a daily interview and entertainment show on "BRN plus fm" That is plus FM's Baltic radio network.-- which is not a broadcast station but an internet channel, a network that is not listed in WP except in this one article. The plusFM entire network when I checked just now had 119 listeners. It is dubious by my standards whether this is a reasonable assertion of notability. As for advertisement, it is only borderline G11, since some of the article is informative. I usually support listing for an AfD discussion in cases like this, but I would have to say that the chance of having a keep is extremely minimal. DGG ( talk ) 21:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] 119 listeners on the whole network? If so, it's a bit of a lost cause, I should think.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 21:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] If DGG is uncertain about indication of importance, that's good enough for me. From what was described, I don't see how the A7 was in error. No sources presented by nom changes my mind, and no ((tempundelete)) necessary. Endorse. Tim Song (talk) 22:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Hello again and thank you all for taking your time on my issue. Whatsoever, will you excuse me people but then what exactly is the notability? Well as one of you mentioned the Baltic radio network and numbers (119) why nobody really checked the numbers of the sources that I'd provided above? I believe that these numbers could prove you the notability that we are missing here. Please note that for obvious reasons I did not used the Baltic radio network as an independent source of notability at all. I am not sure about this but I might guess that the deletion admin Renata3 is Lithuanian, if so then maybe you could tell how big or independent the sources are (provided above). The subject of this article is the author of many reports and interviews which is available to the public. He has been hosting weekly Tv show “Pramogu rulete” at the local tv station, which by the way has been broadcasted for 4 season in Lithuania, Kaunas (ARTV, Lietuvos Rytas TV) and for a year in Vilnius (11tv). As far as I know the show had a huge audience too. As I have stated early the subject of my article suppose to cover "Creative professionals - journalist, entertainers". I would think if in my article I'd used part of the ongoing work for the Baltic radio network, and if that's called as an advert then it can be simply removed from the article. It's internet project, so I agree that it's not the best source. I can swear that I have got no intention to advertise any websites as the deletion admin has stated, I am sorry for this misunderstanding. Again, I apologise but I really believe about the notability of the subject and I don't know how else I can prove you that. Maybe I just expected your advice and help on how I should correctly rewrite this deleted article so it won't sound as an advert. Please, if I still may ask your comment about the independent sources that actually has enormous numbers of visitors and clearly confirms the real but not imaginary status and notability of the character. Again, thank you all! PS. Renata3, please, when you free and back from your journey, may I ask you to review this article again. I will really appreciate that. Sean Todd Lewis (talk • contribs) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.223.109.101 (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

Eimantas Paltarackas – deletion endorsed – Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.

Hello,

Please, accept my apology for disturbing you but more than a week ago one of my articles has been deleted by the user called Renata3. Under the deletion it's been stated as "No indication that the article may meet guidelines for inclusion: total advertising".

By the user Protonk (On "request undelition" page) I have been told that "In order to meet our inclusion criteria, a subject must be covered in significant detail by multiple reliable sources".

Since I wrote this article I wasn't trying to advertise anything. Whole time I was concerned that this article would have to meet the Wikipedia guidance, including the inclusion criteria In this article I have provided a short biography about the radio and tv personality, outlined as Wikipedia:Notability (people). I read the list of what classifies as a people and there I'd found exact criteria that would subscribe to my article as "Creative professionals - journalist, entertainers".

Speaking about a subject who suppose to be covered by multiple reliable sources, there are many independent public media sources that clearly states about the identity and status of the subject from my article. Most of these sources are in native Lithuanian language, whatsoever, most of it can simply be translated into English. Please, find the links bellow.

Information about the subject at the biggest Lithuanian daily news paper

The completed entertainment projects, ideas (Note: Information at the bottom of the page). Official "Yearly city days" website supported by the local government

Eimantas Paltarackas are the author of these all printed reports and interviews (The main news source in Lithuania)

And there are many other independent sources, entertainment awards that the name of Eimantas Paltarackas appears on it.

Currently, the person that I wrote this article about is working in United Kingdom, into the broadcasting industry. Including British Broadcasting Corporation, well known as a BBC. However, legally I don't have the approval to provide you yet with the information about this work with the BBC as it is the upcoming tv show project. Time by time he does cooperate with various Lithuanian media too.

Again, I honestly do apologise if this article has appeared as a totally advertising. But please, can you look at the details that I have provided and review this article. I only wish that providing the story of someone's life from the Creative professionals sector will be accepted and available to the public.

Thank you so much for taking your time on this matter, deep down I really hope that you can help me. Regards, Sean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean Todd Lewis (talk • contribs)

Deleting admin notified. Tim Song (talk) 18:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No apology necessary, though next time please try discussing this with the deleting admin first - you can see their name from the deletion log.
  Can an admin restore it temporarily for non-admins to review? Thanks a lot. Tim Song (talk) 18:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tim, thank you so much for your responds. Please, accept my apology as I did used it just to say "sorry, I didn't had any intention to disturb any of your time for such reason".
I only felt disappointed about this deletion as I really had made an effort to write this article. It took me time to prechecked all the details and compare it to the reality, so this article could provide true information to the Wikipedia users.

I still wish to thank you for giving me a chance to stand by my removed article.
Sorry for my mistake as I did not contacted the deletion administrator. Should I still do it or wait for the review?

In regards to your question "Can an admin restore it temporarily for non-admins to review?" I am not sure what the whole procedure will be. I do wish that this article has been undeleted but can it be restored before the review? I really don’t want to cause any troubles while waiting for the reviews, I mean the temporary restore that you'd suggested. What will you say?

Please, I will appreciate any of your help or advice. Thank you again. Regards, Sean. Sean Todd Lewis (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 20:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

You can still do it now. My question was directed to any admin who might come and see it, not you. Tim Song (talk) 21:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am deleting admin. I deleted the article not only because I believe it does not meet notablity requirement, but also because it was writen as an advertisement & personal website/essay. I do not have time to investigate. I am traveling and my Internet time is limited to 15 minute count-down in an Internet cafe. I will have Internet access starting Monday. Gotta run, sorry. Renata (talk) 17:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uncertain Like Renata, I tend to use both criteria when I think they are both applicable. In this case I am not sure about the A7 --the only thing that might serve as an assertion of notability is " hosting a daily interview and entertainment show on "BRN plus fm" That is plus FM's Baltic radio network.-- which is not a broadcast station but an internet channel, a network that is not listed in WP except in this one article. The plusFM entire network when I checked just now had 119 listeners. It is dubious by my standards whether this is a reasonable assertion of notability. As for advertisement, it is only borderline G11, since some of the article is informative. I usually support listing for an AfD discussion in cases like this, but I would have to say that the chance of having a keep is extremely minimal. DGG ( talk ) 21:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
119 listeners on the whole network? If so, it's a bit of a lost cause, I should think.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 21:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If DGG is uncertain about indication of importance, that's good enough for me. From what was described, I don't see how the A7 was in error. No sources presented by nom changes my mind, and no ((tempundelete)) necessary. Endorse. Tim Song (talk) 22:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again and thank you all for taking your time on my issue.

Whatsoever, will you excuse me people but then what exactly is the notability? Well as one of you mentioned the Baltic radio network and numbers (119) why nobody really checked the numbers of the sources that I'd provided above? I believe that these numbers could prove you the notability that we are missing here. Please note that for obvious reasons I did not used the Baltic radio network as an independent source of notability at all.

I am not sure about this but I might guess that the deletion admin Renata3 is Lithuanian, if so then maybe you could tell how big or independent the sources are (provided above).
The subject of this article is the author of many reports and interviews which is available to the public. He has been hosting weekly Tv show “Pramogu rulete” at the local tv station, which by the way has been broadcasted for 4 season in Lithuania, Kaunas (ARTV, Lietuvos Rytas TV) and for a year in Vilnius (11tv). As far as I know the show had a huge audience too. As I have stated early the subject of my article suppose to cover "Creative professionals - journalist, entertainers".

I would think if in my article I'd used part of the ongoing work for the Baltic radio network, and if that's called as an advert then it can be simply removed from the article. It's internet project, so I agree that it's not the best source.

I can swear that I have got no intention to advertise any websites as the deletion admin has stated, I am sorry for this misunderstanding. Again, I apologise but I really believe about the notability of the subject and I don't know how else I can prove you that. Maybe I just expected your advice and help on how I should correctly rewrite this deleted article so it won't sound as an advert.
Please, if I still may ask your comment about the independent sources that actually has enormous numbers of visitors and clearly confirms the real but not imaginary status and notability of the character. Again, thank you all!

PS. Renata3, please, when you free and back from your journey, may I ask you to review this article again. I will really appreciate that. Sean Todd Lewis (talk • contribs) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.223.109.101 (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.