Help desk
< March 3	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 5 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

March 4

STILL no Pacific drift band page..?

This page should not be speedily deleted because I was told that while there was a Wimple Winch addition there was not a Pacific Drift page despite being practically the same band AND more successful too! So 2 days ago i took it apon myself to rectify this. however I checked it today & receive this message- "This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 17:12, 24 February 2013 INeverCry (talk | contribs) deleted page Pacific Drift (A7: Article about an eligible subject, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)" despite the fact that this is a band that had a record deal & are having a series of CD reissues out in the summer. How do I reinstate my contribution or ask another to do their own? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merseymale (talk • contribs)

Hi Merseymale. The reason that your article was deleted was because, unfortunately the band did not meet our notability criteria. A7 means that, even though the subject was eligible for inclusion in Wikipedia, your article failed to indicate why they were important/significant. If you wish to rewrite the article, you can contact an administrator here to ask for a copy of the article in your userspace, so that you can continue working on it. You should also read this, as it may be the case that it is just too soon to write an article about Pacific Drift. Frigid Ninja 22:47, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally — Wikipedia does not have an article titled Wimple Winch. Maproom (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does now: Wimple Winch--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:57, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't seem to get my article back..? :-( ANYONE out there help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merseymale (talk • contribs) 21:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The lost years of Jesus

On your site The lost years of Jesus, one of your contribitors a Edwin W. Reiner is incorrect, He states that Mary the mother of Jesus was not of the tribe of Levi. This is incorrect. In the new testament it plainly says that mary's blood cousin, we are told in the new testament, was Elisabeth, and she was of the tribe of Levi, which makes Mary the mother of Jesus a Levite, and by extension, as your say's that Jesus was not a levite wrong. Jesus' flesh birth mother was part levite. Please have your staff research this and correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.76.148.197 (talk) 00:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the article Lost years of Jesus (redirects to Unknown years of Jesus, I find no reference to your claims. No editor named Edwin W. Reiner has edited the article recently. Please clarify. Wikipedia is not ran by staff, it is edited by volunteers. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 01:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is to Reiner, Edwin W. (1971). The Atonement. Nashville: Southern Pub. Association. ISBN 0812700511. OCLC 134392. — relating to Page 140 ""And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph." Luke 3:23. But Christ, of course, did not belong to the Levitical priesthood. He had descended neither from Aaron nor from the tribe of Levi."

74.60.29.141 (talk) 02:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: this is in footnote 11 of Unknown years of Jesus, which has some explanatory text as well as the reference to the Reiner book. --ColinFine (talk) 23:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

errors on this page should be fixed.

Marist College Ashgrove is a Roman Catholic dayand boarding school for girls/ladies, located in Ashgrove, a northern suburb of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. The college has a primary school for students in grades 5 to 7, and a high school for gay students in grades 8 to 12.[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.135.146.89 (talk) 03:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I undid one vandalism edit. If you spot other errors, please be bold and fix them. Also, when reporting an error, it helps if you say what the error is. RudolfRed (talk) 03:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you meant "day students" and not "gay students"? Why would you say it's a girls' school when the article and the school's website specifically state it's a boys' school? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"gay" and "girls" were part of the vandalism I reverted. I think that's what the OP was trying to point out. RudolfRed (talk) 05:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked users contribs hidden?

This user is currently blocked: Penetrationxxx. I'm wondering why Special:Contributions/Penetrationxxx doesn't show any edits. But, they've made at least one unreverted edit, a question here on the help desk. Are contributions from blocked users hidden? The talk page for the account is still visable. RudolfRed (talk) 03:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an admin I can see 7 edits. They all say "‎[username or IP address removed – edit hidden from contributions]". See [1] for the help desk edit. Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Changing visibility settings says: "Hiding a username will remove the contribution completely from the user's contributions list (except from administrators, who will see a warning indicating it is invisible to users)". PrimeHunter (talk) 03:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a questionable use of revision deletion. I've started a discussion with the admin that did it.—Kww(talk) 03:55, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanations. RudolfRed (talk) 05:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aimee Sun Picture

Hello,

My name is Claudia and I work as Aimee Sun's executive assistant. Aimee would like her wiki page photo to be changed. Could you please help us in doing that?

Aimee Sun

Thank you so much! Claudia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.36.62.21 (talk) 05:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Upload the image onto Wikipedia and simply link it into the article. Click here to upload a file. If you need help with editing, please come back here after you have uploaded the picture. Or simple replace 'AmySunPhoto.jpg' with the name of the image you uploaded. Please make sure that the image you upload is not copyrighted, or if it is, obtain and give permission for this image to be used according to the policy. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 05:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It probably will be copyrighted unless it was published before 1923 or the photographer placed it in the public domain. The easiest way would be to have the rights holder upload it themselves or put it on flickr with a Creative Commons licence CC-by-3.0 and we can upload it for you.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note, the old photo was deleted from the article as being a copyright infringment. I'd also like to thank you for asking on the help page. as Aimee Sun's executive assistant, you have a large Conflict of Interest in regards to changes on her article, so asking others to make changes is the best way to go. (please read the Wikipedia Policy on Conflict of Interest.Naraht (talk) 11:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding an existing entry

I am something of a Wikinovice, though I managed to find my way through the organisation's complex rules and post a 1000-word article without any disasters. Now I'd like to get stuck into the research for a second project. The subject I've identified is presently covered on Wikipedia by an extremely superficial entry (less thasn 150 words) and needs a lot of editing and expansion. Under Wikietiquette, am I allowed simply to add the material I have assembled to this existing entry? Or do I have to ask someone's permission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CORREZE (talk • contribs) 07:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, you don't need permission, as the usual rule here is "Be bold!". Make the changes, and see if anyone objects; if anyone does, use the talk page to discuss what should be done. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Nobody owns any of the articles on Wikipedia and everyone is welcome to contribute, so if you think you can improve an article, go ahead and edit it. Just make sure your edits conform to Wikipedia guidelines and policies including neutrality and verifiability. Of course, if somebody disagrees with your edits you will need to discuss it with them, but you don't really need to ask anybody's permission. Chamal ^T•C 07:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take it personally if some of your edits get reverted - that tends to happen, especially with inexperienced editors. You'll have better luck if you be sure to explain your edits in the Edit summary - especially if you cite your information to reliable sources. ~Good luck, and happy editing! ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 09:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

problem with my password

hi I do have a problem with my password that you send me please help kind regards petter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.226.28.245 (talk) 12:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is your username? The account User:petter appears to have been created many years ago and I guess it isn't you. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What if username is 'petter'? So what. Does Wiki just give out passwords if you ask from them? This is a ~~disgrace~~ scandal (if true). LalaLAND (talk) 13:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The password can be manually reset, or sent in an email to the address tied to the account, if I remember correctly. What is it with you and disgraces? Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, your right I used that word before so have changed it to "scandal" which is equally fitting. Secondly, it is crazy that they would just give out passwords to anyone who requests it. Please define "password can be manually reset"? LalaLAND (talk) 14:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that, as at some other sites, the website staff could change the password on an account to a random string of characters, which would then be emailed to the user. Per John's comment below, that seems to be incorrect. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted. LalaLAND (talk) 14:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Last I checked, I didn't apologize; nor did I have anything to apologize for. Go find something better to do. I won't be playing along with whatever game this is you're playing any longer. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, the password can only be sent to the email address, if any, that has been saved with the account. See Help:Logging in#What if I forget the password? for general advice. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:02, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citing straight line distances on maps

I wish to use some straight line/great circle (as the crow flies) distance figures in an article, and have obtained them using the Google Maps distance calculator tool (part of the Maps Labs suite). Unfortunately, however, it seems that distances generated through this tool cannot be directly referenced by a link to Google Maps. I'm wondering what is the best way to get around this. Could I take a screenshot of the Google map with guidance as to which points are being measured so that others can go to the source and verify for themselves? Or is there some better way to cite straight line/great circle distances as measured on a map? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 13:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obtaining a list of articles containing the Infobox company template

I'd like to know if there is a way to get a list of all articles in which a certain template is used. In particular, I'm looking for all articles with the Infobox company template. I've tried a number of different ways, but so far without result. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Things I tried, unsuccessfully:

Search the page source for "Infobox company". According to Help:Searching, "[t]he source text (as shown in the edit box) is searched for", but this did not have the expected outcome. So maybe I have been doing something wrong, or Help:searching is incorrect.
Look for a list or category with pages in which the Infobox company template is used. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any.

GuyHill (talk) 13:38, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GuyHill and welcome to Wikipedia. The easiest way to see the information you want is to go to the page of the template itself, Template:Infobox company, then on the lefthand navigation bar there is a section called "Toolbox". Within that section, click on "What links here". This will take you to a special page indicating all links to the article or template you just came from. To see the list that only includes transclusions (i.e. where the template is actually used), you should then click the buttons for "Hide links" and "Hide redirects".

The end result from following the above steps is this: [2]. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 13:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And this page will show that the infobox is used in over 47,000 articles. Bencherlite ^Talk 14:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both so much! This is exactly what I was looking for. Also, thanks for responding so quickly. GuyHill (talk) 16:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oyster cards

You say on your page that "In order to prevent "misuse" by a stated 2% of passengers, from 19 November 2006 pay as you go users who do not both 'touch in' at the start and 'touch out' at the end of their rail network journeys are charged a "maximum Oyster fare"". I regard this as an absolute disgrace; you assume that users are dishonest and penalise those that can't complete their journey for other reasons (including the train being cancelled!) and force them to ring an expensive 0845 number to get their money back. You guys are an absolute disgrace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.156.153.4 (talk) 14:10, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. Roger (talk) 14:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to contact London Transport, you can try here. Chamal ^T•C 14:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's quote is from the Wikipedia article Oyster card#Penalty fares and maximum Oyster fare. The section has very few references and could well do with a rewrite. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Request

Dear Sir or Madam,

First of all, I like to say that I enjoy this site. I've been reading the articles for years. I wanted to find an article here about the Chinese folk song "Feng Yang Hua Gu". When I couldn't find it on the website, I started trying to navigate through the pages on how I go about requesting the creation of an article. However, I haven't been able to locate exactly where and how to or even find the link so a request form or something of that nature. Could you please direct me to the right page so that I may make my article request? Thank You for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.155.165.56 (talk) 15:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it depends on whether you have information, or sources, about the folk song, or you would just like to see an article about the folk song. If you have no information make a request at Requested Articles, if, on the other hand, you have information to contribute, the history of the song, relevant sources then try Articles For Creation. Hope this helps, good luck! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 15:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

fear of flying

Regarding Fear of flying

I have long contributed to this page. Most of the text under the heading "Non-pharmacolic" (treatment) was authored by me. For example, I was involved in the original research on VRET and supplied the information on that research. Based on research by Stephen Porges and Allan Schore (whose research I wrote about on this page) I developed a non-pharmacologic method for treating fear of flying which is far more effective than CBT or VRET. (Wolpe's systematic desensitization cannot be applied to flight phobia as exposure cannot be adequately adjusted.)

Yesterday, I checked the page and found the troll I have been plagued by (whose name I can supply privately) had removed the information about the method I developed based on research by Porges and Schore, When I reinstated the text, I received the following message:

I see you are using Wikipedia to promote yourself. If you persist, your account will be indefinitely blocked from editing. Rklawton (talk) 16:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

A book I have written to train therapists in this method will be published this fall by Globe Pequot Press. As the most effective method for treating flight phobia, its inclusion in wikipedia is fully justified. Apparently, however, Rklawton removed the text and sent the warning.

Since its inclusion in wikipedia on this subject is fully justified, how can I reinstate it without running into this problem?

Capttombunn (talk) 17:10, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look. But in the meantime, you need to be mindful of Conflict of interest. It is inappropriate to cite material that you yourself wrote, however reliable, as that can have the appearance of self-promotion. The best you could do would be to note the sources on the article's talk page (and note your COI), and let other editors judge whether to include the sources or not. If the method you developed is indeed notable, other editors will see this and include it on their own. Your involvement (as the author) taints what might otherwise be worthwhile and usable sources. Please take a step back and review our policy on Conflict of interest before proceeding further. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that all your many contributions to Wikipedia have been to the fear of flying article. This suggests that they are motivated by self-promotion, rather than by a wish to improve Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personality rights

Hi. The first image caption in this article has reference to "Fiqh", which looks to me like some kind of test edit or vandalism (since it appears completely unrelated to personality rights or the table it is in). I attempted to find the edit which added it and clear it up - but was unsuccesful. Can someone either remove it or correct me? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 17:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it's vandalism because "Fiqh" seems to be a type of law jurisdiction, which is what the map is about. So in a way, it is related to personality rights because law jurisdictions are related. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:23, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is correct. Roger (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see...Thank you very much for looking into it Anonymouse and have a nice day/evening ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 17:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adding information

Good evening,

I am writing in regards about supporting Wikipedia by adding information.

I recently bought some old magazines called Film Review And I found some film reviews. I just wondering if I help some info to your website.

John www.john-ninnis.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninfilms (talk • contribs) 19:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John

Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for your interest

With regard to the film reviews, the first thing I should say is that the material in the magazines is almsot certainly copyrighted (unless it was written a very long time ago). Therefore it would not be permitted to copy any text directly from the magazines on to Wikipedia. See WP:Copyrights for more detail on that.

It would, however, be permitted to use the magazines as a source reference (assuming they are reputable), in which case you would cite facts that you wrote in your own articles against text written in the magazine. See WP:CITE for information. The important thing when doing that is to reformulate any concepts you use in your own words, making sure you do not follow the source too closely. The work you produce has to be substantially different from the original source to avoid copyright issues. Thanks, and happy editing! — Amakuru (talk) 20:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note that it is okay to use direct quotes (one or two sentences) if properly cited to a notable source; e.g.:

Joe Flick wrote in Uberfilm that Twinkies at Twilight is "an abomination to every known form of human."^[1]

74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guadalcanal veterans

Trying to find out names of surving men still alive that landed on guadalancal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.213.114.55 (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And, you might try contacting somebody here: Guadalcanal Campaign Veterans Association. ~:74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC):~[reply]

LUNSERS

Hi

I developed LUNSERS and the entry is not accurate. Red herrings were not included to trap people who over-rate symptoms, they were included to test the hypothesis that people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia can rate their own side effects. They can (which wasn't a great surprise to me even back then) so now we don't need to use them any more.

Best wishes

Jennie Day — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.97.78.117 (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The best way to do this is to post an explanation of the problem at Talk:Lunsers and provide a previously published reliable source for your assertions, so that readers can verify the claim. Roger (talk) 07:14, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Juno Roxas

Just thought you may want to know Juno was born on the 4th May 1967.

He is quite proud of that fact 4,5,6,7.

Which will make him 46 this year.

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.15.238.114 (talk) 21:20, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The birthdate has no source now so normal procedure is to remove it altogether. Is there a source for the 1967 year anywhere?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:53, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lingering vandalism

Resolved

I just noticed some vandalism (concerning "pakistan") at West Virginia. Because I want to revert to a version that isn't itself some vandalism, I usually look at the page history before reverting. There I saw that the last version was from a couple of hours earlier, a bot reverting vandalism. My first thought that the "pakistan" part was just uncaught vandalism. But that was actually what the bot had reverted! Why does it still show up hours later? I hadn't viewed the page in the vandalized version, so it can't just be a caching problem. (Just to be sure, I also did hard reload, but of course to no avail.) — Sebastian 21:34, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see any residual vandalism. Did you try a WP:PURGE as well as a WP:BYPASS?--ukexpat (talk) 21:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) It looks like it was a caching issue. When I went to the article I saw the same thing you did, but after i made a null edit, it was gone. Is it gone now for you too? --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks! — Sebastian 22:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How to get rid of the annoying box with bold red text

Resolved

Each time I enter a question here, I have to scroll down to the bottom of the page over a number of texts with questionable use ({{Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Help_desk}}), including a loud big box on top. How can I get rid of that? — Sebastian 21:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copy the first line from User:John of Reading/common.css into User:SebastianHelm/common.css, save, and then bypass your browser cache, and it should be gone for ever. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:41, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, that works - thanks a lot! — Sebastian 17:26, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Autobiography on a user subpage - violation or not?

Today, I created a subpage on my userpage so I could start making a userfied article about myself. I was thinking that I could make an autobiography in my userspace because it's my userspace, I'm not famous or notable for anything so I'm not allowed to put it in the mainspace, and I thought the information would go along with the parent userpage, which has my userboxes and some of my Wikipedia ideas. I don't know if it would be considered a WP:FAKEARTICLE, since it's in my userspace and not the mainspace, but I think I might have violated the guideline about writing an article about yourself. All I've written is an introductory paragraph, but I think it has a little too much personal information. I also made an infobox using the musical artist template instead of the "ordinary person" one, because I wanted the infobox to look like the ones I've seen on articles of famous musicians. I also mentioned all of the websites I am a member of, instead of just talking about my Wikipedia user account. I know autobiographies are never allowed in Wikipedia mainspace, and as I said before, my autobiography is just on a subpage of my userpage. So did I violate WP:NOT and/or WP:USER by making a userfied autobiography? epzik8 22:04, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Err hello, please read Wikipedia:NOTMYSPACE, specifically about personal web pages, the aim of WP is to edit the encyclopaedia, not to have the bestest user page with the most infoboxes. For other editors who have more knowledge on this sort of question (delete or what?), the page in question is User:Epzik8/Peter_Steinberg. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 22:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My personal opinion, is that the page is currently in a grey area. If it was overly detailed, or was trying to promote you or something your involved in, it would probably end up being deleted. In its current form I think its probably ok, as you have been making article contributions, and editors are given a fair bit of latitude to list information about themselves on their user page. If anything, I would try to make it look less like an article, maybe ditch the info box. Ultimately, the only way to be sure is to wait for someone to nominate it for deletion and see what the consensus is. (Raising it here is likely to attract attention to it, so if it doesn't get nominated in the next few days, its less likely anyone will later) As an aside, you may want to consider just how much personal information you want to reveal, while some editors choose to provide details about their off wiki life, many prefer to either maintain pseudo-anonymity, or at least not to advertise their personal information. Monty ₈₄₅ 22:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the absence of a {{userpage}} template on your userpage (which would help avoid confusion). ~:74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC):~[reply]

Thanks for your answers. I should have paid closer attention to all the guidelines before I created the subpage. I really created it just to see what an article about me would look like without breaking any of the rules. I think I'll just propose it for deletion. epzik8 15:44, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question re Hank Risan article

Hello,

I wrote an article about Hank Risan (Hank Risan) that was initially denied, and then posted one week later, by the same reviewer, who has since been banned from reviewing Wikipedia articles. This weekend, a "Notice to Delete" my Hank Risan article was posted. I spend time last week and today in the Chat room with experienced reviewers discussing problems with the article as no notes were provided by the banned reviewer. I made substantial edits to the article based on their comments and removed the deletion notice. Within the deletion notice, I was advised to present my reasons for the changes on the reviewer's "Talk" page, if I am not mistaken. That is not an option in this instance. Could you please advise me as to where I should post my rationale for revisions made to the article?

Many thanks,

bbmusicmanBbmusicman (talk) 22:28, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You were being directed to discuss the issue on the article talk page. You are allowed to remove a "proposed deletion" tag. If the person who tagged it still wishes to proceed, they should nominate it for the "Article for Deletion" process. If they do, that tag should not be removed before the discussion is concluded. Rmhermen (talk) 22:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]