User talk:FoCuSandLeArN/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Rushton2010

I'm glad you found some enjoyment from them. I have to agree; although I always like to think of wikipedia as a big community of friendly and civil people, I have come across a lot with no people skills at all. Not quite sure why people would waste their time posting abusive things or vandalising things or even just waste their time being down right rude. Doesn't achieve anything.
But each to their own...

Congratulations on 2nd place in the Backlog Elimination Drive. You did over double your nearest competitor!

Rushton2010 (talk) 20:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Some people weren't happy about my contributions. Anyway, I totally agree. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

• Special report: Who reads which Wikipedia?

• WikiProject report: Special: FAQs

• Featured content: What the ?

• News and notes: Grants given for Wikipedia Library, six others; April Fool's Day ructions

• Arbitration report: Three open cases

• Technology report: Wikidata phase 2 deployment timetable in doubt

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 14:07, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Very good work for our beloved Wikipedia for such a short time, keep up the good work, appreciated...!!! :) Faizan Munawar Varya chat contributions 02:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Vizzini (The Princess Bride)

Hello again, I was wondering of how to add a screen shot of Vizzini to my article. I see many tv characters with screen shots from their show. How do I get one of those?

you can add any image from Wikimedia Commons to the article. Feel free to browse the collection, otherwise it is sometimes possible to upload non-copyright images to Commons and then place them in articles, but I have no experience on how that works. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Language templates

Hi. Just wanted to draw your attention to the difference between templates like {{en}} and those like {{lang-en}}. The former are for use to flag foreign-language references, but the parenthesized bold text makes them unsuitable for inline use. We don't usually flag the use of English at all, in fact. Cheers, --Stfg (talk) 12:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Stfg. This is very useful. Could you elaborate on how and when to use language templates, i.e. when there is a foreign language quoted, etc.? Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

No worries. take a look at Template:Lang, which has some fairly thorough documentation. I'll come back later with the feedback you requested, when I've reviewed a few more articles. Cheers, --Stfg (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I want to request an article

I am very new to Wikipedia, but I am eager to be a part of it's growth.. I was hoping to use a template to create a new article, but I got confused and didn't want to be inconsiderate of other people's work.. So now I thought I'd try to request it.. "Chinkie Brown" is mentioned in an Article for on Wikipedia already - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._DJ, but doesn't have a page. I have the biography for "Chinkie Brown" in my possession and have permission to create it, but I don't know how to grab the right template for editing.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMatrix 360 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! Welcome to Wikipedia. There are no templates as such for artists' articles, however all artists need to comply with Wikipedia:Notability (music) and usually use a musical artist infobox such as this. If you feel creating an article is too daunting, feel free to request an article here, and provide as much information as you can. Does that help? Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me.. and I appreciate your input..IMatrix 360 (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

CE feedback

Hi F&L. You asked for some feedback and I've been thinking about what I could offer. See if the following helps at all. First the good news, you've done some excellent work in removing puffery and promotional tone from articles. Also, I think that the criticisms levelled at you were way over the top. My view is that the articles I looked at all ended up better after you worked on them than they were before.

That said, I see that you've said on Torchiest's talk page that you won't take part in any more drives, and I think that's a good decision. If you wanted to do much more copy editing, I'd be advising you to check out some language references and the like, at least if you were going to fulfil copyedit requests on articles that people are putting effort into. As it is, here are just a few pointers for general article work:

• You should always hit preview and proof-read your writing, but proof-reading one's own writing is hard, because we (think we) know what we said, and the brain wants to skim too quickly. The standard trick to avoid this problem is to read it out loud. Another thing I find helpful is the Show changes button. It doesn't show up what we've missed, but it quickly shows up typos and the like.

• You tend to WP:OVERLINK. The general principle is to provide links where they may help the understanding of the article, not otherwise. Don't allow duplicate links; don't link to well-known things unless there's a special reason to; don't link to red herrings.

• If you find a bit of formatting and you don't know the WP:MOS rule about it, either look it up or leave it alone. Then people won't have to follow after you restoring italics to the names of television series and suchlike. But anyone who copy edits or who writes anything larger than stubs should at least be familiar with Wikipedia:Simplified Manual of Style. It's only around 1000 words.

• Be sparing with tags that ask for extra information in articles that aren't likely to get attention from strong editors. The tags will just fester there as badges of shame.

Last but not least, you seem to be somewhat accident-prone, inserting strange turns of phrase and doing things like that AFC that you rejected as blank. I can't see a pattern, but do you edit with distractions in the environment -- people chatting in the background; mobile at your ear; the telly on? Would a quieter environment help? Cheers, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking the time, and for your valuable comments. I will do my best to address these issues. I guess I've been under a bit of stress lately. I am doing things a bit slower now, as you'll find. I sometimes listen to jazz while editing. Maybe I should leave Thelonious Monk for Charlie Parker, haha. Thanks again, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk Back

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Faizanalivarya's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This was a question from someone whose AfC you declined. You never responded to him; if you are going to help newcomers, you need to give them the assistance the require. In your decline comment, you gave merely the reason not being suitable for WP. This is not helpful unless the article would really meet one of the NOT conditions. In this case it is an unsourced bio of someone probably notable. although written by the person's agent. For someone with COI like this, AfC is in fact the recommended course of action. I've gone and given the necessary information. If you are going to review afcs, please be specific to the actual problem. DGG ( talk ) 01:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide me with the article please? Did he contact me on my talk page? I answer all queries. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry-- I left out the heading, and I misread you pagehistory. Repeating below. It may be clearer now. . DGG ( talk ) 01:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

afc reviewing

On Jan 6, you received a question about your review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Boulou Ferré: Revision history. This was a question from someone whose AfC you declined. In your decline comment, you gave merely the reason not being suitable for WP. This is not helpful unless the article would really meet one of the NOT conditions, which was not the case.

You replied to him on your talk p, " if you are directly involved with the artist, then beware of conflicts of interest to begin with. that said, as long as an article's subject is notable, and the article possesses adequate references, it will be considered in due regard. " I do not see how that help tell him what to actually do--it does imply they need to add references, which is what you should have used as a reason in the first place.

Now, in this case it is an unsourced bio of someone clearly notable, with an article in the frWP containing multiple good references, which he did not indicate at the AfC, but he did in his question to you. Yes, this article submission was written by the person's agent, and for someone with COI like this, AfC is in fact the recommended way to go. I've gone and given him the necessary information,and I hope he is still around. . If you are going to review afcs, please be specific to the actual problem. I myself find the prebuilt reasons rarely sufficient, DGG ( talk ) 01:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:53, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Shearonink's talk page.
Message added 05:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shearonink (talk) 05:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

hi!

HI! thanks a lot for the editing. I'm still not very experienced with wikipedia talk page, so I'm not sure where this message will pop up. I just tried to de-orphan my article hope it worked out! All the best! :) Maria.orciuoli (talk) 10:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Looks like you did! Happy editing :) FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 10:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Article declined

Hello FoCuSandLeArN, I´ve re-written this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Treccani_Milano) and it keeps being declined, why? I feel that the topic meets all of wikipedia´s rules. Can you please explain to me in plain language what the problem is please. I have added "citations to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subjec", so I don´t see what the problem is. It´s so frustrating that I want to contribute information about a company that I find fascinating and so unique and you guys keep declining it. Help please!!! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cris.santander (talk • contribs) 15:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there. Thank you for your question. All of the article's sources are not independent of the subject, such as LXRY, Born Rich and Elle magazines. Also, coverage doesn't seem to be significant, usually sources being item descriptions that merely promote the subject. Furthermore, two of the sources provided are dead links. Perhaps you should focus on why the company is "unique" (as you say), brush up on finding adequate sources (and the notability guidelines) to back that up, and resubmit after you've addressed these issues. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Spekmac

I have added the valuable reference for the item. in its section. so please review the reference made by it. Included a news article of Malayala manorama which is a national daily in india — Preceding unsigned comment added by Semymaksd (talk • contribs) 07:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide me with a link to the article? I'm unaware of what you're referring to. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Article about Summer School AACIMP is declined for the second time

Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

we have submitted the article about Summer School AACIMP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Summer_School_AACIMP) for the second time, and it is still gets declined. Mentioned reason is that our article isn't supported enough by reliable resources, but we have checked several articles on similar topics (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Clancy_Summer_School) and our article appears to be superior to the rest by number of reliable resources. It also has already been approved by russian and ukrainian wikipedias (won't publish those links they are too long). Moreover recently we have added two more references and now it is 11. May I kindly ask you to clarify the situation. Appreciate your help.

The head of Information Campaign

Summer School AACIMP

Dmytro Fishman

Dear Mr Fishman, let me start by saying a few things about the article: its sources don't appear to be reliable according to Wikipedia Policy. In order for sources to establish the notability of the article's subject, they need to be independent of the subject, reliable and extensive. Please read Wikipedia:Notability for that matter. Just because there are other articles like such doesn't mean that this one meets the requirements for acceptance, that's exactly the point of AfC. Lastly, please be aware that if you are writing this article in order to market/promote/advertise (or simply call for the school's attention) the school, then that falls under Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, in which case you need to seriously consider your position in the matter. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Intel

I created "Intel System Studio" and the submission was declined on March 7. I made some updates in early April and resubmitted. I appreciate that reviewers have other responsibilities but I was just wondering when the resubmission might be reviewed. Thanks Cbpiper2 (talk) 17:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC) Chuck Piper

Be aware that the backlog is of 1500+ articles at the moment, so it might take a few weeks. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I am not sure Bull's eye is a sign of macular degeneration, I deleted it , as far as I know it is a sign of chloroquine maculopathy and I think page Bull's Eye Maculopathy should be redirected to Chloroquine retinopathy, what do you think? Kiatdd (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You might be right. I suspected it wasn't notable when I edited it yesterday. According to this we should redirect and perhaps add a little sentence to the chloro article saying this, using that as a ref? Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the ref, I used your reference in chloro article and redirected Bull's eye maculopathy.Regards Kiatdd (talk) 20:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

awesome, thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Apps#Discussion.
Message added XapApp · talk · contribs 13:52, 12 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Can you give me a hand?

Hello again, Jim. I'm trying to expand the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012 article a bit, and found this article, however I'm not sure how exactly that has to do with the legislation. Could you be so kind and give me some directions? Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:23, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

That's a curious one. It looks like there was an argument about whether language in one version of the bill would have allowed or prevented the USPS from discontinuing Saturday service. I found a subsequent article suggesting that the language made it through and that is why the USPS dropped the plan to reduce service to five days. Here's another article about the controversy. I have to confess I don't know exactly what happened.

There's almost an endless number of directions the article here on Wikipedia could go. It might be fun to list all the spending items in the bill (last link in the list is the one that passed) - it's an appropriations bill, after all. But take a look and you'll see what a HUUUGE chore that would be!

Don't know how helpful I've been, but thanks for askin'! JimHarperDC (talk) 14:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

It's good to know I'm not the only confused person out there! And it certainly seems the reporter joined the club. I'll see if I can incorporate al least a bit of it into the article. It could be very useful, but I do look upon it with some hesitation...Thanks again! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:17, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Oops! Further confusion! I thought/assumed you were talking about the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, but I see now that you were editing Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012. (If anyone ever asks why bills should be identified by their bill number and Congress number...) So it looks like the postal service and whistleblower issues pertain to this years bill, while the horse slaughter stuff is about last year's. These are utterly complicated bills, and they have these little complicated issues buried in them... — Preceding unsigned comment added by JimHarperDC (talk • contribs) 15:14, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, they're all intricately intertwined. Horse slaughter and whistleblowing was specifically mentioned in 2012, while the postal service stuff was part of the continued appropriations after the 2012 bill, whatever that means. But do you think what I've added is ok? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Playwright

Hi

Could you at least explain the decision to reject the page Greg Day (playwright). I hadn't even finished it by the way. It seems to be based on a value judgment rather than any glaring academic failings Picknick99 (talk) 13:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

If you haven't finished a draft, then please do not submit it for review. As I specified, there weren't extensive, reliable independent sources to establish the subject's notability. Please familiarise yourself with WP:GNG before accusing me of making a value judgement. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:03, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Need your advice

Hello FoCuSandLeArN,

You have initially checked my page and gave me a lot of constructive criticism. Here it is denied again and I was wandering whether you could look at it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tim_Dahl

I feel, like my last reviewer was slightly condescending, compering my entry to Facebook. This makes me feel that the objectivity among the Wikipedia editors can vary. I have deleted all the loose links, and used ones that I could attach to the text.

Could you have a look at it and give me your feedback.

Thanks in advance 2991media — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2991media (talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there. I don't think mabdul was condescending. It is true that editors often have different viewpoints, however there are certain policies and such that are almost unanimously adhered to. Anyway, your references are not independent, extensive nor reliable, which makes your article deficient in terms of notability. It may be that the subject has not yet reached the threshold of notability, so to speak. If that's the case, then maybe consider writing an article about him at some later stage. If after reading the notability guideline you still believe he merits an article, then please provide those references I was mentioning before. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

(2991media (talk) 17:06, 15 April 2013 (UTC)) Ok, I see. I will read more about notability. Is any of my references in your opinion notable ? FOr example a quote from the guardian magazine (nr 1) or nr 12 and 13 (village voice, tiny mixtapes) Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2991media (talk • contribs) 17:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps the Guardian would be the only "sort of" reliable reference, although it is a review, and as such can't establish much about the musician. That's why notability implies "extensive" references. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:07, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

2991media (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2013 (UTC) I see, so needs to be " a self standing article". The fact that he played with so and so and a link that proves that is still not enough to establish notability. In this case I would need to find better articles. Also famous painter did a cover kind of stuff-worth mentioning? Or to establish that Tim Dahl played with for example MAry Halverson (http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/article.php?id=40703&page=1#.UWw02IJAvsk) - is this notable or not worth putting in?

Thanks

Exactly, the subject is expected to receive extensive coverage. As you said, a self-standing article is favoured. All the other stuff you mentioned might be worth adding to an article, but as side-info, given it doesn't enhance the subject's coverage, it is separate. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

2991media (talk) 17:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)It is best to wait for better articles to come out and then get back to wiki page. THANKS for your time!

No worries, you might also find this relevant: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Page Denial

Hi,

Thank you for reviewing my submission. I am disappointed to hear that it has been denied, but eager to review the comments and fix it up. Unfortunatley, I am having trouble accessing the article. When I go to the link that was listed, I cannot find it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sophiefire13

Could you please help me find where I can see the article as well as your comments?

Thank you! Sophiefire13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophiefire13 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that; it appears that it has been deleted already. You can find the latest version here. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Wilhelmina Will's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 10:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Andy Hall

I was wondering why my article about human rights defender Andy Hall was not published in Wikipedia. I put a lot of effort to formulate the article suited especially for Wikipedia and the article should not be in contradiction with the site rules. Hall is a significant human rights defender and a migrant specialist who is currently procecuted in Thailand because of his righteous work. The case is gaining more and more international publicity and various global human rights organisations and trade union have expressed their support for Hall. This is why I think Hall is a person who is deserves to be noted in Wikipedia.

Please let me know how I could improve my article in a way that it would get published in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.194.217 (talk) 14:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The article is written like a CV. You would need to write the article as prose, using sources that are independent of the subject, extensive and reliable, in order to establish the subject's notability. Please read WP:GNG in order to understand what counts as notable in Wikipedia, which might not be the same as your own criteria. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

• Op-ed: How do we fix RfA inactivity?

• WikiProject report: Unity in Diversity: South Africa

• News and notes: Another admin reform attempt flops

• Featured content: The featured process swings into high gear

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 21:10, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Dr. Dinosaur page

First, thanks for reviewing my submission. I'm glad you took the time to read it and fix up the code.

What resources for this are considered reliable? I compared with other comic characters' pages, where the resources are almost entirely citations of the comics themselves, which I did. My other citation I think should work, since self-published material is usually considered authoritative with regards to the person publishing - the post from the author of Atomic Robo on what he intends to write for Atomic Robo seems like it should pass that test. Is it just that I need more citations?

Thanks for helping, and I hope that my article can be added to Wikipedia's store of knowledge.

Mathesonr5 (talk) 01:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)mathesonr5

Hello there! Well, characters are a tricky one, to tell you the truth. Although there are several articles on Wikipedia that rely on self-published or primary sources for references, that doesn't mean it's what the encyclopaedia intends. I noticed you referenced the comic book for plot details, which is ok, however the notability of Dr Dinosaur itself needs to be established, and that's done through reliable, extensive and independent sources (not any citations, please beware). You have to understand that Wikipedia is not a character depository; it's an encyclopaedia, and as such it needs articles that treat the subject in more than one level, while yours is pretty much linear (just a character description, plot-wise). Hope this helps, regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

An Barnstar for You!

	The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
	Congratulations, FoCuSandLeArN! You're receiving the Silver Wiki Award because you reviewed 1310 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Sclerodermatineae confusion and who has priority?

My page for the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sclerodermatineae was denied for the reason that "it already exists" and I'm confused by this. At the time that I created this page, there wasn't one for the Sclerodermatineae. If I review the order of events as they appear on Wikipedia, the current Sclerodermatineae page states that it was created yesterday (April 16th), whereas mine was created on April 2nd, and revised and submitted by April 4th. I've simply been waiting for it to be reviewed and published. Finding out it's been rejected exactly one day after the new article was created by Sasata, especially after waiting close to two weeks for mine to be reviewed, seems rather coincidental. I admit that I'm new to Wikipedia and am still figuring things out. I was doing this as an assignment and I wondering why my page gets dumped in favor of a page that was apparently done after mine. I know the user Sasata, who created the current Sclerodermatineae page, has done a lot of good work with this group, and has a lot of experience, so is it possible that more experienced and senior contributors get preference over newer ones?

Hello there. I am sorry about what you told me, it certainly isn't a preference issue. There are many editors involved in reviewing AfC submissions, and it just happened that your article had a longer wait than Sasata's one. There is a very high backlog, and it isn't necessarily reviewed in a first come, first serve basis. Unfortunately, there is no established priority when it comes to the queue. I hope this explains the issue a bit better for you, and doesn't keep you from making further contributions to Wikipedia. Let me know if you need any help. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

This makes a certain amount of sense. I'm fine with Sasata's article as it was more polished than mine. But this begs the question that I've been wondering about for some time. Seeing as things aren't done on a "first come, first serve basis", what are the different routes one can take to contributing an article? For example, rather than submitting to a pool of general articles could I have submitted my page to a pool based on fungal taxonomy where it would be quickly recognized by that community? Should I have tagged my page as "fungus taxonomy" related so it would have stood out to you and others in the Wikipedia fungi community? If so, this would definitely explain to me why Sasata's was published within 24 hours, and why mine took two weeks (> two weeks if Sasata hadn't published?). I can't say that I'm not a little discouraged by these events. Knowing a better way to work the Wiki system would definitely help in my consideration of future contributions. Thanks Enderwilson (talk) 14:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC).

Well, these are not easy questions to answer. Articles for creation don't go through the same process as newly created articles submitted to mainspace. The latter go through page curation, while the former are reviewed by AfC people. What I would suggest you do if you want an article created more quickly and not have to wait in queue is perhaps post a message on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi talk page, and I'm sure the Fungi people (or any other Project for that matter) will be able to assist you with new articles related to that project. Perhaps you could direct them to any future article drafts on your personal sandbox and let them give you feedback and help you reate the article according to their specific guidelines. Once you get the hang of it, you can just create new articles and tag them with the Project's templates and categories so that the appropriate editors know about the new article and can improve it. Another path you could take is to post a message on the AfC talk page stating your urgency. Taking your previous submission as evidence, I'm confident your article would be reviewed pretty swiftly. Hope this helps, and let me know if you have any other questions. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:57, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Zac Poonen

Thank you for alerting me to your declination of my AfC. You set a very good example to the previous reviewer.

Now, could you explain to me your rationale that there were no reliable sources there? There are twelve sources listed - granted, not all of them are independent, but it would seem that surely one of them has to be reliable?--Launchballer 14:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there. Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Notability. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:22, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Justice Action

Hi, I've read through your comment and responded to the best of my ability in the article page in question. As the contributor of this article it is of no doubt to me, being familiar with this organisation and a resident of the city and country where it is based that it is a notable organisation. I have included dozens of references made to the organisation in mainstream press in Australia. In each of these articles Justice Action is positioned as an expert opinion for comment on a matter of criminal justice or rights at hand. The organisation has also had national-profile campaigns covered in press, is a member of dozens of state and national peakbodies across social services, mental health and criminal justice, being invited to present at national and international conferences on criminal justice and mental health policy, quoted in Parliament and so forth. If necessary I can post even more references, as I have by no means exhausted the independent coverage of the organisation. Please let me know your opinion on this material

Thank you and kind regards,

-D — Preceding unsigned comment added byOceanlovejustice (talk • contribs) 02:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! Thank you for reading my comments and taking the appropriate action. After having a look at your article once more, I have the following points to make: some sections currently in bullet points need to be expanded in prose; no external links are to be included in-line, only citations (please see WP:MOS and WP:REFB); references you added to your talk page are better, please add them to the submission with proper citations (there is a nice tool in the wizard that helps you with those). Good luck! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Purolator USA article declined

Hello -- Thank you for getting back to me regarding the article I submitted for Purolator International. You declined my article, saying that it already exists as "Purolator USA." The company has changed its name and Purolator USA is now Purolator International. Can you help me make that change?

Thanks so much! PrincessKimmie (talk) 11:43, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll place a redirect for now, but if you want the entire page moved to the new name, you'll have to place a request here. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Tempests - Legendary Rock Band

Hello, I have been trying to get this page accepted for years. This is a brand new attempt. In the remarks it was stated there were not reliable sources, when in fact there are. Some newspapers and magazines are out of print, but I have references and dates I can post. But I didn't use them because of the fact that they are out of print. Also, I don't understand the other statement about no notability. This musical group has had more notability than many other musical groups that have been accepted. Maybe I'm not spelling it out correctly. I don't know what to do to correct this. I have researched other musical group sites and many don't meet any requirements or offer 1 single reference, but they seem to be accepted. I feel almost like I am being discriminated against for some reason, as I have made numerous attempts and received help from some of the wiki volunteers, but the page keeps getting declined. What do I need to do to have this article be accepted. I have read and read and read and cannot find why. Microv (talk) 03:37, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Newspapers are a reliable source, no matter if they're still in print, so please add those citations if you can. Reliable sources and notability are defined by Wikipedia here: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, Wikipedia:Notability. Please read those policies, as most of your references were inadequate in some aspect. It is likely that all of those musical group articles you mention didn't go through the AfC process, and that's why they're lacking in that regard, and that's why it's better to be having this conversation than to have articles than don't meet the requirements out there. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank You So Much for your help. I've located the artricles. I have more, but not just sure how much is really needed before it is overkill. I'll re-submit and go from there. Thank You again. Microv (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

José Antonio “Toñito” Rivera

Hi I have added additional sources, 10 out of the 11 are from the mayor newspapers in Honduras, La Prensa, El Tiempo and La Tribuna. Please follow the links. You also comment he is not mayor yet. This is true but he is a "Regidor" which is similar to serving in a City Council in a large American City. In Honduras being part of the City Council in its Industrial Capital San Pedro Sula is a big deal. Again I would ask you to follow the 10 newspaper links that were provided. You will see the extensive coverage Tonito has and is receiving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Technion777 (talk • contribs) 03:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, it will be reviewed again. You have to understand that according to WP:GNG, the subject needs to have an enduring exposure and relevance in real life in order to stand the test of time. Because this is an encyclopaedia, it can't include all the people in the world, especially when the article is created in a very convenient time (he's facing an election). Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

In the States he would parallel someone like Christine Quinn who is in the New York City Council and running for mayor of that city. I would argue even is she lost she has impacted that city and warrants a Wikipedia page (which she has). Similarly José Antonio “Toñito” Rivera is important figure to the politics of San Pedro Sula. If you Google him you will countless references in the major Honduras News Papers because of his role not only as Candidate but as Regidor (City Council member). I know the articles are all in Spanish but I think you should be able to get the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Technion777 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not up to me to judge who's notable or not. That's what the WP:GNG are for. If he has extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources then properly cite them and great! I am fluent in Spanish, by the way. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Resubmission of American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists.

I have edited the article entitled American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists, but have not determined how to have it reviewed by your editors. It was initially rejected because of a lack of references which I have now inserted. FeedBill — Preceding unsigned comment added by FeedBill (talk • contribs) 02:05, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

If you clicked on the resubmit button, then it's queued for review. It's a matter of time. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:07, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I did not find a resubmit button. FeedBill — Preceding unsigned comment added by FeedBill (talk • contribs) 02:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Hm, I thought there was. You'll have to manually submit the article for review again then. From the article I see on the queue, it's far from ready. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

• In the media: Wikipedia inaccurate, says Florence; New Wikipedia app for breaking news

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Editor Retention

• News and notes: Milan conference a mixed bag

• Featured content: Batfish in the Red Sea

• Arbitration report: Sexology case nears closure after stalling over topic ban

• Technology report: A flurry of deployments

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 13:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Simple Gogoi's Article

Hi I have added all the reliable sources links for Simple Gogoi's article on external links i.e. the links which is uploaded by newspapers official sites. They have also printed the news which are on links still why it is declined??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.8.248.34 (talk) 18:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I cannot find the article you're writing about, could you give me a link? Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I've found it. The sources presented are not reliable and extensive. Please read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I just now added all the links i.e. Newspaper official site links to news which is also printed on hardcopy, the TV Interview she had done, Music Videos which she directed on reference section. There are more music videos but its not up on internet due to record label or production companies dont allow. Please Kindly check if you can proceed. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.8.248.34 (talk) 20:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Youtube is not considered a reliable source. The links which I provided before are very useful, and I recommend you read them. The subject needs to fulfil Wikipedia:GNGand for that you will need extensive coverage in relevant and verifiable media. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok youtube is not reliable, then what about the newspapers links dat i gave on reference section? datz too not reliable??? i added there because you replied on(The Tempests - Legendary Rock Band) post above...i can upload the scan copies too...to make people belief...please Sentinel, Assam Tribune, Meghlaya Times are reliable source for us and our locality...if you have network in Guwahati please ask them... regards... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.226.254.67 (talk) 16:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, newspaper articles are generally reliable. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

and the newspaper links...??? plz provide me a link where i can upload d scan copies of hardcopy of newspapers...here m ignoring/ not talking abt the youtube links and yes for info lots of articles on wiki have only one newspaper or media link and others all are youtube link...warm regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.226.254.67 (talk) 19:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

There's no need to send a scanned copy, just please properly cite the newspapers, including date, name of the author and page, if available. Articles should have several references whenever possible, but I am aware some articles unfortunately do not fulfil that notion. Youtube is definitely not a reliable source. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Please check the article again. I have properly cite the newspapers links. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.226.254.67 (talk) 08:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Tibet

Hello, Thank you very much reviewing the article Tibet : Third Pole. You have declined my article and commented that it is copied from many sources like Tibet.net. Yes, it is copied because the articles in www.tibet.net, environmental publications are indeed published by me and my colleagues, Department of environment and development, Central Tibetan Administration. I also did included a http//www.tibet.net/publications in the reference section today. Can you please help me sort this thing out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diiredd (talk • contribs) 10:49, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Diiredd! I would suggest looking at what to do if you want to donate copy written material, which will have all of the rules for doing so there. Let us know if this helps your issue. -Fumitol|talk|cont 16:21, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Fumitol's talk page.
Message added 16:43, 25 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just a 'You're welcome' message :) Fumitol|talk|cont 16:43, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

To create an article

hi, I am Varun Iyer from India, I am studying B.SC. in hospitality and hotel administration, we are given many assignment to do and most of the time i seek Wikipedia for help and usually I could find out what i was looking for but this time it was different i have do an assignement regarding front office, in hotel but couldn't find it, could you please try to create an article regarding front office in hotel.

Thanking You Yours Truly VARUN IYER♠ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.231.216.145 (talk) 19:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! The place to do so is: Wikipedia:Requested articles. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I think maybe Varun was looking for this article: Lobby (room). I left a message. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Anne. Hopefully Varun will find that useful. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

PowerSC article

Hi there:

Since the earlier two comments I have added 8 specific references and removed advertising type of language... not sure what else I should do to gain approval... please advise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/IBM_PowerSC_Technology — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimhoskins (talk • contribs) 14:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

All the references you added were IBM-dependent. If you're unable to provide independent, reliable and extensive sources, I'm afraid the article will not be up to standards. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:MEDRS

Please see for referencing requirements. Cheers Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 17:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Are you referring to the osteoarthritis gene therapy article? It definitely doesn't fall under medical advice. It's an encyclopaedic article about gene therapy, deserves the same coverage as all other treatments and it would certainly be improved upon if you gave it time (and by this I also mean the addition of terciary sources). I apologise if my inclusionist ideals exude! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Or did you mean the little subsection in the osteoarthritis article? In that case, it's easy to fix. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

MK Kaw page review

Hi

I had submitted an article on MK KAw which you rejected because of lack of reliable sources to back the information.I have added new sources. This is the link for the new page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Maharaj_Krishen_Kaw

Kindly check if it is alright now.

Thank you 117.200.70.130 (talk) 19:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Manik

James Wagner

Hello-- I've added new material and sources. Let me know if you see anything that requires attention. Thank you for your help. McIntosh Chaney (talk) 22:26, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Liechtenstein Institute

Hi!

The German Version of the Article Liechtenstein Institute is already online. It is hard to find independent sources, especially in english, because the official languages of the principality of liechtenstein are Rhäteroromanisch and German.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liechtenstein-Institut

Can you give me a hint what I can do?

Best Regards from Liechtenstein,

MkM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markus Mayer 1983 (talk • contribs) 07:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! Thank you for your question. Don't worry, references in any language are accepted, as long as they're independent, reliable and extensive. In this case, any newspaper, government office, terciary education regulatory body, etc. would help improve the article's references. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Elizabeth Eslami

Hi, Thank you for the message re: Elizabeth Eslami. I've added multiple outside sources relating to her life and work. I've also brought the formatting in line with the pages of other contemporary writers. I've re-submitted the page for approval. Thanks & best wishes - Derheger (talk) 16:09, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Article about Sarah Rodgers, composer

Dear Focus and Learn, An article about me was submitted some months ago and I learned that it had been declined. I had some new references added earlier this month which I hope will provide sufficient verification of authenticity. I do have some noteworthy connections such as being descended from the family of the English composer Henry Purcell and also being recent Chairman of the UK's biggest organisation representing composers and songwriters (BASCA - British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors)and I also founded the British Composer Awards which take place every year, partnered by BBC Radio 3. Apart from that, my music is published, recorded, performed and broadcast. Subjects of articles are probably not supposed to promote themselves, so if you need support from other quarters, do please let me know. Thanks for you time and attention. Best wishes, Sarah Rodgers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.160.180 (talk) 08:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I strongly advise you to read WP:AB. Also, references need to be independent of the subject, reliable and extensive. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your advice. SR — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.160.180 (talk) 18:14, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Anatol Kagan House at Mount Eliza

Hello and thanks for your comment. With regard to other published work regarding the notability of this particular house, there is little published regarding the work of emigre architects such as Kagan working within Australia at that time. However a work is currently under compilation by Simon Reeves, an architectural historian, and member of the academic faculty at School of Architecture, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. The house at Mount Eliza is to be referenced in that publication, however it is not yet completed, let alone submitted for publication, some of the material regarding the work of Anatol Kagan is referenced under the first listed source, prepared by Simon Reeves. The material held by the RMIT Design Archives, is a collection sourced from a family bequest, and considered significant enough to include in the publications from that body. Whilst it is fair to say this house did not achieve heritage listing while it still existed, that was largely due to modifications carried out many years following its initial construction, not due to the quality of the original architectural work, presented in line drawings as part of the article. In conclusion there are two somewhat independent sources, who are reporting posthumously on a architect with a limited international reputation and practice. The specific selection of this house has been made to best represent the remaining well documented and attributed works of this architect, with a particular reference to its coastal location. Any further comments would be welcomed. Regards Tomjarch (talk) 14:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback from Technical 13

Hello, FoCuSandLeArN. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orphanage.
Message added 17:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Technical 13 (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)