Dear David Eppstein, 

 I have inquired a couple of people on this matter and they seem to agree with you. They say that there is too much emphasis on the fundamental group in the article. Is this what you mean? In my opinion, one cannot study the fundamental group without studying the induced homomorphism. They are connected topics. Also, maybe I was thinking that Wikipedia is a place to learn and as much information as possible should be included. For example, someone may want to know about the applications of the induced homomorphism which is what I wrote about. As far as I can see, you have merely given a definition in your article with the connection to algebraic topology. Sure, their textbook would probably write about that but sometimes it is good to read two different perspectives. I included examples so that people can understand the applications of the induced homomorphism. And truthfully, shouldn't people know that if two spaces are homeomorphic, their fundamental groups are isomorphic. That is probably the first theorem you read after learning the concept. Also, I have not seen a single page stating that if two spaces are homeomorpic, their fundamental groups are isomorphic. This may be obvious to someone who knows algebraic topology well, but it isn't obvious to the general population and it would be good for people to see the applications of this theorem. In fact, one purpose of algebraic topology is to determine whether two spaces are homeomorphic or not.  

 Wikipedia is about including maximum detail as a few other people wrote to me when I nominated the article on 'Supercompactness' for deletion. I initially thought that Wikipedia should only have information on major topics. Not small topics like what a limit point is (I thought these types of topics should be included in other pages). I admit that I was wrong. But by adding what I wrote, we are giving maximum detail about the subject. My intention is to improve Wikipedia. I understand that you are an administrator, but I feel that whatever I write is challenged. Also, I can't see what is wrong with my writing style. If there are only minor points, then in my opinion, what I wrote shouldn't be deleted. I can't see any major mistakes with my writing. In fact, I have seen many other Wikipedia pages which have many spelling mistakes but haven't been deleted. My article is not as bad as that; is it?  

 Seeing as you are experienced in Wikipedia, if you really think that what I wrote should be deleted, then could I instead create a new page regarding what I wrote. If possible, I could call that page 'Induced homomorphism (algebraic topology)'.  

 Could you also please tell me what is precisely wrong with what I wrote? That would help me to write better next time.