User talk:Jimvanpat

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Jimvanpat, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Sarah Van Patten

A tag has been placed on Sarah Van Patten requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing your username, maybe a look at WP:COI won't hurt. Good luck editing, I hope you stick around! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

If the subject of an article you write is important / notable, the article needs to say so - hundreds of articles are created every day, and it's not immediately obvious whether one should be kept.

The content of your article was

Sarah Van Patten was born in 1984 and raised in Boston, Massachusetts, where at the age of six, she began taking dance classes with Barbara Mullen, a local teacher. She trained at Boston Ballet and began performing at age 8 in their annual performance of The Nutcracker. By age 10, Sarah was studying with Jacqueline Cronsberg and performing classical ballet repertoire with the Massachusetts Youth Ballet. She spent her summers studying with Jean-Pierre Bonnefeux, Violette Verdy, and Patricia McBride at The Chautauqua Institution.
In 2000 at age 15, she joined the Royal Danish Ballet as an apprentice where John Nieumeier cast her as Juliet in his Romeo & Juliet. Soon after, she was promoted to the rank of corps dancer, and originated a soloist role in Peter Martin’s Halleluiah Junction. Sarah joined San Francisco Ballet as a soloist dancer in 2002 and was promoted to the rank of principal dancer in 2007.
Sarah’s featured roles while at San Francisco Ballet include: Romeo & Juliet, The Four Temperaments, Apollo, Divertimento No. 15, Nutcracker (Sugarplum Fairy, Tea), Nanna’s Lied, Rodeo, Dybbuk, Afternoon of a Faun, Serenade, and Carousel (a Dance).

- if you would like to work on it and improve it, including by citing reliable sources, etc, you're welcome to. It's not immediately obvious to someone not familiar with ballet that "principal dancer" is something special and thus is a claim to notability. —Random832 20:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, are you related to the subject of the article? Your name seems to imply this.—Random832 20:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have undeleted the article, based on your statements it appears not to be a candidate for speedy deletion. Keep in mind it still needs a lot of improvement, and you may end up having to defend it in an articles for deletion debate - You should read the conflict of interest policy, while you're welcome to edit the article you may be perceived as having a bias—Random832 20:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say that dance reviews should be included, but citing links/references to any mainstream media coverage in a references section would help establish notability.—Random832 20:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some background on the speedy deletion process - these policies are geared towards getting rid of articles on non-notable subjects as quickly as possible (in some cases too quickly) because often people will write an article on their best friend / some garage band they started / etc, and it does sometimes lead to stuff being deleted without checking closely enough. —Random832 20:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on my talk page. I see that Random exlained quite a few things about deletion and the procedures already. If you have any further questions, just give me a shout! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to your comment on Randoms page: "I will be happy to work on the article, but how can I when it has been so quickly deleted? Also, ballet is a very specialized field. I suggest you take a look at the other ballet dancer bios for reference. Or google "Sarah van patten" to get a sense of her prominence in the field. Should I include dance reviews in the article? That seems too much to me." You can use dance reviews as references, and such articles can be very usefull in article building. Not directly as the review itself, but the other things said in those reviews, for example (and I'm just making things up here), when a dance review sais "Sarah can Patten, who is one of the best dancers in the <something>" in Dance Dance International magazine (yeah, I'm really making things up today), you can use that to include for example "Peter Post, editor of Dance Dance Magazine, ranks her amongst the best dancers in <something>". If you could supply links to the actual reviews, I'd be happy to help you lift some quotes from them, and assist you in getting the Good Stuff into the article. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More comments on my talk. I wasn't sure if you were already familliar with 'my watchlist' on the top of your page. It's one of wikipedias most usefull tools. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Sarah Van Patten.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sarah Van Patten.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also took a look at this picture for you. By the looks of it, it's a portfolio picture. Those are usualy non-free: The photographer has the copyrights. If this is so, it can't be on Wikipedia, because of the licence Wikipedia uses (anyone is free to copy anything from Wikipedia, and copyrighted images can't be distributed freely). If this is you are the copyrightholder of the work, you can release it under some forms of the creative commons licence, the GNU free licence, or release it into the public domain. WP:COPYRIGHT gives you some more information. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't act on it soon, the image will probably be deleted, as the policy on copyright is a very strict one. Once copyright is properly dealt with, i'll get the image on the page. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The picture you took yourself, and are willing to licence under the GNU free licence, is that the same image or a different one? If it's a different one, just use a different name. If it is the same one, tag the current image accordingly. I have to look up how aswell, it's in WP:TAGS.

For the GNU free licence, you use {{GFDL-self}} and sign it. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sarah Van Patten.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Sarah Van Patten.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Secret ^account 04:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI

Please read and follow. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]