Talk:Peter Reveen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability[edit]

No disrespect intended to Mr. Reveen, but are we sure that he is notable enough for an encyclopedia article? Has he won a major award, been the subject of major press attention, published a major work, or done anything else which qualifies per WP:BIO? --Elonka 21:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reveen passes WP:BIO. There aren't too many Canadians who haven't heard of him or seen him at least once. I saw him perform in 1972 and have seen him sell out local 5000 seat arenas/theatres at least a dozen times since. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 22:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, personal knowledge is not acceptable as a source on Wikipedia, per the policy at Wikipedia:Verifiability. I'm not saying that I disagree with you as to Reveen's notability -- I just want to ensure that the article is properly sourced, so as to prevent problems further down the line. Can you provide links to any major newspaper or magazine interviews? --Elonka 23:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
???Still not sure where the problem lies? A long-standing reference on a national broadcast comedy program.(international since it's also on BBC America) An interview with the Canadian University Press discussing his invitaion to do a lecture at Dalhousie University on the merits of medical hyptnotism. Telefilm Canada(basically the Canadian Federal Government) felt his massive popularity was notable enough that they produced a one hour documentary about him. An article from The Manitoban. The Australian Government's own website hosts collectable merchandise about this "internationally celebrated Canadian entertainer" (and the Wiki-article labels him as Australian?) Not being a household name in the United States doesn't mean "not famous" or non-notable. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 01:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that on Wikipedia, no article can include information, unless the source of that information is included on the page. The links you listed above should be good though -- can you please include them in a "References" section at the bottom of the article? Or if you'd like to try and make formal citations, see WP:CITE. But if that's too complex, just listing them for now should be sufficient, thanks. --Elonka 19:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to expand on the article a bit later. I was really surprised when I saw the Telefilm documentary pages..tax payer money well spent :). The Aussie Gov hawking wares was a bit of a shock too. I am currently ping-pong'ing around on vandal-patrol plus a few other Wiki-projects. But I'll keep this one on my "to-do" list, Cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 20:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:PeterReveen.jpg[edit]

Image:PeterReveen.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peter Reveen. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:23, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_Reveen&oldid=1209089651"