When is an argument considered to be a logical fallacy?

a: when the argument doesn't make sense
b: when an illogical premise is presented with logical supporting information
c: when there is a logical premise without data to support it
d: when a logical premise is supported by very general claims
e: when the author or speaker is not a credible representative of the topic
f: when a logical premise is supported by claims that don't address the argument's point
g: when certain claims only seem to lead to other, unsupported claims

A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or "wrong moves" in the construction of an argument. A fallacious argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is. Some fallacies are committed intentionally to manipulate or persuade by deception, while others are committed unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance. Lawyers acknowledge that the extent to which an argument is sound or unsound depends on the context in which the argument is made.

Fallacies are commonly divided into "formal" and "informal". A formal fallacy can be expressed neatly in a standard system of logic, such as propositional logic while an informal fallacy originates in an error in reasoning other than an improper logical form. Arguments containing informal fallacies may be formally valid, but still fallacious.

he thought hans was leaving

at least thats what i think it is

sorry if wrong