About a year ago, an article in the wiki about "Made us" has already appeared, but was removed. I believe that it was removed due to objective reasons, and rightly so — in the article did not specify Authoritative Sources (AI), and the significance was not shown properly. But the article was recently restored, in no small part thanks to the efforts of top-blogger LiveJournal Fritz Morgen. Jerry raised the question the injustice of removing articles on his blog, troubled by the fact that we have done was removed and, for example, sites Navalny, where as having a smaller attendance and the importance of calm present in the wiki. Since filing Fritz Morgen, users and Ivafanas Slb_nsk undertook the restoration of Articles about the project. In his own blog Ivafanas described in detail progress on a new article. When a draft of the article was ready, Slb_nsk asked the Administration to restore the article.
Good time! October 8, 2012, a summary of your discussion and deleted article sdelanounas.ru (submitted for removal of September 30, 2012). I learned about the fact of the existence of the article and its removal by accident — in recent days on this topic brought up some buzz in the blogosphere. Since due to the hype poured some dirt on wikipedia, I decided to prove that the presence or absence of a Wikipedia article on the quality of its writing, not the world behind the scenes. At the moment, blank Article is in my personal space. Questions for you: (1) there is enough at the moment the significance of an object to an article could be placed in the main space? (2) if so — how better to call the article («sdelanounas.ru» or "Made us")? (3) If the item is placed in the main space — what steps to take to bring the domain of spam sheet wikipedia (though references to the Ukrainian analogue of this website live peacefully)? Yours —Slb_nsk 16:56, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think that at this point the importance of shows. I think that can be restored in the main space. If you do not mind, I make a. —V.Petrov(Obs) 12:23, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Article was restored, but then again put up for deletion. Long discussion Wikipedia page on "I remove" Today's verdict is finally over, "the article leave!" I must say that this is not a victory. Article immediately began actively to rule, and not always with a view to improve it. At each statement require AI, find fault with the wording, calling into question the significance of certain facts. However, perhaps such close attention to the article will make it only better, we'll see.
I ask all who want to add or correct something in the article, a hundred times before that think the rules are very strict VP and great attention to the article, any changes in the truth and relevance of which there is the slightest doubt, will be deleted. Already he has had time to see this.