Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 May 25

Image:Lootie original.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

It looks like the consensus of the AfD on Lootie will be merge to Media coverage of Hurricane Katrina. This image appeared on the Lootie article in January 2006 but was removed from the article and deleted the same day by an admin as a copyvio. Given the fact that two years have passed, meaning reselling opportunities for a news (ie current events) photo are less and given the racial bias talked about in both articles (and what I plan on mentioning when I do the merge) I believe this image would be fair use in Media coverage of Hurricane Katrina. Also since this image is a photoshop meme, I believe the best source of an unaltered version is (ironically) our deletion logs. -N 22:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment What exactly are you asking DRV for? If the image was deleted in Jan 06 its gone and can't be undeleted. If you want to upload it again you need to make sure there is a free copy available or that it meets the fairuse guidelines. DRV doesn't exist to review FU and certainly not before the merge has taken place - Context is everything. Why don't you just wait until the merge goes through and then look at sourcing an appropriate image? --Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Italian-American Youth Organization (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

User:Cjserio left this request in this page's wiki comments. I am neutral on the merits. His original request was "This was a page created about an organization that I belong to. The organization is a charitable one and is growing rapidly. It appears that the past article was vandelized and was then deleted. Please put the article back up.". Looks like a contested prod to me. -N 22:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Undelete and send to AFD as a contested prod. I can't find any trace of vandalism in the article's history though. Aecis^Brievenbus 22:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• Could someone undelete Image:Iyo_logo.jpg which was deleted as orphaned fair use as well? Just for the duration of the afd, of course... -N 22:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Done. Michaelas¹⁰ 22:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Newgate - cell and galleries from The Queen's London - a Pictorial and Descriptive Record of the Streets, Buildings, Parks and Scenery of the Great Metropolis, 1896.JPG (edit|[[Talk::Image:Newgate - cell and galleries from The Queen's London - a Pictorial and Descriptive Record of the Streets, Buildings, Parks and Scenery of the Great Metropolis, 1896.JPG|talk]]|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

Now as I am not (yet) an admin, I cannot see this deleted page, but I saw the deletion log. I4, no source. However, I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that this consists of an image from The Queen's London - a Pictorial and Descriptive Record of the Streets, Buildings, Parks and Scenery of the Great Metropolis, 1896. I am going to further speculate this was published in 1896, and is PD by reason of age. -N 22:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• I found the source online and undeleted it. Thanks. Chick Bowen 02:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Dynamic Submission (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

Improper Deletion Akc9000 01:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC) This was the first product ever created by Dynamic Software. I actually do not understand your reasoning. I was following the format used by Microsoft. Dynamic Software is a software company as is Microsoft (much smaller) but it is published and has many works and it worthy of being in an Wikipedia

akc9000

Dynamic Software (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

Improper Deletion Akc9000 01:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC) --> Dynamic Software is an international corp. that sells Windows based software. It is published and noteworthy. I see no reason for this article to be deleted. I request the article be restored.

• Deletion is perfectly proper under WP:CSD#A7 and probably WP:CSD#G11. The fact of existence is not evidence of significance or an assertion of notability. "Internet based software promotion products" = spammers. That doesn't make the thing notable either. Guy (Help!) 09:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy undelete as a contested prod. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Done, and then deleted again as A7. Process duly satisfied, we can now get on with life. Guy (Help!) 14:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Love gaming the prod system. And before anyone makes a catty comment, I know it's written into WP:PROD, it doesn't make it less underhanded. --badlydrawnjeff talk 14:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, you're right, asking for undeletion of a spammy article with no assertion of notability written by a single purpose account just because it's a prod is indeed gaming the system. Luckily we have WP:CSD#A7 and WP:CSD#G11 to overcome such nonsense. Guy (Help!) 14:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• I dunno man. As a general rule, you want to give careful consideration to a contested speedy, as through {{hangon}}, provided the contester is not a troll or vandal. This article is certainly not spam. Does it make a sufficient claim of notability? Well, they make a bluelinked product that has a fair-sized article with its own press notices; and they've won an award of some kind, or at least claim to have. Why not give the guy his day in court, is that gonna kill you? It's easier, really, than expending energy here. In all liklihood it'll pick up a half-dozen Delete comments and vanish forever. But maybe not. You might start to get "ZOMG are you kidding everyone uses their software" or whatever. You never know. Herostratus 15:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• If "everyone uses their software", they'll find references from "everyone", and post it here on the DRV rather than fire rubber cartridges.--WaltCip 17:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• I just now saw this thread. I answered a #wikipedia-en-help request for this earlier today and userfied the article to User:Akc9000/sandbox. I did this, as noted, without knowing that this discussion was on-going. The user is attempting to create a properly referenced article now in the sandbox. If anyone has issue with what I've done, feel free to comment accordingly. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• Absolutely fine. Best solution, probably. Guy (Help!) 12:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• Shall we close this as userfied? I'd do it but I'm not an admin and I don't know how to do it anyway. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Iceman (Rapper) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

It was a page I created for myself so please let me restore it! GBpacker4 7 00:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment from the deleting admin: I have deleted this article per WP:CSD#A7, since it didn't assert the notability of the subject. With all due respect, this is not the first unsigned aspiring rapper with only a myspace link who writes an article about himself. Aecis^Brievenbus 01:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• "Because i'm writing this page about myself and i would know the best about myself." See WP:AUTO. Valid WP:CSD#A7. Guy (Help!) 09:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy close per WP:CSD#A7, and salt the earth.--WaltCip 13:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse deletion, no claim or evidence of notability whatsoever is given. His myspace profile isn't even public, for crying out loud. Herostratus 15:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse, valid A7. Unsigned teen rapper, and a self-admitted WP:COI case. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse. Yo GBpacker. This shizzle ain't fitting in the nizzle 'cause it's not notabizzle. You know what I'm sayin'? Michaelas¹⁰ 21:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)