| Revision as of 10:46, 9 December 2024 editCryptic (talk | contribs)Administrators41,603 edits →Draft:Shay Albert Vidas: egregious← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:54, 9 December 2024 edit undoBlack Kite (talk | contribs)Administrators85,148 edits →Draft:Shay Albert Vidas: nopeNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| *'''Endorse''' but it doesn't hurt for someone to email him the deleted content. ] (]) 07:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | *'''Endorse''' but it doesn't hurt for someone to email him the deleted content. ] (]) 07:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *''Egregious'' spam. Endorse and do not provide the deleted content, on the slim hope he'll have to pay someone to write it again if he wants to use it elsewhere. —] 10:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | *''Egregious'' spam. Endorse and do not provide the deleted content, on the slim hope he'll have to pay someone to write it again if he wants to use it elsewhere. —] 10:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Endorse''' and do not undelete. Vidas or his company may well be notable but nearly every single sentence of that article is unusable because it's 100% promotional (about the only one that would survive is the one about where and when he was born; even the sentence about his wife feels the need to eulogise ''her''.) ] 10:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:54, 9 December 2024
< 2024 December 8 Deletion review archives: 2024 December 2024 December 10 >9 December 2024
Draft:Shay Albert Vidas
I recently created a draft titled "Draft:Shay Albert Vidas," but it was deleted under G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion). I understand Misplaced Pages’s concerns about promotional content and would like to request that the draft be restored to my user page so I can revise it.
The draft was still in the draft stage and not yet published. I was working to present factual information about Shay Albert Vidas and his work in a neutral and encyclopedic manner. Unfortunately, the deleting administrator, Bbb23, did not provide feedback on what was considered promotional, and I was not given the opportunity to revise the content.
Additionally, I cannot contact Bbb23 directly because their talk page is restricted. I am also unable to post on the Administrators’ Noticeboard due to semi-protection and my account status. I have no way to resolve this issue without assistance.
I am committed to addressing any issues raised and rewriting the draft to ensure it meets Misplaced Pages’s neutrality and notability standards. I kindly request that the draft be restored to my user page for improvement. Thank you for your time and understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shayvidas (talk • contribs) 00:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse, having not seen the deleted draft, but trusting the judgment of Bbb23, and being familiar with autobiographies. The originator should be able to reconstruct what he wrote about his own career if he didn't keep a copy on his computer. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse but it doesn't hurt for someone to email him the deleted content. Jclemens (talk) 07:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Egregious spam. Endorse and do not provide the deleted content, on the slim hope he'll have to pay someone to write it again if he wants to use it elsewhere. —Cryptic 10:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse and do not undelete. Vidas or his company may well be notable but nearly every single sentence of that article is unusable because it's 100% promotional (about the only one that would survive is the one about where and when he was born; even the sentence about his wife feels the need to eulogise her.) Black Kite (talk) 10:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)