User talk:Kealani11

Hello, Kealani11, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users - please check it out! If you need help, visit Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Happy editing! Mootros (talk) 20:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I apologizes I accidentally reverted you sandbox work. Sorry. Mootros (talk)

Aromachologist
With reference to your question on my talk page: the article Aromachologist remains in article space as a valid entry. For reasons not quite clear to me, you entered a page as Aromachologist. This is the page I deleted, as being unnecessary. If you would like to explain, here or on my talk page, the purpose of your entry, I would be happy to discuss it in more detail.--Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If you need any help, ask me on my talk page and I'll be happy to help out as best as I can. -- Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 12:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * As indeed will I. Do read the information contained in the blue-links in the welcome message posted above; and, as I say above, do not worry - your article remains in place. Happy wikying.--Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:40, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Aromachologist is restored
I received your email. Just to let you know, this article was deleted as a result of a proposed deletion. For 7 days the tag is left on the page, and anyone who objects to the deletion can remove it, and the tag cannot be restored. Essentially, it is for deleting articles that nobody "cares" about. As the article's creator, you should have been notified about the proposed deletion, but such notifications are a courtesy and not a requirement so sometimes that doesn't happen. Since you clearly want the article restored, I've done so; any article deleted through PROD can be restored on request.

Just a note, the reason given in the deletion wasn't mine, it was the opinion of the editor who had proposed it for deletion. I have no opinion about whether or not this subject is related to aromatherapy. I reviewed the viability of the deletion suggestion, looked to see if the deletion would be controversial (was the deletion protested at the time or in the past) and did my own search for coverage of the subject online, and determined that it would be viable to delete it.

Just to warn you, however, the article is still in danger of deletion. The article does a poor job of showing how the article is notable. On Wikipedia, notability is generally shown for a subject by finding significant coverage from multiple reliable sources. A brief mention in an article or book about another subject isn't considered significant coverage, and blogs or self-published sources are rarely considered reliable. The sources currently used in the article are lacking. If the article isn't improved, the article may be brought to an articles for deletion discussion, and if a consensus is reached among participating editors that the article should be deleted, it can only be restored if you can address the concerns mentioned in the deletion discussion (which would almost surely include the lack of notability). Just some advice. --  At am a  頭 02:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)