" 

 :Re.  and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrea Elizabeth Michaels 

 :Hi. I can see why it was closed as 'delete' - it was listed for a week of discussion, and the only two people who discussed it (other than the nominator) had said it did not pass notability requirements. I think, personally, it just-about does pass them (which is why I moved it in the first place) - and I've now commented in the AfD discussion. 
 :I suggest that you just continue to monitor the AfD, and if possible try to address concerns raised - such as, excessive information from primary sources, which one person noted. 
 :Please remember though - in the 'worst case', if it is decided that the article is not currently suitable for inclusion - it can be restored to user-space and developed further later - and there is no deadline on Wikipedia. 
 :The major difficulty you face is due to the conflict of interest, which is always very challenging. I really do strongly recommend you edit other articles - regardless of whether this is 'kept' or 'deleted' at this stage. That will give you wider experience of Wikipedia, which would help with developing this one. You should re-read WP:BFAQ and WP:BESTCOI. 
 :Even very experienced editors struggle with the difficulty of conflict-of-interest; personally, I totally avoid editing any article about anything I have a connection with. It is so hard to remain detached from the subject, and there is a danger of feeling like we own the article - which, of course, we do not. 
 :Our objective can only be to provide the best, well-referenced, neutral and Encyclopaedic information - and sometimes that means deleting as well as adding things. 
 :I'll make some suggestions on things you could look at, on your own user talk page. 
 :Best of luck,  "