Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Clarawood

Hi. I checked the page and was quite surprised to find that it had ben redirected to CDRL102's sandbox and that it had been nominated for deletion. As previously discussed on the talk page ALL of the information on the Clarawood article is factual and those portions which could be classed as discussion (a normal thing on Wikipedia) were written as described by someone qualified to do so. Simply because someone is a resident of an area would not be a reason to reject their information - in fact I was under the impression that Wikipedia was a site where factual information is put into articles by those who know something of the subject in order to disseminate that information for the benefit of those who do not know about it. In that case I would argue that as an article author with expertise on my chosen subject I would have very few, if any, rivals in terms of information on Clarawood. Just because CDRL102's personal opinion is that the article is not important or that Clarawood is unimportant does not mean that it actually is unimportant. I find it quite confusing that some editors seem to spend their time editing articles on which they have absolutely no knowledge or experience whatsoever. Edits are meant to be positive, not negative, and the charge that I have simply reverted every edit made to the Clarawood page is not true. I have taken on board several positive amendments by others. I HAVE undone edits which were absolutely unecesssary such as those by CDRL102. I would ask that the Clarawood page be removed from CDRL's sandbox and restored to the condition I left it in. I do not see any reason not to do so, if there are REAL problems with the article, as I stated on it's talk page, please discuss them there rather than making pointless edits based on personal opinions of how Wikipedia should look or how YOU would write a page. If every editor on Wikipedia randomly amended everyone else's creations - without direct knowledge of the subject - then things would go downhill quite rapidly. Thankyou Clarawood123 (talk) 08:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah we have policies and guidelines on how articles should be written .... If you don't wanna abide by them then this place isn't for you. – Davey 2010 Talk 16:18, 24 March 2016 (UTC)