User talk:FoCuSandLeArN

This is my talk page.

If you wish to ask why an article you submitted was declined, see some general advice here: User talk:FoCuSandLeArN/AFC declines

If this advice does not answer your questions, then for the fastest response try:

* AFC Help Desk

* unofficial live chat

Or please to leave me a message.

I always respond on my talkpage unless instructed to do so elsewhere.

Trestle

Hello, Thank you for reviewing my recent page "Work at the Trestle." You asked whether it would make more sense to focus the page on TT Vernon Smith, rather than the sculpture. We definitely considered this approach, but wanted the page to serve as a resource for people visiting the sculpture in Wolfville. We figured more people would search based on the sculpture than on TT Vernon himself. Do you feel it would be better represented the other way around? Thanks, Nicole Quinn (talk) 20:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)Nicole

Hello there! Thanks for your prompt response. I understand your dilemma, and fortunately there's a solution for that. On Wikipedia, we usually focus on the artist first, then their work, unless the work definitely overshadows the author, which I'm not sure happens in this case. If your concern is about search results, we can simply place a redirect under the sculpture's name that actually links to the artist's article, or even its relevant subsection. Hope this helps, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:09, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. However, the decision is not whether to focus primarily on artist vs. art, but rather subject vs. art piece. TT Vernon Smith is the subject of the sculpture, not the artist. The artist (Ruth Abernethy) does not currently have a wikipedia page (although she should...). Personally, I feel like the focus here could go either way. TT Vernon Smith is certainly of historical significance to Eastern Canada, so warrants a titled page; however, the sculpture is also highly relevant as a landmark and historical tribute. I'm open to either based on the preference of the Wikipedia editors... please advise. Thanks, NicoleNicole Quinn (talk) 20:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

That's exactly what I meant, I just read the article too quickly to notice the sculpture's dedicatee. Ruth's notability would have to be assessed concomitantly with Vernon Smith's. The sculpture itself doesn't seem to have garnered significant enough coverage to procure an article, or otherwise be notable for its artistic merit. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. OK, I'd like to change the name of the entry to "T.T. Vernon Smith" and have the sculpture be a section within, as you originally suggested. However, I cannot figure out how to change the title of the page. Should I simply delete the old entry and create a new one? Thanks, Nicole Nicole Quinn (talk) 16:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Never mind, I think I figured it out. Thanks!Nicole Quinn (talk) 17:07, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Just an explanatory comment at the top should be enough for future reviewers to see what they should do. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stormy_Atmosphere

Dear FoCuSandLeArN
What exactly did you mean by Chart history?
I know that the band was few times on a radio (2 or 3 different local radio stations),
also their first album "Colorblind" was rated 48 from 100 best world Progressive albums of 2009, but I guess I mentioned that in the article already... Is that good enough?
Thanks in advance,
Silverray123 (talk) 05:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:BAND has more information as to what we're looking for. Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Levi Suydam

Thank you very much, FoCuSandLeArN! I sent more thank yous from the history page, but here's more just in case. Cheers Pangurban22 (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

No worries! I found his story quite curious! Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Philippe Sollie

Dear sir,

Even I did my best, I am disappointed to see that my article has been declined again. Philippe Sollie is an inventor who has been offering new solutions in wound care e.g. wound healing without silver which is known to have multiple side-effects. Indeed he is involved in private industry but I am not planning to mention his companies or his products in my article. Therefore I believe he deserves a record in Wikipedia. Among all his publications, his patents he is a well-known entrepreneur in BeNeLux countries. If this is the problem that the references I add to his biography are mostly in local language Dutch or French, I will try to enter the article in Wikipedia within these secions. Would this help? I would appreciate your help and ideas. Best Regards

Gfrederic(talk)

Unfortunately, believing he deserves an article is not enough. If he fails WP:GNG he simply will not be accepted. PLease review the guideline. Thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Hare Krishna Temple of Understanding

Hi FoCuSandLeArN

You left a comment on my draft article, Draft:Hare Krishna Temple of Understanding advising that it needs to be edited extensively for language and neutrality. Is it possible if you could mention a part of the article that does not abide by this? This will just give me a better idea what to improve on regards to language and neutrality throughout the entire article.

Thanks, will appreciate your help.

AarthiKalan (talk) 08:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

In general terms, all unreferenced information could potentially be deleted. Most of the information found in the article seems unreferenced, therefore should be either trimmed or offer proper attribution. As for the language, stuff like "The celebration of Krishna’s birthday is an important festival", or "Maya is the illusive energy which makes Vaishnavas forget who God is, what their identity is and what their relationship with God is", should definitely be addressed. The whole article seems to be written from the point of view of Srila Prabhupada's followers. Try to offer a neutral description of the building rather than an one-sided exposé on religious views. Hope this helps, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Vincent

I was trying to make a page about Vincent Emanuele and you commented that he doesn't meet the requirements. I believe he does:

3) The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

Vincent Emanuele has been played a major role in maintaining and creating one of the only antiwar veterans organizations in the world: Iraq Veterans Against the War. His war experiences and experiences as an activist have been captured in several books and his life after the war has been captured in a feature lengthy documentary, plus he's been interviewed by media outlets around the world about his experiences overseas. And he testified to US Congress about war crimes in Iraq, one of only nine veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan who've testified to US Congress about such issues.

After looking through some of the pages on here, I find it very hard to believe that Vincent Emanuele doesn't fit the criteria.

Let me know what I can do to improve the page or to convince you otherwise! Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

Matthew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Leary South Boo (talk • contribs) 12:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, and where are those notable reviews? I can't seem to find them. He simply does not seem to garner extensive coverage outside of his own writings. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Draft article feedback

Hello, Thanks for your comment on my draft article "Vista Group International". I've begun tidying up my references and adding links to other articles so that this article is no longer a complete 'orphan'. I have read through the article on writing with a neutral tone, but if you could give an example from my article of writing that appears biased it would be very helpful! That way I can have a bit more direction with my editing. Also, having received your feedback and implementing it, I wonder what the next step is in terms of having my article made public? Is there anything further I can do apart from continue to make editing improvements? Thanks, Joselyn Tan (talk) 20:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

thanks for taking a look at my article on crowdsaving. Your comment was that there was no indication that it was a widely used term. Totally understandable as that's how new terms come into being. Is there a metric for when such a term can be considered as widely used? Using google keywords I found at least 70 people per month were searching for this exact term.