UDWiki:Administration/Undeletions/Archive2007
| Undeletions Archive | ||||||||||||||
|
2007 Undeletions Archive
Sons of Treweeke
An old group speedied under Criterion 12 last year. Still quoted in some pages, mostly in ancient discussions. Undelete + Defunct Group category. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 10:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Undeleted all revisions. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 15:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Fedaykin
Please undelete the page for the group Fedaykin. Reason for undelete: This group disbanded but members have recently become active again.--Dark Shogun 04:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
French glossary
I would like access please to the content of the page formerly titled "G.I.F.D./Escouade de la Legion Etrangère/Glossary". It was speedily deleted on 26Oct07, see:
My plan is to create a page with better links and put the content there. Unfortunately my backup was out-of-date and thus incomplete. Thanks, --Dan Everyman 22:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- When that page was deleted it was a redirect to G.I.F.D./Glossaire, a page that was also deleted. Are you looking for something from G.I.F.D./Escouade de la Legion Etrangère/Glossary history or would you like G.I.F.D./Glossaire restored instead? - Vantar 22:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- The latter thanks. Apologies for the confusion. --Dan Everyman 12:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- You will find the page you are looking for at User:Dan Everyman/Glossaire - Vantar 12:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I've moved it back to G.I.F.D./Glossaire, which I think is probably the best location for it, though I'm open to suggestions otherwise. There is a link to it from the news section at the bottom of the home page of G.I.F.D., of which I'm a member. --Dan Everyman 06:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- You will find the page you are looking for at User:Dan Everyman/Glossaire - Vantar 12:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- The latter thanks. Apologies for the confusion. --Dan Everyman 12:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
User:Nalikill/TemplateTemplate
As it was illegally deleted; it was voted keep on on the A/SD page and therefore should have been subject to 2 weeks of voting, especially as it was a user subpage, and never used maliciously. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:29, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- It was deleted under crit 6 and its nature as a spam gun more or less disqualifies it for undeletion - Vantar 01:39, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- But it had four keep votes under it... meaning it didn't qualify for speedydeletion. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:41, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- It was something that had passed through speedydeletion. Is recreation was completely bad faith, especially given its nature. You are fucking lucky im not punting you for a week. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 01:42, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Hey, fuck you, banning me would be against the rules- THAT PAGE EXISTED FOR A FUCKING MONTH so it would be misconduct to ban me over something that was there for God and everyone to see and was only deleted when hagnat got pissy and got a grudge against me. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:45, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Yes but that was after it was deleted here A/D#Template:Template making it a crit 6 - Vantar 01:44, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- And you still haven't said why it's elegible DESPITE HAVING KEEP VOTES? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:45, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- 6 Deletion Workaround: The page is a duplicate of a page that has been deleted from a previous deletion request (please note the relevant deletion request if this is so). A page that fits this criterion is immediately qualified for deletion without requiring it be nominated on the 'Speedy Deletions' page. Recreating a page that fits this criterion will get you a polite message to stop doing so. Any further infractions of this nature will qualify as vandalism and will be treated as such. Note that criterion 6 does not apply when the page has been restored through Undeletions. In short the page is delete on sight - Vantar 01:47, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- IT STILL HAD KEEP VOTES..."A Speedy Deletion may be circumvented by a single vote of Keep under the request." your point about crit 6 being? (Other than it was rendered INAPPLICABLE after the first keep vote?) And I ain't asking for much; is it really that much work to put the page back and let it pass through A/D? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:48, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- A page that fits this criterion is immediately qualified for deletion that super secedes everything else - Vantar 01:50, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- But there's precedent. The DEM roster? Remember that? [1] I hope that's enough of an example; just on that page there's several more where it WASN'T superceded, so crit 6 doesn't fit here either. Unless there is some gigantic difference between the cases you can explain? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:53, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Restoring anything that has previously been deleted through any means other than undeletions is an instant delete. Crit 6 has no appeal if the content was deleted prior to new page creation. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 01:56, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Wait, does that mean that crit 6 does or doesn't apply here? If it means it doesn't then, you're right, if it means it does, then, why wasn't User:Saromu/DEM_Roster and User:User:Cyberbob240/DEM_Roster deleted despite the keep votes? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 02:00, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Differences between DEM rooster and this: This is a spamgun the dem rooster wasn't. The DEM rooster had many people claiming ownership- this doesn't - Vantar 01:58, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- The spamgun part isn't an issue. That's nowhere in the rules, regulations, or precedent, so that means nothing, and this, it is one person claiming ownership, but I don't see why that matters as there's nothing in the rules about it. So try again for a valid explanation. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 02:00, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Ok but thats going to take some time since I have a feeling you will reject anything unless it is cited perfectly it;s be on your talk page in an 1/2 hour - Vantar 02:03, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- The spamgun part isn't an issue. That's nowhere in the rules, regulations, or precedent, so that means nothing, and this, it is one person claiming ownership, but I don't see why that matters as there's nothing in the rules about it. So try again for a valid explanation. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 02:00, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- Restoring anything that has previously been deleted through any means other than undeletions is an instant delete. Crit 6 has no appeal if the content was deleted prior to new page creation. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 01:56, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- IT STILL HAD KEEP VOTES..."A Speedy Deletion may be circumvented by a single vote of Keep under the request." your point about crit 6 being? (Other than it was rendered INAPPLICABLE after the first keep vote?) And I ain't asking for much; is it really that much work to put the page back and let it pass through A/D? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:48, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- 6 Deletion Workaround: The page is a duplicate of a page that has been deleted from a previous deletion request (please note the relevant deletion request if this is so). A page that fits this criterion is immediately qualified for deletion without requiring it be nominated on the 'Speedy Deletions' page. Recreating a page that fits this criterion will get you a polite message to stop doing so. Any further infractions of this nature will qualify as vandalism and will be treated as such. Note that criterion 6 does not apply when the page has been restored through Undeletions. In short the page is delete on sight - Vantar 01:47, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- And you still haven't said why it's elegible DESPITE HAVING KEEP VOTES? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:45, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- It was something that had passed through speedydeletion. Is recreation was completely bad faith, especially given its nature. You are fucking lucky im not punting you for a week. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 01:42, 27 October 2007 (BST)
- But it had four keep votes under it... meaning it didn't qualify for speedydeletion. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 01:41, 27 October 2007 (BST)
I hate to dig trough this drama all over again, but here it is. User:Jedaz/Sandbox/Evil Text. This page was once created and used to put a halt in the entire wiki software. The wiki was unable to render the sheer ammount of templates called in this page, which led for the entire website to be unavailable for several minutes. After one user checking this page! Jedaz was later punished for this, losing his sysop powers and edit privileges for several weeks.
Your Spam Gun, Nalikll, serves no purpose but spam. It could break the wiki. It was up for deletion once, and when you saw it was about to be deleted you moved it's content to you user namespace. The administration should have deleted this new page once the first one were served, but we failed at it. Since spam is in any way a sign of good faith, this page wont be undeleted. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 02:44, 27 October 2007 (BST)
Wiki Dual Nature Policy
[2] for the deletion. It was a serious attempt at humor, and it was making a point. I don't know why it was speedy-deleted, but I never knew it was even up for deletion. Please restore it, or at least give me a copy of the text so I can put it on a use sub-page. I put a fair amount of work into that page. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 20:07, 7 October 2007 (BST)
- The thing wasn't fully deleted, just moved into a less misleading page name. Give me a second and I'll have the page...-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 20:10, 7 October 2007 (BST)
Sorry about that, I assumed you had seen it moved, and then put up for deletion, you were here at the time, but I guess you were busy locationblocking -- boxy • talk • 06:54 8 October 2007 (BST)
Guns 4 Hire
UDWiki:Adminstration/Speedy_Deletions/Archive/Nov-2006 is where the deletion request was, criterion 12 g-j I believe. I apologize for the awkwardness of this format. Wiki editing is not really my thing and most of the shortcuts escape me currently.
- Guns 4 Hire is where the old page was...
We take long sojourns... okay, REALLY long sojourns, but a few of us are back now and we would really like our page returned. If it's causing a problem because of low traffic I can stick it on my user page or find some other nifty corner. Just not, you know, the trash bin. Kielios 02:00, 30 September 2007 (BST)
- Undeleted most recent revision --The Grimch U! E! 02:18, 30 September 2007 (BST)
- Thanks so much! Kielios 02:24, 30 September 2007 (BST)
The Judges Nine
A bit of a complicated issue, I was the leader of the group before we disbanded on UD. However I never archived our Wiki page before it was deleted, and I would like to have it restored so I could move it into a sub-page of my userspace. I came here after suggested by the Sysop Boxy, who was very kind and courteous in our discussion:
===Restoring deleted info===
Hi, it is possible for sysops to access deleted data from months ago, however a year ago may be pushing the issue (many older revisions have been totally erased). You will need to know the name of the page you want to access, and then put a request in on the undeletions page. I suggest (if the page still exists) you ask for a sysop to restore it, and then move it to a sub-page in your userspace where you can access it. Good luck -- boxy T Nuts block it! DA 12:31, 28 July 2007 (BST)
Thank you. Riktar 06:09, 29 July 2007 (BST)
- Done, See User:Riktar/The Judges Nine and next please post undeleteion requests at the top of the Undeletion Queue section - Vantar 06:17, 29 July 2007 (BST)
The End
The End=== - This group shut down a while ago while I was the co leader. The leader of the end lleft so the group was shut down but I would like to start it up again and http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_End&action=edit-- Slug02 21:49, 21 June 2007 (BST)
- Done. --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 22:09, 21 June 2007 (BST)
The Uncanny Valley Alliance
The Uncanny Valley Alliance - I noticed that they're on the stats page... they were crit 12ed in February. Must have made a comeback, or were never off the stats -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 07:48, 20 May 2007 (BST)
Izone
I wrote this a while back. I thought I saved a backup of it somewhere on my computer, but I can't find it. Would it be possible to put a copy of it on my talk page or something? I don't really mind if the page is on the wiki, but I'd like to have it for my own use. Oh, and if it's not there the page might be at Initiating Zombies to Obtain the Naturalization of Earth.--Radoteur 19:11, 23 April 2007 (BST)
- Done see User:Radoteur/Initiating Zombies to Obtain the Naturalization of Earth Vantar 19:28, 23 April 2007 (BST)
Hambargar Halparz
This group is no longer defunct, and has been active in Crowbank since late March.--Kali Magdalene 21:24, 17 April 2007 (BST)
- I tried to restore the page, but something seems to have gone wrong (see talk page). Got the talk page back though (small consolation) -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 03:53, 18 April 2007 (BST)
User:V2Blast
It's my user page, and I have returned. I'm happy to be back. My other stuff (like my sig) wasn't deleted, so it's cool. And my talk page doesn't really matter. Deletion request here. --V2Blast T•P!•C•SR 21:04, 17 April 2007 (BST)
- Restored --
T 21:15, 17 April 2007 (BST)
M-Zap
A relatively big point in wiki history. sombody even made a joke template about it. Mattiator 02:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think you mean M-ZAP. Could you elaborate on its importance further? -- 17:06, 26 March 2007 (BST)
- m-zap is nothing but a zerger group created by mattiator... there is no need for it to be restores, since there was nothing of importance on it... --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 17:29, 26 March 2007 (BST)
- Not Restored --T 17:39, 26 March 2007 (BST)
- Not Restored --
- m-zap is nothing but a zerger group created by mattiator... there is no need for it to be restores, since there was nothing of importance on it... --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 17:29, 26 March 2007 (BST)
Dead On Arrival
Wasn't this a fairly famous zombie group? They should have their chance at historical status.--Gage 17:02, 28 March 2007 (BST)
- They did have quite a lot of edits....sure. --T 17:09, 28 March 2007 (BST)
- Restored --T 17:12, 28 March 2007 (BST)
- Restored --
Soldiers Of Perryn
I've been working hard to recruit people, but haven't had much sucess. Please put the group page back up... Mattiator 04:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- I guess you mean Soldiers of Perryn? If so, that's a 10 month recruitment period... wouldn't it be better to start something different if you havn't had much success? -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 07:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
St D's Bar & Grill
Not sure how this one got speedy'ed, but they're active in the area with one of my alts, and they're on the stats page. -- Atticus Rex mfu pif Δ 00:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- I second this. I just found out about the deletion of our redirect page and removal of our group from the listing of radio frequencies. Last we checked, we have over 35 members, although not all of them are active. Also, please restore St D's redirects as listed on the speedy deletions page A bit on the history of our problems with deletions can be found on my talk page under 'Deleted your group page'. --Cartoonlad 18:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
ICH Team
Hello, I just found our team page has disappeared. I guess it has been speedy deleted as it hasn't been updated in a while, but I can assure our team is alive and kicking. We are going to start a new campaign and would like to update the news in the page, so can you please set it back on? Many thanks, Seagull Flock 12:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Restored, sorry, but your logo has also been deleted, and is not recoverable -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 12:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, we'll upload it again. Thanks for the quick action! :) --Seagull Flock 16:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Dante's Guard
This is a page that has been recreated by a member after being speedydeleted under Crit. 12. It now has minimal content on it, I think it would be good if one of you guys could resurrect the latest version before deletion to save them having to recreate it's content from scratch. Maybe the talk page too? It's been deleted twice now. Just because a page isn't updated doesn't mean that the group isn't still active -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 02:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Done. I think. Maybe I broke it. Whatever. I need my pills. – Nubis NWO 01:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Mrh?Brnhr.Graaaagh!
The page of this historical group was deleted last year, and i request it to be undeleted for voting. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 21:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Gage did it. I wonder how he managed to restore the image too :x --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 22:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- The image was hosted offsite. I saved the image to my computer and uploaded it to the wiki.--Gage 04:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
The Hidden Tower
The Hidden Tower yeah...so it was deleted. If y'all undelete it I'll change it so that it does not link to Matthew's user page and talk page. Thank yous. --Sir Sonny Corleone RRF CRF DORIS Hunt! 21:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've recreated a copy of the page without mathew's name in it.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 21:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Sir Sonny Corleone RRF CRF DORIS Hunt! 21:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
faux-alliances
Faux-alliances, just because I'm curious as to what it entails... surely it can't be that controversial. Broken links on this page. 'Carn, it's history, long since dead as a real issue (that's if it's even recoverable, being so long ago) -- boxy T L PA DA 12:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if this should be undeleted as it seems to be quite useless page. But the content is below. Feel free to whatever you want with it.
A faux-alliance is a non-existant player group that spawns from a group of pre-organised gamers on a forum who see a game and figure they should all play it whilst working together. There are quite a few faux-alliances in game, most are known for skulduggery, misbehaviour and general abusiveness. The average age of the players is usually under 21, therefore the personality traits displayed are matching. Faux-alliances are usually a threat within the first few weeks of their conception, primarily due to their notorious use of zerging, however once a method of defeating this attack is learnt by most players, their power dwindles as does their membership.
Known defences include Distributed Defense (also known as Sutherlands Defence).
- --Brizth M T 13:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Brizth, it's an interesting read with consideration of resent faux-alliance entries to the game. I think it could do with a bit of updating, and moderation of the judgmental wording of it's conclusions, but it has more than a drop of truth to it. I may recreate the page, if it's not a problem. I'm guessing that the only editor was !1A? -- boxy T L PA DA 14:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well actually Faux-alliances is just a redirect to Faux-alliance, both created by BrianSutherland on 16 November 2005 (Yikes that's old!) !1A did just some vandalism. --Brizth M T 14:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Jeez, really dredging the past ain't we. Sooo, when was the last memory purge for the wiki? Do you still have access to deleted files and revisions from "the before time"? The main thing is, whose view is that above, or is it perhaps a conglomeration of wiki users opinion? -- boxy T L PA DA 15:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- The purges didn't affect already deleted pages. The last (and only?) purge was on 17/18 March 2006, but I can see, for example, 880 deleted edits of suggestions page (deleted 6 November 2005).
- Jeez, really dredging the past ain't we. Sooo, when was the last memory purge for the wiki? Do you still have access to deleted files and revisions from "the before time"? The main thing is, whose view is that above, or is it perhaps a conglomeration of wiki users opinion? -- boxy T L PA DA 15:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well actually Faux-alliances is just a redirect to Faux-alliance, both created by BrianSutherland on 16 November 2005 (Yikes that's old!) !1A did just some vandalism. --Brizth M T 14:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Brizth, it's an interesting read with consideration of resent faux-alliance entries to the game. I think it could do with a bit of updating, and moderation of the judgmental wording of it's conclusions, but it has more than a drop of truth to it. I may recreate the page, if it's not a problem. I'm guessing that the only editor was !1A? -- boxy T L PA DA 14:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- The text above was solely written by BrianSutherland, other editors merely fixed some links or grammar or something similar. Whether the text represents only one user's opinion or not is pretty much impossible to say for sure, but strongly believe that to be the case. --Brizth M T 16:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
The Necrophiliac Lounge OrganiZation
Or NLO for short. In a neurotic fit it seems that my dear sweet Vulnavia did NOT consult me. (Despite being away on my carnival cruise (NOT really). Oh yes, it was nice.) Since I am the SUPREME Dictator of the The Necrophiliac Lounge Organization, I formally and humbly request with all pleasantries that it become undeleted. She shouldn't have been able to delete it when it was a co-operation. So please, all powerful Wiki Gods, please gimmie my page back. (What sort of sacrifice do I have to make to get this baby started?) --Murder Legendre 11:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- A page by that name never existed.--Gage 11:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ah. It seems that the Z is capitalized. A minor error, to be sure. It gives it a certain charm, I suppose. --Murder Legendre 15:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- And it's back. --Brizth M T 16:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Break out the Sacrificial Chickens, sweetheart. O Omnipotent Wiki-Gods, do you suppose we can get The Dead Can Read undeleted as well? (It's under the control of The Necrophiliac Lounge OrganiZation Conglomerate and, therefore, is part of, and under the control of, The NLOC (Parent OrganiZation)(deleted for same reason)) Please undelete it? Pretty Please? With whipped cream and a cherry on top?? --Vulnavia 20:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- And it's back. --Brizth M T 16:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ah. It seems that the Z is capitalized. A minor error, to be sure. It gives it a certain charm, I suppose. --Murder Legendre 15:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
