User talk:FoCuSandLeArN

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
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 click here to leave me a message.
I always respond on my talkpage unless instructed to do so elsewhere.

The Lost Son (a novel)[edit]

Hello fOCUSaNDlEARN. Re your last reply for my request for evidence of your allegation of copyright violation:

"Are you blind? It seems you're unable to read the link I provided for you 4 times before, and are trying to hop on a self-glorifying bandwagon that I do not want anything to do with. Remove any copied material and resubmit if desired. Do not use my talk page as your soapbox. I have plenty of work to do. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 21:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)"

This is now the third time that, unwilling or unable to provide evidence supporting your unfounded allegations of copyright violation, you decided instead to be rude and disparaging; can I also ask, from the depth of blindness, no doubt, what kind of notion exactly is "to hop on a self-glorifying bandwagon"? Baffling as your attitude may be, I fail to see the good in resorting to particular and pointless abuse. Again, all I requested from you is to provide evidence of copyright infringement, not some meaningless limp link to some automated software report which, for all the comfort it clearly affords you, makes no sense as the page you rejected and deleted did not contain any copyright infrigement or violation whatsoever. This being the case, one would think that an open and reasonably inquisitive mind would look into the matter - to avoid future unwarranted censure or inappropriate censorship, perhaps, but evidently you have other thoughts on such matters; or are too busy, maybe. It is now plain that you have no intention to back up your allegations with what, in the circumstances, would be proper and appropriate evidence, leaving me with no idea as to what to do to the material in order to get a pass from your automated software approval template. So I guess I probably wont resubmit it. You needn't to reply to this note as I too have better things to do, never mind being abused. This may not be the end of the matter, though. And by the way, just in case you care, no, I'm not blind. Regards.Merelcel (talk) 19:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


Nice work on the Lily article, would you mind if I edited your draft and wrapped the references? Hughesdarren (talk) 22:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

@Hughesdarren: Hello there! What article is that? FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 22:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
oops, I saw the submission for Draft:The Lily (windmill) and assumed you had written it, but after checking the history I found I was incorrect. Keep up the good work anyway. Hughesdarren (talk) 09:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@Hughesdarren: Ha! No worries! Thanks for the offer and I hope you get to move that one. Face-wink.svg FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 16:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Kami Lyle draft[edit]

Hi.... thanks for the review, and good suggestion regarding Although I didn't have it as a citation, in hindsight it is a rather local organization's post. Overall I'm concerned that by adding extra references, I may have watered down the real meat of the matter... and being a newbie I really appreciate your suggestions! Tmcnellis15 (talk) 22:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

My hint was regarding the small passage that too closely resembled the one on that website. You can fix that by either removing it or changing its wording. As for referencing, fair points; the best way to go about it is caring about their quality. 2-3 good, solid sources can mean a whole lot more than trivial ones. Another thing you have to take into account is our music notability guideline, which you can read more about here. Try to accommodate for at least one of those criteria, and let us know why she's notable, providing relevant evidence for it. Finally, make sure biographical information is referenced at all times. Sources we look for are independent of the subject, reliable, and extensive about them, i.e. they discuss her in detail, and are not just about concert dates (unless you of course want to cite a particular concert date statement). All in all, I've found quite a few sources about her, especially in print. Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any more questions. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 22:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eagles of Death Metal[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eagles of Death Metal. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice[edit]

The following pages have become eligible for CSD:G13.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ivan Pope.[edit]

Draft:Ivan_Pope is based on a Wikipedia article that was deleted. Hence, finding versions elsewhere is quite easy. Please check the history of the article. LoopZilla (talk) 09:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

  • @LoopZilla: As I replied on the draft, the comment was meant to warn future reviewers about the existence of duplicates online. I obviously did not CSD the page, which I would have if it had been a copyvio. My decline rationale was on notability terms. Please check the decline template. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 16:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
OK. LoopZilla (talk) 21:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


Hi, after the review of Moncucco, could you also check War Memorial (Brugherio) and Villa Somaglia-Balconi? Thanks for your great help about WiBrugherio. FrOsmetti (talk) 11:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Campus sexual assault[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Campus sexual assault. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice[edit]

The following pages have become eligible for CSD:G13.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)