User talk:FoCuSandLeArN/Archive 6

Ceres Football Club-Manila
Dear FoCuSandLeArN,

Thank you for your advise in how to improve my article. This is my first contribution and I am still struggling with the formats and all. I will search the Help section for the referencing you suggested. In this regard, can you give me a short guide or example on how to make in-line citations?

Thank you.

Wpolido (talk) 14:19, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * sure. the easiest way to make an in-line citation is place the cursor in whichever part of the text you want to reference, and click the "cite" button on the editing toolbar, then choose whichever citation option from the drop-down menu is more convenient (i.e. cite web). if you want to format the citation yourself you can use ref tags. please make sure they establish the notability of the article's subject. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I am currently editing the article and revising the reference. The club is new though and although it is well known in Quezon City as an uprising club and is active in sports development, there is not much reference available in the internet that can be cited. This is why I placed it under footy stub so it may be improved anytime.

Many thanks. Wpolido (talk) 16:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * no problem. keep in mind that referenced don't have to be online, they can be from any medium. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:05, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you. There are local news papers but then I am not sure they will be considered a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. I guess this is quite a common problem of football clubs in smaller countries. While I was looking at how to format the references, I have seen teams/clubs who also have this problem like Mambas Noirs FC, Dynamo Abomey F.C., ECCO City Green and Espérance Guider.

Anyway will keep improving the article. Hopefully other contributors from Quezon City would notice this and add to it. Regards. Wpolido (talk) 17:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * yes, as long as they're properly cited, you won't have any issues with them. maybe consider contacting WikiProject Football, as they might be able to help you establish the club's notability. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Article about a social worker S.MD.Rafi
Hi, recently i submitted an article about a social worker named S.MD.Rafi. But this has been rejected by you with a comment non-notable Can you please let me know what changes do i need to do to my article. Please help. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azzusheikh (talk • contribs) 07:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * refer to Notability, Referencing for beginners and Verifiability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:14, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

article / Frank Morzuch
Hi,

Thank you for your review. Frank Morzuch article has not been accepted at this time. Would you please explain us what we should improve.

Great thanks, Zoum90.56.193.199 (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * basically what the article needs is to establish the subject's notability. please read Notability. if you want to see if your subject is likely to be regarded as notable, please refer to Notability/Noticeboard. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Ball Possession and Possession With Purpose
Hi, I'm not tracking the suggestion of merging this article into Ball Possession; is the suggestion to cut and paste the entire article in there? If so I can do that - does this also mean including the references as well as other attachments?

Would this also mean the title changes from Ball Possession to "Ball Possession With Purpose"?

All the best, ChrisChrisGluck (talk) 18:19, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * i suggest trimming the article according to the Manual of Style, citing it properly (see Referencing for beginners), and then copying the extra content under a new section of the Ball Possession article. let me know if you have any other questions. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, just a quick courtesy notification about further comments I've made over at User talk:ChrisGluck following the recent edits at Ball possession. --nonsense ferret  22:45, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:55, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Solvatten
Hello FoCuSandLeArN, I received the message you sent me on citing reliable sources. Could you please specify which ones you do not find reliable? thanks David — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solvatten (talk • contribs) 16:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * you didn't provide any references whatsoever. before resubmitting, please read Identifying reliable sources, Notability, Referencing for beginners and What Wikipedia is not. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Article denial
You denied the article I submitted due to lack of reliable resources. Can you explain why they are not reliable? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BBEA (talk • contribs) 16:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * i don't know which article you're referring to. these will be of useful read, though: Verifiability, Referencing for beginners and Notability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

 * ok then, happy editing! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Submission declined
You declined my submission for Articles for creation/No More Sad Refrains: The Anthology because it wasn't adequately supported by reliable sources. Why are these sources not adequate. Is the format of the reference inadequate (not enough information), the type of reference (Official Sandy Denny webpage and Allmusic.com Sandy Denny entry), or some other reason? Wikizenji (talk)
 * hello there. this is intimitely described here: Notability. the subject should have plenty of references available, so this shouldn't be hard. in order to create full citations please read: Referencing for beginners. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Dendrotek 22:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Raymond Vanier
Hi thanks for reviewing the above. I understand the need to Wikify the citations, which I intend doing. I have already drafted and included some reputable and strong References, to which I will form in-line cites. However I am surprised that you seem to have flagged up questioning whether Vanier is "notable." As a colleague of Didier Daurat, he was one of the first pilots of l'Aeropostale (subsequently Air Blue, Air France, now Air Bus Industries) and as already stated in my draft, founder of Barcelona International Airport. The pair of them went on to pioneer routes throughout Europe, Africa and across the Andes into Chile. They are the basis for characters in novels of Saint-Exupery too Vanier once rescued him!). Hugely significant for the development of European civil aviation and airmails. There are entries for both Vanier and Daurat in French Wikipedia, but this article on Vanier will be better and subsequently I may improve the English Wikipedia article on Daurat too, if not too discouraged by reviewers! Perhaps you would be kind enough to re-read the draft in terms of its content rather than its observation of Wiki editing rules. Best Wishes, Dendrotek 22:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dendrotek (talk • contribs)
 * i am sure the notability of the article's subject will be easy to establish with veryu reliable referenced. best of luck, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Dendrotek 23:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC) Cheers - I've copied the draft into my Sandbox to do some Wikifying. Dendrotek 23:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dendrotek (talk • contribs)

Articles_for_creation/Thanks_to_My_Eyes
Hello FoCuSandLeArN, I received your message saying this submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. I included external links and references to two opera houses who presented this opera, the publishing house who published it, and the composer and the librettist of the opera, plus a few article reviewing the premiere. I thought these were going to be enough sources to make the information verifiable. Please let me know how could I improve on that matter, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiavanniCors (talk • contribs) 23:34, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * you'll find a detailed explanation of what counts as valid referencing here: Notability and Verifiability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:42, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Crow hailer
Hi there, I have a dilemma I hope you can help me with... the BBC have posted a biog page for the music band I represent (Crow hailer) but I can only upload a biog from Wikipedia. Can you please advise me how I can edit my article to make it acceptable to Wiki? They have played many concerts in France and the UK and released an album in 2012 (available on iTunes and Amazon). They have been played on BBC 6 Music and reviewed by various journals including Electric Harmony. The band is made up of 'seasoned' musicians who have been playing for decades and been in other successful bands. They will be touring this summer and have already been confirmed for a number of festivals - shortlisted for Glastonbury just today. Please can you help? I am fairly computer savvy and consider myself reasonably smart (I have a PhD in molecular biology) so I can find my way around most websites but this has thrown me a bit as I can't quite see what I am doing wrong... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Justbut&diff=next&oldid=546980715

Many thanks Justbut (talk) 23:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * well, put simply, wikipedia requires certain standards for every article. you'll find a point summary here: Notability and Verifiability. also, for inline citations: Referencing for beginners (remeber they need to be full citations, not just bare urls). good luck! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Matt Sergott post request
Hi!

You denied my submission based upon notability and references. I included many references from independent sites like IMDB which are industry standard and easily verifiable. Could you please tell me which references you find unacceptable since so many were included? Also, if notability is a problem, is that something that can be corrected? If you just do not feel Matt has made adequate professional contributions regardless of my references, could you please let me know so that I do not waste both our time with further references?

Thanks, Ann
 * he might be notable, however i can'r recall the specific article. imdb is not an acceptable reference according to wikipedia guidelines. if after reading Notability, Verifiability and Referencing for beginners you feel he's notable, please provide extensive, full citations and resubmit your entry. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Declined submission: NASDAQ OMX
You declined submission because of unsourced material and unreliable sources. I am just a student learning about stock market and want to contribute to wikipedia in this area and about my country's stock market. Official website of stock market is best and very reliable source since they are required by law to provide only correct and verified information. I believe this applies to all stock market information in all countries, since based on this information investment decisions are being made.

I will gladly add more citations and sources, but can you review your position on official website as unreliable source?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dainiusblynas (talk • contribs) 09:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * sources need to be independent of the subject and establish its notability. please read Identifying reliable sources, Notability and Verifiability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

AfC submission
I became aware of your decline of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carna Botnet because I have User:Lowkeyvision's page on my watchlist. Could you please expand on your reason for declining the article? All you said was "original research", but I don't see how that's the case here at all; the information is verified in several reliable sources, and while the article may be perfect, I don't see any major information that isn't in those sources. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * you're right about the original research, it seemed like it at first, however it was a bad call. it doesn't appear notable, though, which was my second decline reason; i don't see how a gif image of internet usage deserves a wikipedia article. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Apologies, FoCusandLeArN, it's not an article about a picture, it's an article about a Botnet, or, rather, an experiment conducted with said Botnet. It has multiple, independent, reliable sources. That means it meets WP:GNG. You can't judgments about articles based upon your opinions; rather, you must decide based on policy and guidelines. Since I don't see how it fails to meet WP:GNG, I'm going to go ahead and move it into mainspace. If you think the article doesn't belong there, please nominate it for deletion. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 March 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 23:41, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Denial of page for "Miles Power"
You declined my article today for not having reliable sources. Sorry I'm a noob, but I thought I did a decent job making this page about my friend Miles Power so if you can help steer me in the right direction I'd appreciate it. I submitted with two cited articles about him (one from 850 KOA radio station web site, and one from the official "Denver Broncos" website blog). I also cited the video clip of him being on "The John Fox Show" which is a local TV show broadcast in the Colorado area on CBS. I could not find any "article" about him being on the show, just the clip from the show itself which is the best cite I have really. Sorry that is all I can find right now, but I thought those three cites were more than enough to validate the simple purpose of his Wiki page. Thanks! Dcompton621 (talk) 03:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcompton621 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * hello there. unfortunately, without appropriate references, the article won't be accepted on wikipedia. Notability and Identifying reliable sources should be pretty clear about that . also, please beware of a potential conflict of interest. said blog and website do not constitute reliable sources and do not establish the subject's notability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Bharat Vikas Parishad
Hello Harry! My article has been declined for not being "adequately supported by reliable sources". I need your guidance to proceed further. Could you kindly specify, to begin with, some points in the first few paragraphs of my article where it is absolutely critical to have sources? I would work on them and it may give me confidence to proceed further.

Incidentally, I find that one Hindi language page for the same topic is already on the wikipedia at http://hi.wikipedia.org/s/1di

May I submit that the article as "skeleton" may be permitted to which further meat could be added - which fully meets the criterion of third party reliability.

Kind regards, atam dev http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Atam_dev — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atam dev (talk • contribs) 10:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * articles are build upon indeed, however they do need to fulful certain base criteria in order to be accepted, such as independent, extensive and reliable referencing. please read: Identifying reliable sources, Notability and Verifiability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Denial / Tearpalm
You declined my article "Tearpalm" (about Serbian post-industrial band)on grounds of 'non-notability' and 'lack of reliable sources. I'd like to point out that your first argument is at best arguable, because notability in that respective genre (I haven't heard of any international hits by Rapoon or Cisfinitum, and yet they are on Wikipedia) and region (Balkan) cannot be bluntly measured against notability guidelines, since it's not pop music. Your second argument is absolute balderdash: sources include main popular music portals in Serbia and Croatia, as well as radio of Stanford university and WFMU's branch Free Music Archive. There are other bands from Serbia with just as much (and equally reliable sources), and those articles are still here. Now, I understand that not everything that any of us finds worthy reading about does necessarily belong on Wikipiedia, but the fact that You haven't heard of something, don't understand it or do not care about it should not be the reason enough to delete it.

Oedipah (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * if it doesn't fulfil notability guidelines, it risks being deleted at some point. it's not what i understand, it's what wikipedia guidelines state. please refresh yourself on them and then improve the article or desist. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Comment regarding your articles
High FoCuSandLeArN, I've found a number of problems in articles you have created and have raised those concerns, as well as the topic of your autopatrolled flag, at User talk:Ironholds. Ryan Vesey 19:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)}
 * petty bothering if you ask me. i've got better things to do. cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Slow the heck down
I initially looked at your articles because of your massive acceptances of Doncram's articles. First, I'd like to request that you don't review any of his articles,you review far too many and there are many errors. Consider Marlborough Tavern, your most recent one of his, and the sentence "In 1978 it was operated as a restaurant, the Marlborough Tavern.[2] and 1978.[3]" The error in this case was inserted by yourself, not Doncram. Now consider this copyedit of Kingsville, Texas and the statement "According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 13.9 square miles (36 km²), of which 13.8 square miles (36 km²) are land and 0.04 square miles (0.10 km²) are (0.22%) water." First, convert should have been applied. Second, it is still not grammatically correct. Now we have 135 articles that are no longer tagged as needing a copy edit, and I have no confidence that a single one of them was copy edited correctly. I recently had to clean up some of your sloppy work at Paniyiri Greek Festival as well. So please, slow down in everything you do and focus on doing it right. Ryan Vesey 21:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * hold your horses or we'll take it to arbitration. don't insult and disregard my editing. i've tirelessly contributed to the GOCE and deserve some respect. look at yourself before bluntly sitting in your armchair and commenting on somebody else's work. oh and just so you know, it is gramatically correct. the malborough tavern was a typo. i fixed the references and forgot to delete the full stop. i saw you didn't fix it, so i did now. i shouldn't have to explain myself. you're evidently embarking on a personal attack. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * lol and your "editing" on paniyiri was simply moving "the" around? such good work! keep it up! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Please, try to take it to arbitration. I would like to see your editing broadcast on a wider scale. Ryan Vesey 21:12, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Again with the speed Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NallaMalla Reddy Engineering College was blatantly copyvio. Anyone who has reviewed 852 articles correctly should have been able to pick that up. Ryan Vesey 21:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The same goes for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ikechukwu Onunaku. Ryan Vesey 21:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Those two are now deleted. Drmies (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * FoCuSandLeArN, you first came to my attention when you placed a GCOE template on an article asking editors to not edit the article, and then you left the template on the article without making any changes yourself until the next day. And now I see that you added a broken template to the most recent article you copyedited. Regardless of how many articles you have created in the past, you are making a lot of mistakes now and it is starting to get noticed. Orange Suede Sofa  (talk) 21:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I, too, have concerns about the sheer number of Doncram's articles that you are reviewing at AfC. Are you aware of the recent history that has led to those submissions being made? I mean, someone has to review the things but they should have some understanding of the potential pitfalls that caused the recent ArbCom case. - Sitush (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
mabdul 13:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
I need your cats attention

G Davidson 18:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC) 

Vizzini (The Princess Bride) subimission denied
Hello, i'm the author of the Vizzini (The Princess Bride) article. You said my article was not supported by reliable sources. I'm not sure if you have seen The Princess Bride, but another character of that movie, Inigo Montoya, has his own wikipedia article. That article only has ONE reference. That reference is the original book manuscript. I used that same reference, having seen the movie and read the book, and I also used quotes from IMDb. So I am asking you to relook into my article because I use the same source as Inigo Montoya, and more. JoshBlitz (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)JoshBlitz}
 * articles can be created without going though the afc process. the point of doing so is for experienced editors to give feedback to first-time article creators. my feedback to you is that imdb is not a reliable source. thousands of articles on wiki are entirely unreferenced, that's precisely the point of submitting an afc review. i'm sure said character will be adept at having better references. let me know if you require any further assistance. a book is a perfectly valid reference, as long as it's fully cited. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Alright, i'm fairly new to wikipedia, even though I used IMDb, I only used it for quotes. The rest were ALL from the book refernece. I'm not sure if you've read the book or seen the movie. Also, how come Inigo Montoya was aproved even though it used the same reference I used? Also, you explained something about having an article moved into wikipedia space without the AFC process. How do I go about doing that. JoshBlitz (talk) 22:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)JoshBlitz
 * that article probly did not go through the afc process. in order to establish the notability of an article's subject, sources must be extensive. a book mention and some imdb quotes won't do the trick. please improve the references and re-submit the entry. regards. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Alrighty then, how do I submit my article without going through the AFC process? Also, if I do somehow get my article into wikipedia space without going through the AFC process, would it get deleted? One more thing, if I need a LOT of references to show the subjects notability, then how come the movie/book this character is from already has a page for two of it's characters; Inigo Montoya, Dread Pirate Roberts; a page for the original book; written in 1973, by William Goldman; and a page for the movie adaption, directed by Rob Reiner, in 1987. If that doesn't show the notability of this character then I don't know what will! Also, the character is portrayed by Wallace Shawn, also the voice of Rex in Toy Story! JoshBlitz (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2013 (UTC)JoshBlitz


 * You don't submit it without going through AfC, because it has a 99% chance of getting deleted if you do so. You seriously need a big plate of the Other Stuff Exists argument, because it's not valid for getting your article through. Notability means significant coverage in reliable sources, i.e. 4-6 separate newspaper, magazine, or academic articles not including interviews or press releases. If you can't give us those, it can't be accepted. gwickwire  talk editing 00:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

But how would I get reviews for a movie character? Also, the Inigo Montoya page does not have reviews... JoshBlitz (talk) 22:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)JoshBlitz
 * When someone looks over your draft in Articles for Creation, that's called a "review". A review of a movie by a professional critic might discuss a character at length, and that would help establish the character's notability. If you look at the policy about reliable sources like FoCuSandLeArN advised you to, as well as the general notability guideline, you can see what kinds of references are preferred. Here are some articles about fictional characters that would likely survive Articles for Deletion: Vito Corleone, Cruella de Vil, Frankenstein's monster, Lex Luthor, Lord Voldemort, Joker (comics), Freddy Krueger, Captain Hook, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, and Wicked Witch of the West. You could get some ideas about other kinds of sources to look for. If, instead of making a separate article, you were to add more detail about the character to the Princess Bride or Wallace Shawn articles, there would be no need to show notability. — rybec   05:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify April Drive
Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's April Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 500 articles and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks!

-- Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify.

Happy Easter!!!
So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 22:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Article
Can you review this article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sheldon_Price 173.78.231.251 (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Your work in the GOCE drive
Hi FoCuSandLeArN, you may have been aware of this, but editors have expressed concerns about your work in the most recent GOCE backlog drive. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/March 2013 and let us know what you think. I can't speak for everyone, but personally, I have no desire to discuss you behind your back. --BDD (talk) 04:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyediting hints
I'm just back from a week-long wikibreak, but have been following the saga as time permits. Please ; defend yourself against unjust accusations as necessary, but don't assume that other editors are out to get you. As reigning Queen of the Typo, my use of the preview button before every save spares me untold embarrassment. And while it's nice to amass barnstars and such, it's about quality, not quantity; I think the GOCE has a good reputation at the moment and if that's lost, it's hard to regain. Many thanks for your help, and I hope you'll continue to pitch in. Have fun and all the best,  Mini  apolis  19:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's exactly what Ryan Vesey didn't assume. The preview button's a good idea. I don't do it for the barnstars; It was very recently that I earned my first one. That's a bit pompous, my contributions don't influence the GOCE's reputation. I certainly hope so. Thanks for your comments, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have not once assumed that you were acting in bad faith. I pointed out some issues with your articles and mentioned to an administrator that it would be beneficial to pull your AutoPatrolled flag so that your articles would be reviewed.  You responded with "petty bothering if you ask me. i've got better things to do."  You have assumed bad faith on my part from the very outset and have come across as hostile.  I'll admit that my hostility level increased in response, but I am sure that your edits are being made in good faith. Ryan Vesey 21:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh and that abrupt comment was due to me being frustrated at another editor, I shouldn't have posted it. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Pompous? Wanting to protect whatever reputation the GOCE has as an aid to the encyclopedia? I don't think so. All our contributions affect how the WP community views the effectiveness of the GOCE. You may want to slow down just a bit, and think about what's being said. Your efforts are appreciated; no one's piling on (not me, anyway :-)), and there's no need to bristle. All the best,  Mini  apolis  01:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That was meant as a joke. What I was trying to convey was that my editing doesn't make a real extraordinary difference, unless we get philosophical about it. Cheerio, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 04:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

List Of Tallest Buildings In Cairns
I am planning to continue my work on the article get more refs and will go around and take some photos to add (none in the commons at the moment)CHCBOY (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * awesome, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Bharat Vikas Parishad
My article has been declined for not being "adequately supported by reliable sources". I need your guidance to proceed further. Could you kindly specify, to begin with, some points in the first few paragraphs of my article where it is absolutely critical to have sources? I would work on them and it may give me confidence to proceed further. Incidentally, I find that one Hindi language page for the same topic is already on the wikipedia at http://hi.wikipedia.org/s/1di May I submit that the article as "skeleton" may be permitted to which further “meat” could be added later - which fully meets the criterion of reliability. If you approve, I shall attempt a shorter version of the article. Kind regards, atam dev http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Atam_dev Atam dev (talk) 06:39, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * My advice to you would be: read Inline citation, be aware of a neutral point of view and of the Manual of Style. Also, trimming the article seems prudent, as there is a lot of extra material which would benefit from a clean up. An article being in another Wikipedia is not always representative of its value in another one, however if you would provide substantial coverage reference wise, establishing the subject's notability, then that would be leaning the article towards acceptance. Let me know if you need further help. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:52, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Crytek USA notability?
Why exactly do you believe that this company is not notable? The company does have coverage in secondary sources (though I only used three in the article itself at its current state). ViperSnake151  Talk  19:48, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have a look at Notability (organizations and companies), you'd understand that those references do not cover the subject's notability per se, and if notability can't be established, the company does not merit an article. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerici vagantes (subimission denied)
Hi, you have declined the page Clerici vagantes with a motive I don't understand: "submission is blank". However, the submission is not blank, so I have resubmitted the text for the article being reconsidered. I hope there's nothing wrong in doing so.--93.144.93.121 (talk) 17:48, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It appears to have been blank at the time. Feel free to do so. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Forgive me, F&L, but it appears not to have been. Here is the diff of your rejecting it. Doesn't look blank to me. Rather, it seems pretty good for an article start. --Stfg (talk) 00:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That's very bizarre. Now that I've seen the oldid I don't recall reading this article at all. It was 36 days ago now that I look at it, so I honestly don't know what happened there. I apoligise for the inconvenience! Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk)
 * Shouldn't it be clerici vagantes? There are plenty of typos in the submission. Very interesting though; poor clergy... FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:28, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've corrected the typo, but the presence of minor issues like typos shouldn't obstruct the inclusion of highly worthwhile articles like this into article space, where others would edit such things. An AfD of this article would be laughed out of court. Would you be willing to put matters right now, please? --Stfg (talk) 10:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. I've posted a message on Excirial's talk page because I don't remember editing this one. I've had glitches with reviews before. Anyway, I'll do what's needed. Thanks for pointing it out, I couldn't find the article before. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I see you've accepted the article now. Thanks very much for sorting it out. --Stfg (talk) 16:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. I made some corrections and learnt quite a bit along the way! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

William Morris
I contested the issue and posted my reason on the Talk page. Do you know what the next stop would be? Tinywings10  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinywings10 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I don't follow. Could you provide some more context? Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, you left a message on my Talk about page about deleting a William Morris Endeavor client list page (which has since been removed). I contested it, but got no response. My argument is that that CAA has the same thing and their page has no issues. Also, providing a client list is informative to the public and not self-promotion.Thanks Tinywings10 (talk) 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well if it was removed then that's probably indicative of the way it should have been. The CAA is a disambiguation page, could you specify? It is imformative in some cases, yes. For instance, if it includes appropriate references and advances the reader's knowledge about a certain topic. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Help me kind sir
I have been attacked by a user called SeanHoyland. He calls me a sock, which I guess means he thinks I smell. I am trying to edit content on page Death march but he revert and attack me without explanation. What should I do, I am writer not fighter? I ask because you put welcome message on my talk page. Dasixiaoriben (talk) 08:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * What he means is this: Sock puppetry. While I haven't got a clue about what you're discussing on the Death March article, I do have to say that you've vandalised the talk page repeatedly, and thus would have to agree with other users on that. Perhaps it would be advisable for you to focus your attention on improving other articles. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Brandon Bogotay
Hello FoCuSandLeArN.

Popping by on a courtesy visit to let you know I have made a change to one of your recent taggings on Brandon Bogotay. You had required more citations, but when I looked, I saw that there were no references to begin with, so I have changed the tag to "unreferenced". If I am wrong or acted incorrectly please let me know. Kindest regards to you and many thanks.

Happy wiki-ing (MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 09:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC))
 * Fair enough. Sometimes external links are considered sources, but I agree with you. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Suggest you delete your comment
This is just one person's opinion, but I think this edit was ill-considered. Yes, you should pursue your discussion with Ryan V, but don't invite the readers of the noticeboard to his talk page to continue broader discussion. If I were you, I would remove that comment. [PS — Unwarranted suspicions and over-the-top criticism "come with the territory" when you we engage with strangers on the Internet. Example: When I first ran across your work, I thought you might be a sockpuppet of a puppetmaster I'm always watching out for. It's unpleasant to have your work second-guessed, but unfortunately, we need to live with some of that.] --Orlady (talk) 16:25, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll do as you say because I'm relatively new at this and don't fully understand what you're saying, but I judge a more experienced editor's judgement. Could you tell me some more? Whatever happened to AGF? :P Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * AGF applies, but sometimes that boils down to "trust, but verify". (And, BTW, I replied to your query on my talk page.) --Orlady (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * And what about the talk page issue I didn't follow? Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think I know what you meant by that... But, regarding our discussion on my talk page, I do hope you'll consider getting involved with DYK. You look like someone who could be a great participant there. --Orlady (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do in the future. It sounds great, but everything has a learning curve :) FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I could use some help...
Hey FocusAndLearn... Thanks for liking my article, but I need your help to improve the article.. Can you also tell me why you asked me has it worked..? Thanks again!!! The Wikimon (talk) 19:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem! What I meant was if the restructuring and rebuilding worked, and if so, to what extent was it due to the US Government and Army's involvement. Your article treats the study of such a process, I just wanted your opinion. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)