User talk:Nihiltres/Archive-30

This is an archive of past discussions on Nihiltres' user talk page, as archived on September 27, 2009. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Nulledit

I tried what you told me to do here, but it didn't work. At least, I didn't fix anything with it (which is not necessarily the same). Debresser (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I was online at the time. I have to be online for the script to work. Try again; you should get a reply when the null edit is complete. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 20:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll try, and I'll keep you posted. Debresser (talk) 18:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

How can I know whether you're online? Debresser (talk) 18:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I saw your name on the right side, but still didn't work. Debresser (talk) 18:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I see you in my chat log, having joined the channel and left it:

[2:28pm] Debresser joined the chat room.
[2:45pm] Debresser left the chat room. (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))

You never appeared to say anything, from my point of view. Perhaps the messages got stuck; I just refreshed its cookie and it might have earlier just given up on the messages while attempting to process them. I'll add a subroutine for a 3-minute timeout on password input, and get around to generally overhauling error handling in the underlying code. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 22:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

To clarify: it should work, but I'm improving it to eliminate potential problems. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 00:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll try it again. If you could also check Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates to see if there were any pages I couldn't fix. Debresser (talk) 11:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Today at 15:32 (that was the time indicated, although at GMT+2 it was 14:32), I logged on, saw you, and typed "!nulledit Template:Loop15". And nothing happened. Debresser (talk) 11:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Bio

Nihiltres, I posted a bio on Martha Rogers, Ph.D. and Don Peppers and was wondering why they were considered "unambiguous advertising"? They are just biographies like any other article written about a person, therefore, I am ultimately asking why they were deleted? Sprinterjenn (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)JennSprinterjenn (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The general speedy deletion criterion number 11, or "G11" in shorthand, covers not only advertising but any sort of obviously promotional article. When an article starts with phrases like "[…] recognized for the past decade as one of the world's leading experts on customer-based business strategies […]" and continues in the same effusive vein, the criterion's validity is straightforward to confirm. Wikipedia is supposed to follow a neutral point of view, and that article did not follow it. In any event, the deletions of those articles was also justified by an earlier deletion discussion, meaning that general speedy deletion criterion number 4, applies, as the article is one previously deleted by consensus. I should also point out that other articles on Wikipedia shouldn't be used as justification for the inclusion of another: articles should, for the most part, stand on their own merits. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 20:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Lee_Zehrer

Hello Nihiltres. I just noticed that you deleted an article I was looking for on Lee Zehrer. I was wondering if you could restore the article, or send me the contents of the article, because I am looking for more information on him.

Thank you,

Sasha Bjorkmann (sashab2367yahoo.com)

I've replied by email, sending the contents of the article. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 17:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

hi

hi i want to add a new article in wikipedia. i have completed it on sandbox but i dont know how to move it to create a new article. i m newly added user. plz guide me. thanks.

Lee_Zehrer 2

Collapsed confusing conversation

Why was this page deleted by you? It clearly stated the notability and was well referenced. Please review again and re-submit.

Lee_Zehrer

Answered. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Please review the article for Lee_Zehrer. It is unclear why this is deleted.. It is relevant to business and web culture and as (if not more) significant than all of the following articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Barton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Kawasaki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Kremen Lee Zehrer was a pioneer in the development of Web 1.0 and social media. He built the first online dating business with many more members than Match.com when he sold to them. If Gary Kremen has a wiki page, Lee Zehrer certainly should. If it is a issue of inclusion or significance, please re-instate and I will personally make sure that this article meets those specifications. Here is the article noted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Zehrer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.110.226 (talk) 16:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted under criteria A7: An article about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. The other articles that you mention do assert the notability of their subjects. I would suggest that you recreate the article in your user space, make sure it asserts the notability of the subject, reference those assertions and then contact the admin who deleted the page to give it a lookover before moving it into the mainspace. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.60.11.16221:46, August 31, 2009 (UTC) (talk)

I'm afraid I don't know what isn't addressed here. What would you like? {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 00:07, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks like they cut and pasted this WP:EAR#Lee_Zehrer. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Why is this article missing?

Page errors

How can I find an administrator who specializes in biographies?

I want to notify suspected errors in people's biographies?

Also, is there a way to search on a word such as "Austin" and have the search results limited only to people whos name is Austin?

Please reply to: JerryDixonEnt.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerryldixon (talk • contribs) 17:32, 1 September, 2009 (UTC)

First, there is a noticeboard, specifically dealing with biographies and errors thereof, at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard that sounds like what you're looking for. It doesn't necessarily mean that an administrator will be the one to deal with your notice, but administrators don't have special privileges in content matters, in any event.

Your second question is a little more complex. The answer is, as far as I know, no, but there are probably ways that will let you manually search in such a way that you're more likely to find who you're looking for:

• If you know that the person is alive, and are searching for "Austin" in the last name, try the "Living people" category, starting from "Austin". This is sure to find only people, but it's limited to the living—the "Dead people" category is exclusively subcategorized by date, so you can't try the same trick on it.
• If you're searching for "Austin" in the first name, try the index of all pages, starting with pages prefixed with "Austin". This will find all pages prefixed with "Austin", but will give you plenty of false positives like Austin, Texas.
• Try asking around about how to search this: someone else might know a better way to search that I don't.

I'll email a notice of this reply to the email you mentioned. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 00:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

why did u delete the page on krishna kumar

u deleted the page on krishna kumar. why - the page did say he is an indian academician - the category was mentioned. it gave his bio. gave links to his writings, with isbn numbers. external links as well as links to pages within wiki. in spit of so much information you deleted it. i feel bad about this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.40.161 (talk) 03:52, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Indicating that he's an academic doesn't itself imply his notability. The article did not otherwise indicate that he was notable, which qualified it for speedy deletion under article speedy deletion criterion 7. JL 09 tagged the article as such and, having checked that the criterion invoked was valid, I deleted it. I'm sorry if you're upset. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 04:55, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Page deleted?

Wondering why exactly the the page for "Jamie Macleod" was deleted. The article is relevent to UK unsigned music and is related to the name being mentioned on another page?

Theindeliblebairn (talk) 15:38, 4 September 2009 (UTC)theindeliblebairn

I deleted that page under article speedy deletion criterion 7, as mentioned in my deletion summary. No indication was made that the singer was "notable" at all, let alone that he met either the notability criteria for music-related articles or the general notability guideline. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 23:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, it is noted that you are willing to grant Rollback rights to users, and I was wondering what the criteria you use. If I meet these criteria, I would appreciate having rollback, as I am tired of dealing with the people who delete entire articles and replace them with "'name' was here." Doing it the normal way often results in me getting there at the same time as the bot, which causes my internet to slow down as it tries to undo something that has already been undone.

Thanks, Nezzadar (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't have enough to go on at the current time; many of your edits are from 2006. Would you please ask me again after some more edits? A focus on anti-vandalism work, in particular, would be helpful. Try patrolling edits through Special:RecentChanges for a while. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 23:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

pinging for Peng

I've just encountered Qi peng:

peng blurs the lines between fiction and reality within his personal and professional life as well as the deconstruction of traditional relationships among people within a subculture

Mmm-hmm, finger-licking good. Though I'm not sure what he's doing with the deconstruction; is he blurring it too?

Actually I don't suppose readers are supposed to think about this; they're instead supposed to be numbed into a sort of daze, in which they'll reach for their credit cards.

Anyway, I note that you deleted the article earlier; you may wish to give this a second look.

"the ART ASSASSIN volume 1" 2009 by peng is a 713 pgs. artist's book measuring 6" x 9".

And amazon.com links to a dealer who'll do you a new copy for the arty-farty price of, uh, $20. Oh, the humanity! -- Hoary (talk) 02:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

While that article is filled with fluff, I'm not sure if A7 applies to the current version. I'm not sure whether the assertion of having one's works exhibited in certain places constitutes an assertion of notability, for example. I recommend that you start an AfD discussion. On a side note, watch out for artists trying to troll any such discussion: this particular artist's article mentions that he did one of the remixes on Wikipedia Art, which was a whole load of fun and drama. Art should be covered in Wikipedia, but it needs the same sourcing that the rest of the encyclopedia requires, so this article needs something done better to it. I also ought to read more closely to check for conflicts of interests but … the offline world is catching up with me. Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 04:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Garth Fisher

Hi, I started a page and you deleted it. I realize that it needed to be reworded so I put {{hangon}} and it was still deleted. What can I do? Thanks, jennifer

So why didn't I get time to rewrite it with the hang on???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcole73 (talk • contribs)

The {{hangon}} template is used to protest deletion, while a template like {{underconstruction}} or some such is used to indicate that you're still working on the page. Since you didn't say anything on the talk page, I ignored the hangon template as the page clearly met the criteria: it seems like every phrase was embellished with unsubstantiated promotional wording like "leading" or "award-winning" or "most prominent". It looks like Dr. Fisher likely meets the notability criteria, but your article wasn't written from a neutral point of view. Try writing it again—there's no prejudice against starting over. If you like, I can give you the text of the deleted article. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 00:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you email me the deleted version and I will cut it down. Is there any way you can proofread it after I am done so that it will not get deleted again? Thank you!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcole73 (talk • contribs)

Garth...again:)

How do I find the previously errased document. Sorry I am a moron:) Thanks!

67.115.241.97 (talk) 19:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)Jennifer

I've emailed you (using the "E-mail this user" feature) the text of the article that was deleted. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 19:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I recreated the entry on AMAC that you just deleted, and I will do it again if I need to

I am not affiliated with this organization. If you had read what I wrote, you could tell that I am not promoting it, I am not saying anything positive about it. I do not support nor condone it. I suspect it is a front for the insurance industry and I would have said so, but I was trying to be neutral and unbiased.

I am documenting the existence of AMAC and its very basic details. What is Wiki for if not that?

Did you read it, or just delete it? Who are you?

On examining that case, it looks like I may have been in error. The article probably doesn't meet the general speedy deletion criterion 11 (G11) that I noted when deleting the article, but it certainly meets a different criterion, the article speedy deletion criterion 7 (A7). Be assured that I read every page that I delete. I suppose I must have gotten thrown off here by the phrase "The annual membership fee is $12.95", as I handled a number of similar articles categorized as spam at the same time. Read my user page for all the information about myself I make public. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 00:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I am getting very frustrated

You hit delete before I had a chance to even read and understand why my article was being flagged, let alone rewrite it. You should have a way to moderate without deleting someone's work immediately after they hit save. That is just obnoxious.

Since you agree that my article didn't meet the criteria it was flagged for, you apparently went in search of another reason.

Let me explain to you what I am trying to do.

I am trying to document that there is a group trying to compete with AARP calling itself more "conservative", because oh yeah, everyone knows AARP is a bunch of liberal commies. I want to show that it is being funded by the insurance industry. My article achieved this, which is signifiant, but I had to do it in a way that relied on facts and did not show my opinion, so it is subtle. Because it is subtle, if you quickly scan it and hit delete, you will miss ALL of that. You will completely miss the point. Which is what you did.

If I take out the membership fee, which is not important to the entry, will that satisfy you? There are a lot of organizations that are just fronts for the insurance industry masquerading as something else. Usually something that they really are not. I think that should be documented. That is the point. Do I have to do a full on investigation and write a news story? Who says you are the best judge of content? I completely disagree with you, but you have the authority to censor. I never really thought much about how wiki works before. This really sucks.

copy: to the other delete happy admins

Now you know what I'm trying to do

What do I need to add or remove to comply. I really think you got delete happy just because you completely misunderstood the reason for the entry, and they you tried to justify your decision after the fact.

Please tell NawlinWiki to knock it off and be HELPFUL for a change

I can't find the link to post on his talk/discussion page, so I think he blocked me or something.

I checked him out. I think we have a lot in common actually and suspect he would approve of the intention of my entry if not the format if he too 30 seconds to read and think about it.

I just got an email from this thing called AMAT today and checked it out. I think it's worthy of documenting and NOT because I want to advertise for them. I think it's interesting that they exist, like the teabag people and the birthers and deathers. A curiosity. An oddity. A freak of nature.

Yikes

Nevermind, I figured out the new section tab. Sorry I'm new at this. But I did figure out the nerdy signature thing. Allisoj1 (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I go through the following rough process whenever someone objects to a deletion I have made:

1. I read the article again.
2. I evaluate whether the deletion criterion used was valid
3. I evaluate whether other deletion criteria might apply. Often pages fall under multiple criteria, so I pick one main criterion when deleting. If that criterion was invalid, other "silent" ones might still be valid.
4. I reply to the objection explaining the deletion criterion used and whether or not I am willing to do any of the following:
   • Undelete the article
   • Userfy (undelete and move to a userpage for improvement) the article
   • Make the text of the article available to the user

I here found that the deletion criterion I used was invalid, but that a deletion criterion that I did not use was, so I left it deleted and noted that other. I can userfy the article for you, probably, and I'm certainly willing to give you the text of the article. I'm really not out to get you, or "deletion-happy", or whatnot. My interest is in applying essentially reasonable rules to keep junk articles out of Wikipedia. It can be a bit harsh, but it keeps Wikipedia to at least a reasonable minimum of quality.

I think your subject might have promise if you can find documentation. To satisfy the notability guideline, you should try to find multiple independent non-trivial reliable sources describing the subject. Wikipedia also has rules of no original research and neutral point of view, so be careful how you get your information and how you word things.

I'd suggest that you read the "your first article" guide as well. It seems to cover most of the bases for making a decent first article that won't be immediately deleted.

As an aside, you don't need to add a new section each time you add a comment. Individual posts can be made to the same section. I've merged the sections you added, somewhat. Also, remember to sign your posts by ending them with four tildes: ~~~~. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 01:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

proper page additions?

hi, my early adopted page was just deleted..is there a proper format to make sure this doesn't happen again?

Make sure that any new version does not qualify for speedy deletion under the criteria for speedy deletion, and be sure to add footnoted references to establish the notability of the subject. In this case, the notability guideline for music-related articles is relevant. You might also want to read the "your first article" guide. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 19:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Artists' Repertoire Theatre

Hello,

Artists' Repertoire Theatre is a highly acclaimed Fresno theatre company, and one of VERY few theatre groups in the entire county. In the article, there were at least 10 links to Fresno Bee stories about the group, and praises of its performances. Yes, as mentioned, the group is currently less than five years old, but that changes very soon.

Fresno County is home to about 1,000,000 people and Artists' Repertoire Theatre is one of the only notable theatre companies there, frequently selling out shows and premiering new works never before seen in Fresno, plays like Rabbit Hole and Rocky Horror Show. I believe all the references in the newspaper prove A.R.T. is quite notable. A.R.T. is one of only three theatre companies in California's 5th largest city and the 36th largest city in the nation with a consistent performance season. I believe all these things put it in the class of notable.

I would appreciate a reversal of this page deletion, and I hope I am going about it the right way.

Thank you.

I posted previously without logging in. I'm not sure I need to log in to hear back from you, so I logged in an am posting again. Sorry for the confusion.

Mjustinred (talk) 23:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

64.173.174.230 (talk) 23:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Mjustinred (talk) 23:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem about the not-logging-in; it doesn't reduce the validity of your comment (though it is nice to keep all your edits in a registered account). I'll userfy the article (from "Artists' Repertory Theatre") for you to User:Mjustinred/Artists' Repertoire Theatre. You can work on it there and establish its notability (based on the general notability guideline) and add references (which will help it greatly if it becomes the subject of an Articles for deletion discussion). Once you're satisfied that it doesn't meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion (especially article criterion #7 and general criterion #11), you can use the "move" option (at the top of the page) to move it back to its proper, article-namespace title. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 19:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Almost done. Most references are from the Fresno Bee, the paper of record for the city, but they are linked to the Fresno Bee's blogging website, which is becoming a standard thing for news papers to have now. The newspaper archives are not themselves available online without paying a fee, so I hope these are acceptable references.

Mjustinred (talk) 19:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Armigerous Families of Great Britain

I would like to know why you have deleted the page "armigerous families of great britain", which I had posted, for this is an official body of the British Monarchy set up by the Earl Marsall on behalf of the Sovereign.

If you need more sources you need to look at the CILANE website or article, or to contact the college of arms. I thought the links I had put were enough.

Please note that most European similar associations and commissions have wikipedia articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.148.241.202 (talk)

I deleted the page because it had been proposed to be deleted for at least seven days (168 hours) without any visible objection. I only carried out the deletion: I did not nominate it, and I don't mind either way. Would you like me to undelete the page? Articles deleted via proposed deletion are eligible for undeletion upon request. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 20:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Berryism

Hello, Why did you delete the page for Berryism? It is a wonderful yogurt place in Tampa, Florida. The page was informative and well writen. There was no reason for its deletion. It was a wonderful asset to Wikipedia that you deleted.198.31.196.189 (talk) 13:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I deleted that page as promotional. Regardless of how good their yoghurt may be, the article as written blatantly promoted the place, which both qualifies it for speedy deletion (criterion G11) and means that it violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. The page also didn't imply the notability of the place in any way, which also qualifies it for deletion (criterion A7). I was certainly justified in the deletion. If you'd like to contest it further, try deletion review. I'd also suggest reading the "your first article" guide if you'd like to recreate it. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 16:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

late de-prod

Hey, any chance of an after the fact de-prodding of the 1945 Calgary Stampeders season through 1950 Calgary Stampeders season articles. The rationale of "no assertion of the notability of the single season, any reason why minimal content may not be covered in a history article; unwatched." I disagree with. The season of a professional football teams are notable, claim about minimal content is an acceptable stub in my opinion but a reason for merging not deletion, unwatched is not a deletion reason and it is watched by the WP:WikiProject Canadian football via Canadian football articles Watchlist; though I, myself, have been busy lately. DoubleBlue (talk) 04:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Done—that's quite reasonable. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 20:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers! DoubleBlue (talk) 20:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Would you like the rollbacker permission?

The short answer is yes. I revert all vandalism using undo (roughly a dozen per day), which is slow, especially for multiple reverts. I tried some extra edit features built-in the "user options", but was not satisfied as some slowed down my PC or garbled the screen. I've heard rollbacking is more efficient, if so, it would be of much help. Materialscientist (talk) 23:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Done—enjoy the one-click reverts. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 23:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I really do :-) Thanks a lot! Materialscientist (talk) 00:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

News Central 34

Why did you delete your News Central 34 page?

The deletion summary indicates that I deleted the article due to article speedy deletion criterion 7 (A7). There's no prejudice against the article being recreated, and I can make the content available to you in any of a number of different ways on request. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 14:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Prod's

Just deleted several dead redirects to pages you deleted by prod, don't forget to check the what links here please. thanks--Jac16888^Talk 23:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I'll try to remember that in future. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 23:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers--Jac16888^Talk 23:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Contesting Prod already deleted

Please restore the article "Sergei S. Scurfield" (a notable politician and businessman) which was deleted due to an expired prod. I wish to contest the deletion. Appealcourt (talk) 21:24, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I've done so. Enjoy… {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 14:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Po'Ki

Po'Ki .........is a Newly invented dice and card game that is Trademarked, in the patent process, and is in being copyrighted right now..as well as being in for research and development for distribution...

In the future.....When Po'ki is released and well known.....do not mention my game in your encyclopedia....

There's no good answer to your statement, so I'll just give you a quick list of the points that are obvious to me:

1. The article was deleted by proposed deletion (PROD), so I didn't actually care either way about the deletion; it's just a matter of deleting the page after seven days if there's no visible objections. It was mechanical.
2. The deletion reason given by me ("Expired PROD, concern was: Not sure if this is about a gaming term or a product, but either way a google search and google news search aren't turning up notability.") ends after "concern was:". The rest is the quoted concern of the person who nominated the page for deletion (Fabrictramp).
3. Since the article was deleted by proposed deletion, it can be undeleted on request. Do you want it undeleted?
4. Being provocative to me with "do not mention my game in your encyclopedia" doesn't get you anything. All it does is annoy me slightly, and that's not useful if you want me to be helpful to you, which I'm doing regardless.

Now, I doubt you'll be back to check on this, given your tone, but if you do, hopefully I will have been informative. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 14:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Po'Ki

Nihiltres.........It was not my intent to annoy you or sound threatening. I have a patent pending product that is new and has not been released to the general public yet (so information about it is not available to the public yet, I was going to release it through Wikipedia). I now see that before an article can make it into your encyclopedia, it must be disclosed and verifiable to the public first in several other sources, IE: Google Search....My dice are the only Set of (5) dice that can roll all Poker Hands including all 5,148 flush hands from (2's) through (Aces) as found in Poker, no other dice since Poker was invented in 1850 has that been possible. Look up "Poker Dice" in your own encyclopedia,[Todays poker dice cannot roll flush hands]..Po'Ki, the word and definition are something I made up as a hybrid word, by crossing Poker and Yahtzee, due to the fact that they can roll all Poker hands and you can even roll 5 of a kind as in Yahtzee....Hence - Po'Ki.... I was going to use your encyclopedia to open the worlds eyes to a new product and the meaning behind the title of the product.......yes, if possible I would like it to be undeleted....and sorry for annoying you, again.......

Thank You..for restoring the article....