User talk:2tall4u2

January 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2007-12-20 has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks.   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  16:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Repost of Vivicca A. Whitsett
A tag has been placed on requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 13:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Your draft article
I have moved your draft article away from this talk page into a user sub-page of its own at User:2tall4u2/Vivicca Whitsett and tidied it up a little, as much as I had time for. As it was deleted at a deletion discussion, Articles for deletion/Vivicca A. Whitsett, it can't just be restored: you will have to approach user, the administrator who closed the discussion, and ask him to look at this draft and see whether he agrees that the extra sources overcome the reasons for deletion. If he does not agree, you can take it to WP:Deletion review.

One thing I need to say: from your message I gather you are Vivicca Whitsett. You should know that writing about oneself here is strongly discouraged, for reasons explained at WP:Autobiography. That need not stop you, and your article is not nearly as promotional as many autobiographies we get, but you should read WP:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest, and if it is agreed that you can go ahead you should propose the article at WP:Articles for creation, declaring your interest, rather than posting it yourself.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 23:08, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vivicca whitsett


The article Vivicca whitsett has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Apparent resume posting; subject seems to fail WP:NACTOR.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BusterD (talk) 21:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Reposting of apparent COI material
I didn't notice this had been previously deleted, and I agree with the editors above who believe you need to go through the deleting editor with an updated draft. Wikipedia is not the place to post resume information. I've seen conflict of interest cases where some of the material did stay on the pedia. Here's an example: Robert Petkoff. See my discussion with that COI editor here and in the sections after: User talk:Cwands. Good luck. If I can help, post here for assistance. BusterD (talk) 21:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's an example of the kind of source which is likely to put the subject past the bar of notability. That your page has been deleted doesn't help any. BusterD (talk) 22:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Another and another. This can help. Really need reviews of the work. BusterD (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * IMHO, the reasons this keeps getting deleted are 1) the subject is of borderline notability (as we measure such here), and 2) we lack a number of reliable sources independent of the subject. Not all entertainers are notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. We can easily verify the subject exists and we can verify certain aspects of the subject's biography. Unfortunately, we need more coverage in order to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. The basic criteria is "multiple independent reliable sources directly detailing the subject." I'd like to find some interviews, for example, or a profile in a magazine. To my mind, the SAG stuff is significant. Heck, I'm impressed by anyone who can make a living as a working actor; I know lots of talented, accomplished folks who barely scrape by. But for other actors to select one as a representative to SAG, that demonstrates respect inside the biz. So if I were trying to help keep the article, that's where I'd focus my attention with sources. In addition, I'd be looking for the aforementioned interviews/profiles. Finally, I'd love to find reviews of performances in live venues or of tv episodes in which the subject appeared. Armed with a collection of roughly 5 or 6 of any or all of those, a decent biography could be anchored. Without them, I'm afraid other editors might find this subject doesn't sufficiently fulfill the notability guidelines linked above. BusterD (talk) 02:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:2012 Headshot Photo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:2012 Headshot Photo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Russavia (talk) 00:51, 17 March 2013 (UTC)