Talk:David Knijnenburg

Fair use rationale for Image:Gcac barricades.jpg

Image:Gcac barricades.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 08:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Doctor Who

As far we know, David was never seriously considered for the role of The Doctor in Doctor Who. All sources, including seemingly reliable ones, are quoting an Australian newspaper [1] that was engaged in speculation based entirely upon original research. There is no evidence whatsoever that Knijnenburg was auditioning for the role, or that he was under consideration. Discussion regarding this issue can be found at Reliable sources noticeboard, please feel free to contribute so that a consensus can be reached. magnius (talk) 10:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The disputed text reads: "He was one of dozens of names mentioned during the media speculation over the casting of the eleventh Doctor Who after David Tennant announced his resignation." The sources are the proof of the statement. It is not actually a question of whether the original source is reliable or not. 11:46, 16 June 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.99.99 (talk)

Should this article be deleted?

Looking at the content of this article (including full name & pronunciation guide and a listing of "who he has worked alongside") it doubt that David Knijnenburg is notable enough to warrant an article. The only references on the page all lead back to the one Courier Mail article claiming consideration for the role of the 11th Doctor.

This information should, at best, be referred to in articles discussing the casting of the 11th Doctor, but does not warrant an article for the actor. As discussed above re this issue, there is no evidence verifying whether he was actually auditioned for the part. The newspaper article is simple speculation.

Viewing David Knijnenburg's IMDB page, most of the parts listed are either bit parts or uncredited. While it appears this is certainly a capable theatre actor, there really does not seem to be any claim to notability.WeepingAngel63 (talk) 03:44, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Knijnenburg. 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/20070506040446/http://www.thegroggysquirrel.com:80/articles/2006/09/29/2006-fringe-festival-reviews/hitchcock-and-herrmann/ to http://www.thegroggysquirrel.com/articles/2006/09/29/2006-fringe-festival-reviews/hitchcock-and-herrmann/

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) 03:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Knijnenburg. 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://archive.is/20120707063257/http://australianactingnews.com/archives/australian-actor-to-play-dr-who/ to http://australianactingnews.com/archives/australian-actor-to-play-dr-who/

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: 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) 01:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)