Talk:Christopher Scott Cherot
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Fair use rationale for Image:ChrisCherot.jpg[edit]
Image:ChrisCherot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Article issues[edit]
- Listing only IMDb as a general reference in the "External links" section of a 2005 article does not advance notability and a BLP reportedly has higher sourcing standards.
- While it might be a good job for IMDb to list every producer, writer, editor, and every type of director (art, lighting, set, etc...) does not make it encyclopedia notable. Creating a pseudo biography showing a few "jobs" just becomes a Wikipedia resume and a non-notable indiscriminate list.
- While there "might be" some independent coverage there is a point when notability is questioned and needs to be shown. WP:NEXIST states: However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface.