User talk:FoCuSandLeArN/Archive 12

Leedarson Lighting
Hey, I saw your comments on my article Leedarson Lighting and I was really dissapointed. I admit that the article is clumsy and sounds a bit like commercial. I will fix that asap. But why dont you accept my sources? The company is in the lighting sphere and the main sources are leading news website for the lighting industry. In addition what does it mean independend sources? To write this article I was using the wikipedia Osram page. All the references from that article are coming from its corporate website. How is that independend?

Regards

TsvetomirN (talk) 06:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The links provided are quite clear regarding what sources are accepted. Anyhow, a good rule of thumb is using neutral reputable sources, such as newspapers, magazines, books, etc. Lighting industry sources not only might not be independent, but they do not help establish the organisation's notability because policy requires the subject to be generally notable, not just in the lighting business sphere. Osram might not have been accepted through the AfC process, and in any case, the argument that something already exists won't be productive. Please be aware of our conflicts of interest policy. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive
 Hello, FoCuSandLeArN:

WikiProject AFC is holding a two month long Backlog Elimination Drive!

The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from December 1st, 2013 – January 31st, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. EdwardsBot (talk) 09:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) at 09:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Believe512 - Article for Creation/Diego Arnary
I received your message regarding my article. I am new to Wikipedia (as you have probably guessed!!) and want to know if you could give me some guidance as to what i would need to make this a notable article. There are several published magazines that I have cited, in addition to a bio that was published in a news magazine. I also did not mention in the article that he has developed quite a fan base both on Facebook (19,000 followers) and Instagram (7,000 followers). He also has a newly launched website that i referenced. Any help you could provide would be greatly appreciated!!!! Thank you for your time!!! Believe512 (talk) 02:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * All references provided are either not independent, unreliable or only passing mentions. It looks as if the subject will not fulfil notability guidelines as he is young and hasn't had significant roles in widely discussed productions. Are you in any way associated with the person? Also, followers are no indication of notability and are in no way accepted as per the notability guidelines. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Just to clarify, what is considered a reliable reference? I understand that some of the references are just mentions, but GQ is a national magazine and the Biography was listed in a Magazine that is published in his home country of Columbia. The videos from YouTube mention his name in the credits. The reason I mentioned the followers is that I saw something in the notability guidelines about someone developing a cult following. Not sure if I understood that correctly. I have been making edits to articles and I see some that have less references and in my opinion did not meet the guidelines, but yet they were published. I just want to know what else i could provide to make this right. I thank you for your time and guidance... Believe512 (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Sulfurimonas autotrophica (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Natalia Ivanova, David Sims and Matt Nolan


 * Halanaerobacter chitinovorans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Anaerobic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

New submisstion of reviewed and edited text
Andrea at Kautex (talk) 13:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC) Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

Thank you for your message from last week. This was my first wikipedia article and I understand what you mean by make the text notable and use external, secondary and third party references.

I have added and changed quite a lot, so I hope and think it fits to your requirements. Could you please tell me how I can now submit the entry again to reach its publication?

Would be great, if you could further assist me.

Thanks and kind regards, Andrea at Kautex
 * Click on the resubmit button. But please make sure you've made the appropriate changes. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 11:37, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

changes article
I am not sure whether my article on 'Nikolai B. Kopnin' still needs to undergo editing/reviewing or whether changes made have already been viewed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hkopnina&oldid=prev&diff=584911169

Kind regards, Helen Kopnina — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkopnina (talk • contribs) 16:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is currently on queue. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Update regarding AfC backlog drive auto-updating with AFCBuddy
Manual updating of your Backlog Elimination Drive page is no longer necessary. The AFCBuddy bot is now automatically updating AfC reviews that are performed when using the Helper script. The bot-generated pages are located at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/December 2013 - January 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive/[Your user name].

Importantly, please note that any re-reviews you may have performed will need to be manually copied and pasted to the bot-generated pages. Thank you for participating in the drive. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Seabegs
Hi,

It takes a lot of effort to be certain on the many claims on that page. On the face of it looks genuine though there are many uncited claims. However that brings us to the rather bigger question of if the article itself merits inclusion. It's about a feudal barony not a peerage and there are many of the former utterly inconsequential in nature. Without a very good reason they don't as a class (much like feudal lordships or manorial titles in England) meet notability imo - particularly around 'Significant coverage' and independent sources. Quickly looking at some of the citations they speak to a small area of the article or are not directly relevant at all.(debretts) Looking at the creator of the article the name 'Ptahbesobek' googles to 'George Burden' who seems to be the partial subject of the article. If correct that raises a whole bucketload of red flags. I'm not at all comfortable about people creating/editing their 'own' articles. Garlicplanting (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for getting back to me. I will direct the author to this discussion. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

FYI
Articles for deletion/HSE Faculty of Sociology. Drmies (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Richard_Gordon:_Occultist
Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Richard_Gordon:_Occultist Articles_for_creation/Richard_Gordon:_Occultist

I'm not sure I understand here at all. ALL of the sources I cited are independent of Mr. Gordon whose articles and theories have been widely published and appreciated. Greenmantle magazine was started 20 years ago by myself and Paul Pearson, the reference to the website is to one of the magazines that and Mr. Gordon is published in. He did not start writing for us until about 2.5 years ago and has been a regular staff writer since. Enlightening Times is an e-magazing owned by Jade Melany ashcroft, again you have to submit articles here his latest article from them abot energetic universalism is just about to be published in their latest magazine. Disinformation is an independent site you have to jump through loops to get anything published on and Truthwatching just adopted the article about the universal energy symbol which of it's own momentum is now number 1. in Google images searches for 'the universal energy symbol' and even on this note alone i would have thought that notability would have been established. Bizarre Magazine is a huge independent alternative living magazine,(Hardcopy) and sabotage times again another huge independent site you have to submit work to to be published. All of these are independent of Mr. Gordon.

Please can you help me out here in something that isn't wiki speak cos obviously i'm just not getting it! :) Thanks. RowanWulfe


 * A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.
 * Notability criteria may need to be met for a person to be included in a stand alone list article.
 * All biographies of living individuals must comply with the policy on biographies of living individuals, being supported by sufficient reliable independent sources to ensure neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RowanWulfe (talk • contribs) 09:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * References provided were not independent nor reliable. Please read the aforementioned guidelines, as they are very clear about this. His own publications are not assertions of notability. Notability usually, but not always, extends further than the subject's field of work. He might be a "famous" occultist, but he might not be notable, which is why I declined your submission. The submission's language was also unencyclopaedic. I suggest you read WP:COI very closely too. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions?
Thank you for all of your hard work! I'm wondering how I can improve the KioWare page to get it approved. My concern is that there is a competitor that has an active Wiki page that looks extremely similar (and has fewer academic/industry/external sources). I am happy to continue to edit but don't know what else I can add (external sources of value, including research documentation and well respected industry reports/information). Thanks much, I appreciate the assist. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KioWare--Lboniello (talk) 16:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That argument is futile, given Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. That article might well be of a non-notable suject, and will probably end up being nominated for deletion in due course. If KioWare does not fulfil Wikipedia's notability guidelines which I conveniently linked for your perusal, then it won't merit inclusion to the encyclopaedia. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thanks again for your efforts--Lboniello (talk) 18:41, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've taken the similar article to Articles for Deletion (AFD). Thanks, Mat  ty  .  007  18:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Marshall Goodman Article
Greetings. I am inquiring about sources for the Marshall Goodman article(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marshallartsmusic/sandbox) that was declined on 12/2/13. Would the following sources meet your requirements under "criteria for musicians and ensembles"?

http://www.allmusic.com/artist/long-beach-dub-all-stars-mn0000227268/awards

http://www.thepier.org/live-l-b-d-a-beyond-i-sight-1-25-13/

Sublime - Stories ,Tales, Lies and Exaggerations (1998) DVD

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1454551/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

http://www.allmusic.com/artist/long-beach-dub-all-stars-mn0000227268/biography

http://www.thepier.org/live-long-beach-dub-all-stars-2-11-12/

If not, would you refer a couple of music-based web sources that would meet your requirement?

I have found that the listed links, and media source, have been used by other musicians--including other Long Beach Dub Allstars' band members--as sources for their Wikipedia articles.

Thanks in advance for your feedback. Marshallartsmusic (talk) 01:15, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshallartsmusic (talk • contribs) 23:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid they would not. You should be aiming for review articles from newspapers, magazines, etc. Stuff that has an editorial process and is rigurously checked before publishing. As for your other "argument": Other_stuff_exists. It also looks from your username that you might have a WP:COI. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 11:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Danica Dillon
Are you referring to general notability or the guideline specifically for pornographic actors? They differ and she meets the guidelines for porn BIO. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 23:25, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Both, but WP:GNG is above all else in my opinion. Besides winning "Miss Congeniality", has she "made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre, such as beginning a trend in pornography; starred in an iconic, groundbreaking or blockbuster feature; or is a member of an industry Hall of Fame"? The simple answer is no. I also suggest you read the proper dispute resolution discussion concerning the inadequate porn notability guideline. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've read the discussion, but its just that, a discussion. Nothing was resolved and no policy or new guidelines came out of it. Plenty of editors point to problems with how the porn article are handled (including the fact that there a significant contingent of anti-porn editors) and say that we need flexibility in the matter. Did I miss something? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 04:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Nothing's come out of it YET. Flexibility's not a conclusion I took from reading the discussion but rather that there's a dichotomy in thought. I'm not sweating it for this woman. Her article will probably either end up on AfD or eternally forgotten. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 11:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, the sad fate of many WP articles... :) Thank you for your time and input. Best regards and Happy Holidays, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Botryosphaeria iberica


A tag has been placed on Botryosphaeria iberica requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cybertruffle.org.uk/cyberliber/59350/0097/002/0524.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sasata (talk) 19:28, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Botryosphaeria sarmentorum


A tag has been placed on Botryosphaeria sarmentorum requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cybertruffle.org.uk/cyberliber/59350/0097/002/0522.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sasata (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bayrampaşaspor
In answer to your question, yes, this is the third tier of Turkish football, plays in the TFF 2nd League. It is the only team in this league not to have an article about them, and I made the article because I tried to look them up on Wikipedia after reading an article about them on a fanzine website about supporter culture, and they weren't on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcmaxx (talk • contribs) 19:42, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Philippe Blanchard (actor)
Hi,

Thank you for reviewing the "Philippe Blanchard (actor)" page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Philippe_Blanchard_(actor)

If some of the sources might be "bloggish", I was under the impression that at least three (3) of those I used for the article were independent and reliable, specifically:

1 - Government of Quebec / New York delegation: (15)

http://www.mrifce.gouv.qc.ca/portail/_scripts/ViewEvent.asp?EventID=13989&lang=en&strIdSite=ny

2 - CBC - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation / Radio-Canada broadcast: (1)

http://www.philippe.ac/documents/Radio-Canada_broadcast.pdf

...together with the actual recording:

http://philippe.ac/documents/Radio-Canada.mp3

(Would it help if I asked the CBC for an original link to their archives?)

3 - OffOffOnline Magazine: (4) http://offoffonline.com/?p=2449

Thank you for these additional details!

Ungrandslack (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid they're certainly not independent nor reliable. Please read the policies I linked before. You might also want to read WP:COI. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

AFC: "Critical Power"
Even though my AFC was not yet accepted, thanks for your comments, I will think about them careful and use your comments to improve this article. Thanks again :) 1capybara (talk) 06:32, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Declined WM Software article
You stated "No extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources, therefore non-notable." There is quite a bit of extensive coverage, especially on VMware's site, Citrix's site, and Citrix's Blog. Those are both HUGE worldwide companies, so they are independent from WM Software and I can assure you those are reliable companies/sources. Not to mention WM Software is in the Microsoft Store and the Windows Catalog. Looking for examples, there are other software companies on Wikipedia with far less sources, and those with sources not even as big as VMware or Citrix. Being on Citrix's Blog is very reliable and gets huge coverage with all of the Citrix Twitter followers. If you're looking for something specific, please let me know. Thanks! -Stephanie Ladygaron083 (talk) 15:48, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Please go over the linked policies and understand that you haven't provided appropriate referencing to attest for notability. You might also find WP:COI helpful. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Bobby Manriquez
Thank you for your help reviewing this page. With the corrections you made is it possible to publish the page, or will it still be rejected? BarbieHarris21 (talk) 21:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It needs extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources.

Declined Green Lumber Fallacy
Thank you for taking the time to review. The article was declined b/c of "No extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources...". I've gone ahead and added a number of external links to the article. In addition, I added a reference to the coverage from an article from Yahoo finance. I hope this suffices. If not, I will add the content to the Antifragile page as a section within it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vergilden (talk • contribs) 15:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Radio Amateurs of Northern Vermont
I recently submitted a piece for Radio Amateurs of Northern Vermont which was rejected due to notability. As I'm new to this, I built the submission similar to other similar organizations, namely, "South Jersey Radio Association" and "Delaware Valley Radio Association". Radio Amateurs of Northern Vermont is very similar to these two organizations. In fact, it is larger and more active (and likely more notable) than the Delaware Valley organization, based on the information I found from searching.

In looking at their Wikipedia writeup, the Delaware Valley writeup has only 1 reference, which is a similar one to what I put in. The South Jersey group has a few references, but all point to the fact that the club was started around 1916. Is there a different standard for submissions today then when these articles were written?

I have found a number of references for Radio Amateurs of Northern Vermont, which might fill the needs of notability. These are all from newspapers and television video, reporting on the unique activities this organization has been involved in over the years. These sources are likely independent as they are indeed news sources (which we hope are unbiased). The reports are more than a passing reference, and some of the video contains several minutes of details. My first question is, are these types of references the ones which will meet the needs of notability? If not, what I am looking for?

If the references are useful, my second question is how to use them. Most of the information contained in the article is composed of statements of operating fact for the organization. The one claim (regarding the size of the organization) has a reference back the the American Radio Relay League who keeps data on such things. Or would I simply list this links at the bottom of the article with no tie-in to the writeup above?

Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated! w1sj W1sj (talk) 06:45, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello there! Thanks for getting back to me. Those articles were probably not submitted through AfC (see WP:EXISTS). At AfC we strive to accept articles that fulfil certain criteria, and appropriate referencing is the most important one. Those references sound good. In-line referencing is preferred. If you need a quick guide to help you place references see WP:REFB. Click on resubmit once you're finished and the article will be rereviewed. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 11:28, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles_for_creation/Fine_Sounds_Group
Hi! I see that the Article for creation Fine Sounds Group has not been accepted...one of the reasons is that there are not enough sources...arent't the external links I added enough? Thank you!--PrimaP (talk) 23:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * They don't appear to fulfil the criteria specified. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Hafid Darbaki
Hello FoCuSandLeArn,

I am working on the article for creation, "Hafid Darbaki."

I am curious to see what in particular needs to be changed. It is in my understanding that the sources need to be more reliable and independent, so I would like to know which sources must be changed in order for the submission to be accepted.

Please respond ASAP,

Thanks

---Hafid Darbaki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hafiddarbaki (talk • contribs) 22:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You should look at WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:FPL. He doesn't appear to be generally notable, thus would need to fulfil those aforementioned notability guidelines to be included in Wikipedia, which he does not either. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:09, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Online Sports Booking - OnlineSportsBooking.in
Hi FoCuSandLeArN, I had recently worked on the content "Online Sports Booking - OnlineSportsBooking.in", kindly provide me further information regarding what made the article looked like an advertisement. It would really be handy to me if I knew where I went wrong. I once agin request to to respond to me asap.

Thanks Surya — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.175.7.41 (talk) 09:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

User space "article" from 2005

 * 

The above topic is dealt with in the encyclopedia here: Candidiasis

In this context, the user page could be viewed as promotional.

From working occasionally in AfD for medical content, I can immediately tell from the referencing that this article would not stand a "snowflake's chance in hell" as an encyclopedia article.

I seem to be low on good faith this morning, but I feel this user page is misuse.

Not sure of the guidelines here. Thoughts? Lesion ( talk ) 11:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I had a look at it. It's unambiguous copyvio from http://www.doctorfungus.org/mycoses/human/candida/Chronic_Candidiasis.php and I've blanked the page. The editor may have intended to use it as notes for adding to an article not realizing that copvio cannot appear anywhere on WP. I haven't bothered to leave them a note since they haven't edited anywhere on WP since 2005. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Happy with that outcome, so no-one mistakes this for an actual encyclopedia entry. TY, Lesion  ( talk ) 17:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

iMiller Public Relations LLC "re" submission
New Wiki user here.... I think I got my iMiller PR article into proper notability. I reviewed the notability rules for companies and made a number of changes. I also looked at a couple of other corporate wikis, Equinix -for example, and made adjustments. I think I have enough third party, independent sources now for what I placed into the resubmitted article. I will continue to look up some more. Thanks, Peter Saber Tiger (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, however keep in mind that other corporate articles are not guidelines. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Salu's left-hand rule
Please see my comment at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Salu's left-hand rule for Faraday's law of induction. You cannot decline articles because you personally don't think they merit an entry. Submissions should be objectively judged against the criterion of notabiity, regardless of our personal opinion of the subject. Believe me, there is a huge swathe of articles I would delete if I had a free hand.  Spinning Spark  10:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources, therefore non-notable. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with that assesment, but that wasn't your decline reason. Your decline reason was "I don't think a mnemonic rule merits an encyclopaedic article".  Fleming's rules are undoubtedly notable, have articles, and are easily cited.  Thus your assertion is thus falsified by contradiction.  Spinning  Spark  14:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Fleming's, but not Salu's. In any case, I agree with your comments. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Declined Article Salton Sea (Novel)
I'm not sure why the subject article was declined on the basis of in adequate notability. The authors of the subject novel have stated on their own facebook page that they will be submitting this book to their publisher. I would suggest that there is no more credible of a source of information about this than the author`s themselves. I would hope that you reconsider this article or suggest a way to make it admissable.

Regards,

131.137.245.207 (talk) 15:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC) Norm
 * Please read the linked policies. You might also find WP:COI relevant. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

The Wholeness Assessment Model - Review
Many thanks for you guidance. Actually that's exactly what I need, a hand with me and a second eye for evaluating the content in elaboration.

Once again thanks for the guidance :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WesdomSeeker (talk • contribs) 09:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries. Just make sure you use concise language and provide appropriate references that attest to its notability. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Georges Hobeika
Hello,

I would like to ask you for advice, regarding my article on Georges Hobeika which has been declined. As I am a new member with very little experience, I really would like to know what you think I should change or add in order for the article to meet the requirements and be published.

Many thanks, Gregor.P (talk) 00:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello there! Thank you for getting back to me. Try to keep the article's language as neutral as possible. Also, make sure you provide in-line citations with references that attest to the subject's notability. For help on how to make these, see WP:REFB. Make sure these are independent and reliable. If the subject is non-notable at the moment, you might want to resubmit at a later date. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation: Horror Hotel (TV Show) (January 25)
Hi, FoCuSandLeArn. Since my article was not approved, could you provide some insight as to how I can update it correctly for approval? What sort of links are you looking for as far as notability is concerned? Thank you. -TheRealLadyDragon 24.123.43.130 (talk) 04:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks like it was deleted because it violated Wikipedia's policies. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 10:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

academic scholar as notable
Hello FoCuSandLeArn,

I am somewhat confused by your comments about notably as they relate to academic scholars and I am hoping you can help me. I work at the University of California, Santa Barbara, one of the premier research universities in the country, and have a long career in higher ed. My team and colleagues often submit wiki pages for faculty and they are notable due their academic contributions. Dr. Britt Andreatta is no exception and her work is known by universities across the US and Canada.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Britt_Andreatta&action=edit

We modeled her entry after other academic scholar pages. Most scholars don't achieve the kind of "notability" that a public celebrity does but that is why wikipedia acknowledges scholars for their academic contributions.

Also, of the 10 sources I referenced in this submission, 7 were outside sources (3 publishers and Forbes). Please clarify how we can assess this submission as an academic scholar and how many more outside sources you would need.

Many thanks in advance for your guidance.

Chris Sneathen Director of IT Office of Research, UCSB sneathen@research.ucsb.edu Csneathen (talk) 17:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * She is likely notable, but as you might find by reading WP:ACADEMIC, you need to state why she's notable in her respective field and/or generally. This is done by providing independent and reliable sources that attest to said notability. Her CV, associated websites and projects and video links are certainly not included in that category. The Forbes one is a good start, but it's only a minor mention. Sources need to extensively cover the information you're conveying. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation/José Eisenberg
Hello FoCuSandLeArN,

My draft has been rejected because "this submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability". Nevertheless, I gave references from nationally renowned magazines such as "Repubblica, "Plurielles", or "Edit Mag". And when I read the notability guidelines, my subject fits perfectly : "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique". I even referenced the patent as a proof of José Eisenberg being at the origin of a new concept. Is it because my references come from different countries? Do I have to give other references?

Thank you for your help and advices,

Sandrorem (talk) 09:26, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Please read the linked policies more intently. Extensive coverage needs to be provided in independent and reliable sources ABOUT MR EISENBERG himself, and not the product(s) as is the case at present. Also, patents are by no means proof of notability, and the language of the submission is non-neutral and ad-like. Also read WP:COI and make sure you declare the conflict of interest. References can be in any language; good references include newspapers, books, magazines, etc. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:18, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

Thanks to your advices, I revised my draft to fit with the guidelines. Also, I added other sources and now have sources from newspaper, magazines, blogs, TV channels.

Is it now publishable?

Thanks again for your support,

Sandrorem (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pamela Aares
The page for Pamela Aares has been resubmitted to address the request for additional references, please review at your earliest convenience and advise.

Thanks, Artmedia Group (talk) 17:48, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Titling disambiguation pages
Hi FaL, if I may call you such. I noticed you recently approved AfC submissions for Black coat and Walburg, though you moved them to mainspace at Black coat (disambiguation) and Walburg (disambiguation). Since the base titles Black coat and Walburg were unoccupied at the time, the submissions should have gone there; I've since moved the live dab pages to those titles. These seems to be a misconception that disambiguation pages need to have (disambiguation) in the title, but this is not true. WikiProject Disambiguation calls such pages malplaced. Anyway, no harm done. I just wanted to make you aware for the future. --BDD (talk) 23:06, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank mate! I actually had this doubt while accepting, and it's good you made it clear to me. I had accepted a previous one without the disam. in the title, but got freaked out when I saw so many of them actually did carry it. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:51, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Siddiq Shafi Group article
Hi, My article regarding Siddiq Shafi group was not accepted.

Can you guide how I can improve the article.

I am the group employee. I have taken most of the information from the group website

Regards Asim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asimfida (talk • contribs) 04:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It is written like an advertisement. You need to provide extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources attesting to the company's notability. See WP:CORP. Also, as you've stated you have a conflict of interest, please see WP:COI. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 10:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

WP:PROF
I was asked to comment at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shengfu Wang.  DGG ( talk ) 17:15, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the input. Sometimes very concise statements are insufficient. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Help with rejected article!
Hi!

You recently reviewed and rejected a new submission of mine, titled 'Vungngaihlun (Lulun) Tonsing'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Vungngaihlun_(Lulun)_Tonsing I was wondering if you could help me fix it so that I can resubmit the same.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aksharapitre (talk • contribs) 06:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to provide references from independent and reliable sources. To know how to make a citation see WP:REFB, WP:MINREF and WP:INCITE. These are usually found in books, magazines and newspapers. Make sure they're extensive references, and not just brief mentions. If you can establish the person's notability, then please resubmit. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paige Turner (entertainer)
I'm going to see if I can fix this. If not, I'll revert myself and put it back into the cue queue. Bearian (talk) 18:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm not following. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You reviewed this article, and it was up for speedy deletion. I want to check on possible sources before deleting it.  I'll revert myself and let it go back to the speedy deletion queue, if I can't find any good sources in the next 48 hours.  Do you follow now? Bearian (talk) 21:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I looked at the history and now it's clear. Yes, feel free to edit and resubmit. G13 is just a routine AfC tag. Good luck, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sven Voelpel
Hi, I have changed and added sources and references in order to improve the notability to the article that you have reviewed. The style has also been changed. And please see the German WP page for comparison. I hope the article is now good for resubmission. Please give feedback, thank you Jacobsflem (talk) 09:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, to begin with, his biography is completely unreferenced. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the brief comment, references are added to his biography now too. Doesn't his proven h-index of 20 speak for his notability? If not sufficient now, please list items for improvement, thanks. Jacobsflem (talk) 09:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined article: Yoda Bat
Howdy, I know you're probably super busy, and as you may have been able to tell, I've never written an article for Wikipedia before, but I have to object to your refusal (made on the basis that the article already exists: under the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyctimene_%28genus%29. This link is merely to the article for the Nyctimene genus, once on the page there are links to articles on the various species of tube-nosed fruit bats. My article, limited though it may be, was intended to provide basic in formation on this newly discovered species, and give them a presence in the Wikipedia universe. Here (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyctimene_papuanus) is a link to an article on the species from Wikipedia, Spain. If the issue is with my amateur article creation, that is another story and I will be happy to spruce things up a bit.

Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.135.18 (talk) 10:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello there! Given you didn't specify the species name on the article I assumed it was about the genus. Indeed, the article would need a bit of work to be accepted. What I suggest is using one on that list as a template. If you need further help let me know. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined: Articles for creation: Mohammad Mahdi Sheikh-Jabbari (February 7)
Dear editor Hi Sorry, I am a new user in the Wikipedia and I am not familiar with the rules for creating a new article in it. This is my first one and I hope that I can do it well. The requested article is about one of the greatest physicians in Iran physics society. He has awarded so many times by the international academies and also he is one of the ``Chehrehaye Mandegar" in Iran(which means one of the people who has been chosen as ``forever characters of the country". If you want, I can give citations about this person. For example see: http://www.ictp.it/about-ictp/prizes-awards/the-ictp-prize/the-prize-winners-%281%29/ictp-prize-winner-2007.aspx http://group28.northumbria.ac.uk/Content/Programme/prize.html

He also has an article in Wikipedia in Persian fa.wikipedia.org but he has not in English. So I wanted to create it.

I will edit the article and will resubmit it. Thank you very much

Kamal Hajian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamalhajian (talk • contribs) 05:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Those are good references. Add a couple more and resubmit. You shouldn't have trouble in getting the article accepted if you correctly establish the subject's notability. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation: Ghost Booster
Hi.. i just saw that you rejected submission of the page Ghost Booster.. you said "No extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources, therefore non-notable".. i added citations from the most important indipendet italian webzine like metalized, metalitalia and more, and from encyclopedia metallum..

how can i improve the page and make it notable?

thanks

--DarKane (talk) 21:12, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid those aren't independent nor reliable. Unfortunately you can't make an article notable when the subject of the article, in this case the band, isn't. If you can't find extensive coverage, cite any industry awards or such, the article won't be accepted. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * could you explain what resources are independent? .. wikipedia: "An independent source is a source That has no vested interest in a topic and written Commonly Therefore it is expected to describe the topic from a disinterested perspective" ...

Metalitalia and metalized are the most important italian metal webzine .. they publish news of the most important metal bands in the world, only if the band Has a good resume .. metalunderground is one of the most important european metal webzine .. metal archives (encyclopedia metallum) is the most important metal reference in the world ..

What else should I have to add?

there are many other webzines that I might add, but they are not as important as the ones I've already added

--DarKane (talk) 15:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Denied article: Nellie Putur
Just wondering how to make my sources more extensive! I didn't really understand that comment. Thank you :-) Yuhnela (talk) 03:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)yuhnela
 * The linked policies are quite clear. It doesn't seem the author is notable at the time. Independent and reliable sources as a rule of thumb include edited content such as press media, books, etc. (e.g. a book review from the New York Times with an author biography). Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Ghost Booster
could you explain what resources are independent? .. wikipedia: "An independent source is a source That has no vested interest in a topic and written Commonly Therefore it is expected to describe the topic from a disinterested perspective" ... Metalitalia and metalized are the most important italian metal webzine .. they publish news of the most important metal bands in the world, only if the band Has a good resume .. metalunderground is one of the most important european metal webzine .. metal archives (encyclopedia metallum) is the most important metal reference in the world .. What else should I have to add? there are many other webzines that I might add, but they are not as important as the ones I've already added thanks

--DarKane (talk) 10:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Metal webzines are just that, and as such do not represent widespread recognition of said band. If the band isn't covered anywhere else, then it will be very hard to prove its notability. Also, webzines do not partake in the extensive editorial processes other media do, i.e. they're not fact-checked and do not have other reviewing processes in place, and as such they're reliability is often questioned. Please see WP:IRS and WP:IS. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 10:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

RE: Ghost Booster
but this is a common problem of all metal bands .. all metal bands are mentioned only in newspapers discussing metal .. excluding historical bands like metallica, iron maiden, etc. .. i have seen a lot of bands that have references only in metal webzine that have been accepted on wikipedia .. and honestly I do not see differences in the references in the page that I created

--DarKane (talk) 11:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That's a common misconception. That it exists on Wikipedia is not an acceptance criterion. Those articles were not created through AfC, and will be curated at some point in time, and might even be deleted if that's what the community decides. From what I've researched online, the band is not notable. Are you involved with the band in any way? Please read WP:COI. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

New artical
I am confused, I created a page that can be seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Pretender_(Animorphs)

It was not excepted due to not being notable enough. If you go to wikipedia's main page and do a search for "Animorphs" you can find an article about series in general and links to pages about each of the books in the series. I do not understand why https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hidden_(Animorphs) should exist, yet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Pretender_(Animorphs) should not. Please note that the page for Animorphs #39 The Hidden is very short, has no references and is arguable the worst book in the series, yet the page I tried to create was full of detail and sighted the book itself. This may or may not be the best reference in the world, but I promise you that it is all accurate. Can you please explain to me better why this page was not excepted or how I can see any comments that you have made? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobias Marco (talk • contribs) 20:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to provide extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources, otherwise it won't be accepted. Please read the guidelines specified. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)