Jump to content

User talk:FoCuSandLeArN/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

Kurt

Thank you for the acceptance on June 3 and the favorable comments on the en.Wiki article I had submitted on Kurt Heinrich Meyer. This article is no longer an "orphan" because this article has now been linked to the en.Wikipedia articles on "Hans Horst Meyer" and on "Edmond H. Fischer", as you can check. Can therefore the "orphan" mention be removed and the Kurt Heinrich Meyer en.Wiki article be considered to be OK. ?

Thank you for your consideration

Horst Meyer Horstm Horstm (talk) 01:40, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Tag removed. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Teen Mania International

I got your message about my article. I was not trying to create a new article but was instructed that since I had a conflict of interest being that I work for the company of whom the article is about (disclosed on my user page) that my edits should be submitted in this manner so they can be checked for neutrality. I was told that I cannot directly edit the main article because of this conflict, please advise. PabloRicardo (talk) 02:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I understand. In that case please resubmit and a reviewer will take a look shortly. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Hamburg

Hi, thank you for your comment in my article about "The Hamburg Centre for Ultrafast Imaging": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Hamburg_Centre_for_Ultrafast_Imaging

You said the referencing inline needs to be removed. Do you mean the links within the text or i.e. the links that are connected to people? Thank you so far, Annika --Annika Schonefeld (talk) 11:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Externalk links should not be placed in-line. You could use them as references, via in-line citations. To learn how to do that, see WP:REFB. Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

John Graham Sr- article help

Hello,

I have put in some new references for notability, but I'm having problems with my references page list being so long and with errors that I don't know how to fix.Todd Doyle (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC)Todd DoyleTodd Doyle (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

It seems you have placed references outside of the text. Did you mean to place them above? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Fullbeauty Submission declined

Hi,

Thank you for your feedback on the Fullbeauty article. I made edits and included other content references outside of the Meghan Trainor coverage. I wanted to ask if you can review before I resubmit to advise if this is sufficient.

Thank You Tonyeny (talk) 21:52, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

It is up for review, so any moment now a reviewer might give it a look. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Karenia selliformis

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Karenia selliformis, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15654328.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:15, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Questions on Rik Palieri page feedback...

Hello FoCuSandLeArN,

Thanks for your comments. I am a bit confused by the old comments that were made on May 16 mentioning that there were no notes. I did spend lots of hours adding the notes, and there are now 26 of them.

There are now three comments on the re-submitted article, numbered 1-2-3

1. Comment: Has he been listed in any charts? Any significant reviews of his recordings? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

2. Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: This article will need inline citations after any potentially contentious claims, per WP:MINREF.

3. Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: This is a pretty interesting subject, and a cursory peruse of Google Books indicates enough has been written about him, analyzed about his career, to merit an article.

Yours is #1, I will check if I can provide more info than there already is, and will get back to you soon.

  1. 2 seems to be a repeat of the previous comments, but what does it mean "after any potentially contentions claims?"

Does this mean that there are enough notes now, but that one should be ready for future criticism of contentious claims?

  1. 3 is positive, ok.

I'd like to know the current situation: are we waiting for the answers to your #1 question, "Has he been listed in any charts? Any significant reviews of his recordings?" in order to decide the fate of this article?

Thanks for letting me know,

Pete4W (talk) 22:34, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

As a heads-up about #2: statements that can be argued are contentious, like stating something he did with someone else, for instance. No, by no means is chart information a necessity for approval. See WP:MUSIC for the criteria we're looking for (charts is only one of them). Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft renewable energy in Cook Islands

Thanks for comment. I'll see what I can dig up for additional references, but such things are quite sparse for here. I live on Tongareva, so the things I wrote are direct observations. I have many photoos too. I'll add to the draft as I find anything. Bye, Michael Honumike (talk) 02:23, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately those aren't considered reliable sources. You'll need coverage in independent and verifiable sources to substantiate the content of the article. Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:35, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Soulflower

Hi, After you put comment I have added external links from news articles. Kindly suggest the changes that I could do to this page before finally publishing it...Thanks! vivek.bekhabar (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

What page? The submission appears to have been deleted under the G!11 criterion, which means it was unambiguous advertising. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Earlier I was not aware of wiki guidelines I directly published the page(Soulflower), which got deleted. Now, after going through the guidelines I knew how the content should be. I have changed the whole content, removed the parts which came under G11 criterion and currently I am re-writing the content and adding 3rd party references. Also, I have added this page as a Draft for review from experienced wiki users, so that I get valuable advice and this be within guidelines. Your suggestions are highly welcome. Thanks vivek.bekhabar (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 07:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I have done a lot of research and made changes to the wikipedia Draft:Soulflower on which you added a comment. It would be of great help if you can give your insights about it. Is it right or should I change something ? Please respond. Thanks a lot! vivek.bekhabar (talk)
Please await reviewal. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Answer to the question on Rik Palieri with detailed info

Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

Many thanks for your feedback. I've done some homework and would like to share this info with you:

Question: Has he been listed in any charts? Any significant reviews of his recordings? The answers are yes and yes, and the info is below. Let me know what else I can do. Pete4W (talk) 02:41, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

This is all information you should add to the article's contents, but be aware that I don't think it satisfies WP:MUSIC. For chart information, have a look at WP:CHART; I don't think those charts are enough. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:25, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

about

Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

I'm not sure if you got back to me already on this. I'm new to Wikipedia and am struggling to find my way around a bit. Anyway you'd left me a comments saying that there needs to be more content "about" the person I'm am writing. I was hoping you could clarify what you mean by "about". I spoke to a few others and they interpret that as meaning I need more third party references from the internet to use as citations. Is this correct?

Thanks for you help here!

--Chrisking1977 (talk) 12:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Is this about Karl? Yes, I meant that the sources I found online are mostly his own works. We need to see stuff written ABOUT him, bot by him- That's the only way we have to assess his notability. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Predicted no-effect concentration, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Trophic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Juka

Hello Focusandlearn, can you please review my article on Genc Juka again, and provide me with some advices on what needs to be improved to be acceptable for publication.

thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jukag (talk • contribs) 09:47, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

We require extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:44, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Added references to draft renewable energy in Cook Islands

Any better? Honumike (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Much better. However, there are still unreferenced statements, and the quality of the citations is a bit deficient. We're looking for reliable and independent sources, such as newspapers, books, etc. The article certainly has potential. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Industry

The article I submitted was rejected because there were not enough relevant news stories about the topic. I noticed there are other article about companies in the same industry that are published. What can I do to get my article approved for publishing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony8821 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Other articles might not have gone through AfC, in which case they might be prone to deletions in the future. In any case, as I posted in my comment, I can find no extensive coverage about the subject, nor have you provided evidence of notability. All sources are non-independent. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Sources

Hello, I cited several accurate and independent sources. Please tell me specifically what the problem could be. Thank you, writerfriendinpa.20:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)20:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writerfriendinpa (talk • contribs)

The information in the draft appears to be unreferenced. We need biographical information to be backed up by with verifiable sources. For quick tutorials on referencing and citations, see WP:REFB and WP:INCITE. If no extensive coverage from independent and reliable source can be provided, I'm afraid the subject will be deemed non-notable and won't be accepted. You might also want to read WP:MUSIC, our guideline on the notability of musicians. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Gran Premio Nuvolari

Hello and thank you for assistance at the Gran Premio Nuvolari draft. I added more references. Could you please let me know, if the article is ready for examination? Best regards from Germany. GB-Ferrari (talk) 11:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

It could still use better independent sourcing. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Omer

Hello, I saw your comment on an article I am working on. You mentioned that the topic doesn't seem notable. I would like to know what details or sources can help make it notable. Draft:Omer_Dror Appreciate your time, Mironit9 (talk) 08:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Mironit

We look for extensive (pertaining entirely to the subject) coverage in independent and reliable sources, such as newspapers, books, magazines, etc. If the subject doesn't fulfill WP:GNG, it will likely be declined. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

So I persume the existing sources - Le Figaro, TV Channels, etc. won't do? Mironit9 (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Best regards, Mironit

As I said, they don't pertain to Omer himself, i.e. the articles aren't about him. All other sources are either unreliable or not independent of the subject. Please review the links provided before any further inquiries. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

AFC Submissions

Just curious: I notice that you tend to comment on a lot of the very old submissions, rather than declining. I was just curious why you decide to do this rather than an outright decline as I see your name over there often and you always have excellent observations about the articles! -Pax85 (talk) 06:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I offer comments when I either see the article has potential, I'm not confident enough to decline it or I'm just passing by and don't have much time to perform a diligent review. I like to leave comments for other reviewers or the article's creator to see. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, thank you! Your comments have helped a few times as I get re-acclimated to the AFC process. Pax Verbum 06:07, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, just a note that the AFC Robert Steven Kaplan which you promoted, was a foundational copyright violation of [1]. The draft still included the copyright bot's automated warning, which surprises me that it would be promoted without investigating the notice. Please take care in future to assess any such tags on the page, or in the history (as editors will often remove them without action). Thanks, CrowCaw 22:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Crow: Due to its deletion I can't possibly fathom what submission that was. I review hundreds each week. Obviously the bot must've tagged it either after I approved it (in which case I mustn't have noticed any evident CRV signs), or somebody deleted the tag before my review. The third option implies me assessing the degree of violation after reading the tool's report and reviewing it nonetheless, which I don't think is very likely. In any case, we all make mistakes, in which case I apologise. Thank you for the heads-up! Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Holy Redeemer Catholic parish, Belize City

You left a comment at top of my draft which I tried to respond to, two weeks ago, clarifying the introduction to the article. Should I remove the comment when I try to respond to it, or will you do that or revise your suggestion? jzsj 15:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments should remain on the top of the article submission. Thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Scott

Hi, just wanted to say thanks for your comments about my draft. Have to confess, don't quite understand why Jack Scott isn't considered notable - he certainly is in the world of expat books. Odd. Still, thank you nonetheless.

--Expatauthors (talk) 20:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia's criteria for notability is sometimes contradictory to what a lay person's notion of notability would be. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Snow Pea Crisps

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN,

I decided to make some edits to the page so that it would be ready for publishing eventually. Could you please look at my new section called "Calbee and its relationship to Saya" in our page? I would like to see if this new tone is any better.

The other sections are WIP, I just started editing them so there may be incomplete sentences here and there.

Thank you! TokieDokie^3^ (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

The new section appears reasonable upon a quick glance. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Reviewer_help.
Message added 19:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

E. Lee (talk) 19:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

DashieXP

Why exactly was my submission declined, when all of my information is correct. DashieXP Viewer (talk) 08:45, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm, where to begin? The person is obviously non-notable, it's unreferenced, it's written unencyclopaedically. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:50, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Band

Referring to your comment about sources. I've done some editing now and, as far as I know, those are some of the most independent and reliable sources available on the topic. If they are not good enough, then the topic is apparently not notable. Reaason (talk) 08:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Information

Hello,

thank you for your comment on my contribution "Paolo Messa". I 'm new in Wikipedia so can you help me? Do you know if my contribution could be published in Wikipedia and when? Thank you and have a nice day, Fabrizia Fabrizia.argano (talk) 22:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Ciao Fabrizia! Thank you for getting back to me. Upon first glance, he does appear notable. I would ask you to provide more independent and reliable sourcing, first of all to back up the biography, but most importantly so that we can be sure he's notable according to our standards. I hope this helps, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:01, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Violinist

I have studied wikipedias other live musicians pages and most of them do not have the backup referencing I have submitted. There are musicians and actors on wikipedia online with stubs? and no backup whatsoever.

Alone being THE violinist who represented wikipedias 10th anniversary in London with Jimmy Wales is notability enough I would think and the many other notable referencing I have put forward is verifiable. I am sure I have learnt and followed all wikipedias guidelines plus the fact other wikipedia editors have helped shape this article.

I do apoligize to disagree with you. After discussing this with other wikipedia personnel I have no idea how this article is suppose to improve. Kind regards Therese10 00:26, 23 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbus10 (talk • contribs)

I'm afraid when someone is non-notable according to our guidelines, there's nothing you can do, the article won't be accepted. She does not satisfy any criteria in WP:MUSIC, and there's no extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources about her. If you have any further doubts, let me know. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Equitise

Did someone tell you before that you are not notable enough? what a condescending reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elevinty (talk • contribs) 07:00, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? The subject of the article does not fulfill Wikipedia's notability guidelines; if you're unhappy about that, go vent that frustration somewhere else. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Stayzilla

Hi

I'm not sure if you remember but a few weeks back you had put a comment "Has plenty of coverage, but it's quite recent" on the Stayzilla page (a series B startup which has been covered in places like Techcrunch and Economic Times) which I had created. Just wanted to clarify that the sources are spread across 3 years and are reputable ones. And I have tried to follow all the guidelines to the best of my knowledge. Could you please take a look and let me know if there is any other thing I need to add to help this draft get published?

Thanks Atish AtishU (talk) 07:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I'd suggest providing more references (there are dozens out there). After that, await reviewal. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Jukka Kalevi Salonen

Thanks for your comments on the Jukka Kalevi Salonen submission. I'll go back pull some direct resources referencing Jukka, to add to the subject matter, case histories and patent references already listed. Thanks

Wrtr63 (talk) 19:51, 22 June 2015 (UTC)wrtr47

Again, thanks for comments. I added a direct list of Jukka's patents as third party citations (e.g., U.S. Patent Office) and am collecting some additional third party articles or conference presentation, etc. links. Hope this is helpful

Wrtr63 (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)Wrtr63Wrtr63 (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Badger Maps

Hello, thank you for taking the time to read and comment on my recent article submission. I just started writing articles and am still new and have much to learn.

My Question:

How do I improve the notability you mentioned I am missing? I did a lot of digging on the topic (I have been selecting random topics people have requested) and found some good sources. What else do I need to get an article published?

Best,

Jack Jack W. 17:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Willow (talk • contribs)

Notability is determined by extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources. Adding appropriate references to the submission would probably help the reviewer make that call. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

How does one quantify extensive? Thus far I have found an independent article from some news site, but also one from Forbes to reference, would I need to find 2-3 more reliable sources for instance? Thank you for responding so quickly, I appreciate it.

Best,

Jack Wilow Jack W. 17:28, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Extensive is difficult to quantify indeed, but usually if the topic is discussed in several different sources across an extended period of time, that's a good indication. Sources need to discuss it exclusively, not just in passing, however; and sources need to be good ones, that is verifiable and written by independent players. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

That was such a great, detailed response, I really appreciate it, thank you!

Best,

Jack Wilow Jack W. 19:41, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Violinist

Thank you for your reply. I quite understand where you are coming from but as Wikipedia guidelines state "This page documents an English Wikipedia notability guideline. It with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true." More than I have provided in referencing and links to demonstrate that the information provided is true and verifiable. So much verification the article is probably to long. Nowdays due to protecting contracts and security reasons, a LIVE musician cannot reveal or publish details that they contributed in, plus the fact digital support which is the media the world revolves in today moves quite quickly and is not acceptable on Wikipedia. So when it comes to live musicians the situation becomes a dilema.

Who can say who is notable or not in this modern time?

The same thing happened to The Beatles, Decca and Brian Epstein.!

I would have imagioned that Wikipedia´s most promient concert 10th Anniversary with the presence of Jimmy Wales in London was a notable presence. In Jimmy Wales speech he thanked and congratulated Nicole Crespo for her support and music coverage at his Wikipedia´s 10th anniversary with images, press and T.V coverage all over the World.

Below are some of the points recommended and which through editing were eliminated both by me and the previous Wikipedia editor.There are tours etc... but too much to be added for a Wikipedia page in my opinion.

Criteria for musicians and ensembles (Wikipedia) rule 9 - This musician (is the 1st prize winner of the major competitin in Spain The Euskadi prize. rule 4 - http://www.bilbaorkestra.com/eng/concierto.php?id=456 (tour with BOS) Bilbao & http://www.eldiariomontanes.es/20110718/cultura/musica/encuentro-musica-academia-programa-20110718.html rule 6 - Both Irina Vinogradova (piano)Ofelia Montalván (piano) http://www.aquiconfidencial.es/es/imprimir-noticia.php?IDN=4459 are worldknow musicians and toured in 2011 as an esemble with Nicole Crespo.

After already being advised by other editors and personnel of Wikipedia before presenting this last edition, maybe you can generally help this dilema by editing what you think is missing, I must add I have given everything verified a Live musician can provide. The Arts Live are always taken advantage of because of the absence or possibiliity of proving their notability,

May I suggest the following pages for comparison Wikipedia page Jack Liebeck, Vengerov, Vadim Repin have not supplied the verifiable referencing and information I am sure I have supplied and have been accepted by Wikipedia?.

Music seems to be the modern career raciasm.

Therese10 15:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbus10 (talk • contribs)

Ravi Sathe

I have re-edited the article based on your recommendation. Would love it if you could help me further and see if the citations are fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satheravi (talk • contribs) 13:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Much better, thank you. Please remove the boldface wording in the article, except for the initial Spenta Multimedia. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Sylvia Dwyer

Hello! I saw your comment on the new Sylvia Dwyer wikipage, and I have two online articles you can check to confirm her identity.

This is the reference from the Brooklyn Heights wikipage: Walton, Richard J. (January 22, 1958). "One Painting Leads to Birth of Gallery". Brooklyn New York World Telegram. Second Section, In the Heights.

This is one of the articles on the "Is Art a Profession?" court case on the yet-to-be-submitted Brooklyn Arts Gallery page: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9502E7DF143DE73ABC4B53DFB0668382649EDE

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. This is my first foray into becoming a Wiki contributor, and I'm having a blast, but I really want to do it right. Thank you so much!

Tess — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snookoriva (talk • contribs) 18:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

It'd be great if you could add those to the article. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The link to the "Is Art a Profession" was already on there, fourth paragraph, but I have added the reference to the origin story of the gallery to the page. Thanks for the input. Snookoriva (talk) 21:42, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

SCWIST

Thank you for reviewing the article Draft:Society for Canadian Women in Science and Technology.

Could you please advice how to improve this article? I thought I overdid citations. My guidance was "Independent source for business is media or a government organization" (from Wikipedia:Independent sources).The Globe and Mail Toronto is national wide media organization and Status of Women is a government organization same as Canadian Institute for Health Research and NSERC. There is also a book written about Michael Smith (chemist) that mentions SCWIST. Is this not enough?

Could you give me some suggestion what to do with the articles with some problem I find while browsing? Notability of non-profit organizations is often a problem. There are quite a few articles in Category:Charities based in Canada with the citations problems (for example ALS Society of Canada). The once that don't have them should have them (for example A Better World, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada etc.), there are many broken links (for example Canadian Fellowship Foundation). My initial idea was to find a good article about a non-profit and use as an example of what kind of references are needed but I ended up finding articles that are not notable.Gpeja (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

We are looking for sources that are independent of the subject, are reliable, and extensive, i.e. entirely about the topic, and not just mention it in passing. As for the articles you've mentioned (if I understand you correctly) the first ones are in need of referencing, which can be fixed by just adding sources to corroborate their contents; as for broken links, there's not much one can do about them except finding alternative sources. Of course one way of avoiding dead links is to provide full citations from the get-go, so that if the website is dead, one can still identify where the information came from. Hope this helps. Happy editing! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Black on Black II (Heart Song)

Hi,

You left me a message regarding a source in my draft just stating "Mainstream Rock" chart instead of Billboard Mainstream Rock chart. If you look at that source, the title of the listing is "Billboard Singles", and they are using Billboard charts for the listings they use. I just wanted to clarify that the source you mentioned does indeed indicate the position is a Billboard chart. Thanks for the comment! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DFWRaider (talk • contribs) 04:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I understand, thank you for clarifying. If so, it probably passes WP:MUSIC. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Ganz Danubius

Hi, After WW2 all the Hungarian industrial companies had been taken over by the communist government. During this period (1945-1991) most of the Hungarian heavy industrial companies had the word "Ganz" in their names. All these companies were owned by the state, but were technically independent from each other. Ganz Danubius was a registered shipbuilding and crane manufacturing company, known as part of the Ganz Works, but Ganz Works never existed as a registered entity, it wasn't a holding. Ganz Danubius deserves an independant article since it directly developed from the first Hungarian Shipyard of Óbuda established in 1835. Please feel free to ask in case you have any further questions. Endre Szabó (75yo.) Ship Engineer Last Technical Director of Ganz Danubius Shipyard and Crane Factory Co. 1985 Ganz Danubius (talk) 15:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I see, thank you for the clarification. Could it be possible to add more references? Some paragraphs are wholly unreferenced. Any reliable sources will do, such as books, magazines, old newspaper articles, etc. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Matthew Santoro - resubmitted

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that I have resubmitted a draft that you left feedback on. I added more references and relevant information. Feel free to take a look. Draft:Matthew Santoro Thanks, Rainbow unicorn (talk) 06:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

AfC and Physics

Just wanted to say that your cross-posting between AfC and WT:PHYSICS is appreciated (i.e. I notice the edits). Since I generally work from the back of the queue I don't always see the physics articles, and even then getting a second/third set of eyes is helpful (especially since my expertise is more practical and less theoretical). The slow responses might just be because it's summertime. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for that! I've received a few responses, but they've been quite sporadic over the years. I keep posting with the hope someone will eventually have a look and either comment or review the submissions in question. I don't worry too much about whether they answer on talk pages or not. With uni assignments and all, I feel like we do need a semi-regular couple of experienced eyes at AfC. Anyway, thanks for your acknowledgement! Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:12, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

ACME

Hi FoCuSandLeArN

I put up the wikipedia entry for Acme Idea Factory which is a notable initiative that promotes the start-up movement in India. I have done my best to keep it as non-promoting as possible and also added references of leading financial dailies that have covered the topic. Request your guidance on the removal of the deletion notice and how we can further improve the article.

Thanks and Regards Saptarishi12345 (talk) 05:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the subject of the article you've created is deemed non-notable, and will likely be deleted shortly. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

16:13:09, 30 June 2015 review of submission by Lynn R. McGee


Lynn R. McGee (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

Thank you for explaining why the entry I submitted on BMCC/CUNY college president Antonio Perez is not acceptable at this time:

"This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia."

May I respectfully ask for more specific guidance? Of the 46 citations I included in the article, many were from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and other sources I thought would be acceptable. Also I have read and thought I was adhering to the notability guidelines and golden rule — though clearly I didn't.

I understand that there are over a thousand entries awaiting review at this time, and I apology for taking more of your time. But I want to do this right, and unfortunately I am puzzled as to how to move forward with my edits for resubmission.

Sincerely, Lynn Lynn R. McGee (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

From the sources you've provided I can say: most are either brief mentions, and definitely not extensive (mentions about 9/11 and BMCC for the most part); op-eds; press releases or non-independent. For someone to be notable for Wikipedia, they need extensive coverage from independent and reliable sources, which Pérez clearly does not possess. I've looked for sources myself, and unfortunately he does not pass General Notability at this time. Thank you for your efforts. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Article review

You sent me a message regarding some minor referencing edits I could make. I made them and if you could review them and get back to me, that would be great. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brimhoff (talk • contribs) 17:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

George Fosty submission update

I have updated the George Fosty submission, although it still needs work. As for his inclusion, Mr. Fosty is a former best selling author and has at least 9 published titles to his credit. The book Black Ice is one of the most important hockey books ever written, as it still stands as the only book about the 19th Century and early 20th Century Colored Hockey League. It is responsible for not only rewriting Black hockey history, but has opened up a new and deeper understanding of the early Black Nationalism movement, Booker T. Washington, Henry Sylvester Williams and their connections into Canada as well as expanded the understanding of the Underground Railroad maritime route from New York to Canada, particularly Nova Scotia. He is one of the foremost hockey historians and he and his writings have been featured not only on ESPN/ABC, Oprah Magazine, the New York Times, Sun Media (Canada), CBC Radio/Television and many others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamloops1 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Paul F. Miller

FoCuSandLeArN Thank you for your comments. I will incorporate them into the Draft to the best of my abilities. Joseph Conwell Josephconwell (talk) 14:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding CouponDunia article which got rejected

After repeated attempts my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:CouponDunia is being rejected. I would have appreciate if you could have gone through all the credible References provided. One is from The Times of India its the biggest news agency here in India, apart from that one of the references is from Minitry of External affairs India, the other is from MSN and the financial express news. Also note that the company in question is part of the biggest agency i.e the Times Internet group for which there already exists an Wikipedia page. I would appreciate if you can reconsider your decision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riverside1289 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I did not review the article. I merely provided feedback so that you would add more references. What we look for is extensive coverage from independent and reliable sources. Full citations also are preferred (see WP:REFB for guidance). Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

So you mean to say Times of India is not a reliable source, The govt website Ministry of External affairs that picked the news is not a reliable source. Well there are thousand of articles that are live on Wikipedia which hardly have any references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riverside1289 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I did not say that. I said that I can't find extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources. By the way, of the references you've provided, only two or three actually discuss CouponDunia extensively, via discussing the Times purchase, etc. Of these, only the India Times I deem reliable, as the others don't mention authors or appear to be press releases or lacking editorial process. All the others are simple mentions in passing. As for your other argument, please see WP:OSE. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Annalid disambiguation links.

Good job adding articles on annalids, but I wanted to bring to your attention some common disambiguation links that have popped up in these articles.

Cheers! bd2412 T 15:27, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Yeah, my annelid articles are a work in progress...funny I didn't get disamb bot notifications though. I'll add these to my next ones. Thanks again, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, and happy editing! bd2412 T 18:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Request on 06:13:38, 3 July 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Bestwikimis


Hi, I am enquiring about the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yiannis_Misirlis which was declined. "Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject." The article has 43 independent citations from reliable sources, ranging from the Cypriot Government website to international news agencies. Could you assist me to what exactly is expected?

Thank you in advance.


Bestwikimis (talk) 06:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The references you've provided by no means constitute extensive coverage, plus a big portion of them are non-indepdent and unreliable. They are very minor mentions in regards to his business endeavours and not himself per se. He is the President's son-in-law, and he isn't notable by association. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Transition Assistance Program

Hi, FoCuSandLeArN,

I received your message about the draft page "Draft:Transition Assistance Program" where you commented as follows: 

Comment: I think this is probably notable, although as it is, it copies sections of https://www.linkedin.com/pub/naval-base-kitsap-transition-gps/92/90b/860 FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The information on this LinkedIn page was actually taken from DoDtap.mil, which is a source I cited. I ask that you please re-review the page with this in mind. There's nothing I can do about other websites taking from a source page the same information that I'm taking from a source page.

Jward4 (talk) 14:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I did not review the article, I merely provided a comment to help you out. As for the source of the article, there is something you can do, which is rewrite some information in your own words. I do understand it is a government source, and as such can possibly be copied with proper attribution, but it is standard practice to edit such sources as a courtesy, otherwise Wikipedia would be a government proxy and not an encyclopaedia. You could also provide sourcing from independent and reliable sources to corroborate some of the information. Once that's accomplished I'd be happy to accept the submission. Let me know if you need help. Thank you for contributing! Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.

Hi

Just wanted to say thank you for accepting my article, I had spent months trying to get the right amount of credible links/info and still kept getting declined which really made me not want to bother, it is very much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonfrmr (talk • contribs) 15:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

No worries, it's what I do! I hope you continue editing! Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michel Forst, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mandate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

RE: Your offer to advise with my draft Software-Defined Enterprise Article

Hello, many thanks for your offer to give me some pointers on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Software-Defined_Enterprise

I have spent an inordinate amount of time trying to address your concern of it being unencyclopedic, so much time that I am thinking I might actually be making it worse now. Any chance you might give it a quick look again?

Best 76.10.171.51 (talk) 07:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It still needs plenty of work done. It seems to be covertly trying to advertise several companies, such as VMware® Inc. External links should not be placed in-line. The sources you appear to have based the article on are not reliable, except Wired. Please use sources that are independent, reliable and treat the subject extensively. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FoCuSandLeArN/Archive_18&oldid=1140612226"