Talk:Dave Naz

Untitled

This may be a candidate for Speedy Deletion, but it appears as if the subject may be noteworthy in his field. It does not help the anti-speedy delete case that the only editor of this article appears to be the subject of the article, nor does it help that this appears to be among his only edits. It should, of course, be taken out of the first person. I will watch the page and contact the author. If no one speaks up, I think that it could be sufficient for db-bio.Hwonder talk contribs 23:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

copied from User:Davenaz's namespace

My suggestion would be to move it to your user namespace, as it seems more appropriate there. Per my previous comments, you may be worthy of a bio article per se, but it is usually a bad idea to write it about yourself. See WP:CSD, WP:PROD, and WP:BIO for more information. Hwonder talk contribs 22:44, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

---

I did not write the Bio. I only posted it. It's all totally relevant information to anyone visiting the page. Why would you want that taken off just because I'm the person who posted it? If the writer that came up with the bio posted it, would that make it OK to use? If so, I can have them re-post it.

this is taken right off the bio page: Bio Page on Website

I think that this article has the potential to be relevant and part of wikipedia, which is why I didn't suggest it as a candidate for speedy deletion. I think that there are three things that are important at this stage: removing first-person references, adding more relevancy items (e.g. highlighting the Maxim etc exposure), and removing language that makes it sound like marketing. I highlight auto-bio only because it can be indicative of articles lacking in the three previous fields. I think it's appropriate to leave the cleanup tag that is on the page right now until the items above are addressed, but I think you're right in thinking that this isn't a deletable item. Hwonder talk contribs 05:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

---

How about if I have the author repost the Bio with the "Highlight" changes you requested? I don't pretend to be a writer and don't see any point in rewriting a well written bio just because I'm the person who posted it. It will only look bad if I rewrite it.

I think that sounds like a good plan. The two major "cleanup" points remain writing in the first person and changing what reads like a marketing narrative into an encylopedic article as to why the artist is important (which is where the highlighting comes in). I'm sorry I can't be of more help than that, but I don't know about the subject to be a significant help without whitiling a bunch of stuff away which might be important. I'm going to copy this dicussion to the article's talk page for clarity. Best of luck! Hwonder talk contribs 23:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Why did the page I put up get deleted?

---

How is this lacking Sources? They are listed with a link. Are the editors taking the time to view the changes? they were made some time ago.

Please take the "lacking references or sources." off the page. Everything on there is refferenced from his offficial website.

---

Can you take out the "This biographical article or section is written like a resume." The page has been updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fashioncheque (talk • contribs) 23:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Deleted majority of article

I deleted most of the article text, as it was simply a direct copy from Dave Naz webpage, plus some additional first-person commentary by Naz himself. This is unacceptable as a Wikipedia article. I will note, however, that Dave Naz is a notable photographer and porn filmmaker. This article should not be deleted, but instead should be expanded into a proper Wikipedia article. Iamcuriousblue 17:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted family & school part of Bio

Author did not site sources —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fashioncheque (talk • contribs) 21:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Author did not site sources --Fashioncheque (talk) 04:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Author did not site sources. Site sources if you're going to add something.--Fashioncheque (talk) 13:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dave Naz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070516080143/http://www.laweekly.com:80/la-people-2007/dave-naz/16296/ to http://www.laweekly.com/la-people-2007/dave-naz/16296/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100209005124/http://www.davenaz.com:80/ashleyblue/ to http://www.davenaz.com/ashleyblue

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)