Talk:Nat Wolff
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Click [show] for further details |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, not for engaging in discussion for discussion's sake. Do not use this page as a discussion forum. See talk page guidelines. |
Contents |
[edit] older edits
-If Nat was born in 1994, he would be in 7th grade right now. Yeah, that is so true. Don't put down words if you can't even spell them!!! -also i know this because i have a cousin the same age. and ur mom same birth date and born in 1994.
Nat is in the sixth grade. Nat is a close friend of mine and I would like to edit the page in order to mention his musical side projects (i.e. The LuckyRed).
This is the edit of the page I would like to do: The LuckyRed 00:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)User:The_LuckyRed
[edit] Trivia
Per WP:TRIVIA, removed these unsourced statements from the Naked Brothers film article. The statements pertain to Nat (not the film), are unsourced, and were in an unencyclopedic trivia section. If they can be sourced, they can be incorporated into this article.
- Nat's role models are The Beatles and Green Day, although they seem to have no punk rock influences.
- Nat has stated that he has written about 170 songs.
- Nat changed the lyrics of his song "Firefighters" to new lyrics for "Rosalina" for the movie.
- Nat's great grandpa is named William Henry Draper Jr.
- Nat's great grandpa William Henry Draper Jr. was in the military during World War 1.
- Nat's great grandpa William Henry Draper Jr. went to NYC University.
- Nat's grandpa was William Henry Draper the 3rd.
- Nat's grandpa William Henry Draper the 3rd had two kids the famous Director/Actress Polly Draper
and Timothy C. Draper.
- Tim Draper (principal Schmoke) got married to Melissa Draper they had 3 kids Jessica C. Draper (Jesse Cook),
Adam Draper (Donnie Timmerman), and Billy Draper (Billy Timmerman).
- Polly Draper got married to the famous jazz pianist Michael Wolff they had 2 kids named Nat Wolff short for Nathaniel Marvin Wolff and Alex Wolff short for Alexander Michael Wolff.
- Allie is dating this guy from new york city the guys name is jason.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Another reminder to editors of this article to read WP:TRIVIA and to remember to keep the article focused on encyclopedic content. Also, new text being added should be sourced, paricularly as pertains to WP:BLP SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image..
I dont realy like the pic thats up right now.. it makes him look like a scrub lol.. they should change it.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.78.237.83 (talk) 03:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC). I LOVE NAT WOLFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOLness
Nat and his brother are mentioned in the Novelty song "Cody, Zack and The Bigmac Attack" as the two singing wolf's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlc1990 (talk • contribs) 04:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO PUT A PICTURE OF NAT WOLFF!! HE DOESNT HAVE ONE!!!! I DONT KNOW HOW 2 DO IT!!! SOMEBODY PLZ DO IT!!!--74.173.138.67 (talk) 23:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Birthday
According to an E-mail I received from Nat, he told me he was born June 25, 1995. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.232.244 (talk • contribs)
- Yes because the real Nat just happened to email you his birthday which contradicts every source we've found. I doubt the real Nat has time to email fans his birthday. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- The NBB has fans?Centurion Ry 21:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
june 25,1995?that's my birthday!!!Nat should only be 12 by now,but he's 13 and yes nbb has alot of fans!Blondie blueeyes (talk) 01:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I have also noted the error on his page. If he is 13 years of age, he would be born in '95, if he is 14, he would be born in '94. --CommanderWiki35 (talk) 02:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Nat's birthday is OFFICIALLY December 17th, 1994. If you look on any interview or on his site, natnalex.com, he says it is DECEMBER 17th, 1994. I've also looked it up in California state birth records,it says December 17th. Kid who goes to Dalton, I have friends who go there. Also, he has said that he is 13 in alot of interviews so how'd him being born in 1995 make sense? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.114.50 (talk) 21:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] External Links
NatNAlex.com, The source for all things Nat and Alex Wolff! Nat was born on the 17th of decembre 1994...three months after me (exactly) I love you nat !!
Sorry but this information is incorrect. David Levi and Joshua Kay go to my school, Dalton, and Nat was born December 20th!!!!! 1995!!! Same as me. nat birthday is december 17 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.54.94 (talk) 20:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Birthdate
I've removed all references to birthdate as this has never been resolved here and has been a constant source of edit warring.
- ... born December 17, 1994 (Full name according to the State of California. California Birth Index, 1905-1995. Center for Health Statistics, California Department of Health Services, Sacramento, California. At Ancestry.com)
Ancestry.com is a for-fee site, so we don't know what it says. Someone else claims to have an e-mail, which is not a reliable source. I suggest we leave the birthdate out until someone presents reliably sourced information. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Here's a free version of the California birth index. Would that be sufficient? [1] Mad Jack 02:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. That definitely returns 12/17/1994 for me; why are others inserting 1995? Is that based on an e-mail (which is not a reliable source)? If it continues to happen, we need to call that editor to admin attention, but I'd like to know why it's happening. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll reinstate it with the correct reference to the free version.SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)- Strike that, that is not an official California gov site, neither of the sites (ancestry.com or familytreelegends.com) are official, and neither of them are reliable sources. As far as I can tell, anyone could have added the data to those sites; where am I wrong? They're both genealogy tools anyone can edit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- He was 12 on 2007-09-19; [2] until someone comes up with a reliable source for the birthdate, it shouldn't be added. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- No one can edit the California Birth Records, because they are, indeed, actual birth records. The description at the bottom of that page: "Birth certificates represent one of the key primary sources for family information, typically being issued within days of a birth and containing the parents’ names at a minimum. Many times they contain additional parental details including places of birth, ages, and number of children." Mad Jack 03:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- What they say isn't that clear to me. They don't seem to explicitly say that their source is California Birth Records. They say "Source: California Births, 1905 - 1995. Family Tree Legends Records Collection (Online Database). Pearl Street Software, 2004-2005." On the other hand, I entered at least a dozen relatives born in California, and every single return was correct even when I was intentionally vague (left off middle names), so perhaps the Online Database source does use California Birth Records. The Nat 12/17/94 birthdate is also the most often cited online, even if the sources are iffy, so I'm willing to accept it. Shall we wait to see if we get more comments before re-instating it and correctly referencing it to the familytreelegends.com site? I'm tired of the edit wars and reverts over a birthdate, and we may as well get to the bottom of it before we revert back. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ancestry.com lists the source for birth records as the Center for Health Statistics at the California Department of Health Services of Sacramento. So, yes, I think the date should be restored. Mad Jack 05:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- What they say isn't that clear to me. They don't seem to explicitly say that their source is California Birth Records. They say "Source: California Births, 1905 - 1995. Family Tree Legends Records Collection (Online Database). Pearl Street Software, 2004-2005." On the other hand, I entered at least a dozen relatives born in California, and every single return was correct even when I was intentionally vague (left off middle names), so perhaps the Online Database source does use California Birth Records. The Nat 12/17/94 birthdate is also the most often cited online, even if the sources are iffy, so I'm willing to accept it. Shall we wait to see if we get more comments before re-instating it and correctly referencing it to the familytreelegends.com site? I'm tired of the edit wars and reverts over a birthdate, and we may as well get to the bottom of it before we revert back. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- No one can edit the California Birth Records, because they are, indeed, actual birth records. The description at the bottom of that page: "Birth certificates represent one of the key primary sources for family information, typically being issued within days of a birth and containing the parents’ names at a minimum. Many times they contain additional parental details including places of birth, ages, and number of children." Mad Jack 03:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- He was 12 on 2007-09-19; [2] until someone comes up with a reliable source for the birthdate, it shouldn't be added. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Strike that, that is not an official California gov site, neither of the sites (ancestry.com or familytreelegends.com) are official, and neither of them are reliable sources. As far as I can tell, anyone could have added the data to those sites; where am I wrong? They're both genealogy tools anyone can edit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. That definitely returns 12/17/1994 for me; why are others inserting 1995? Is that based on an e-mail (which is not a reliable source)? If it continues to happen, we need to call that editor to admin attention, but I'd like to know why it's happening. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Where does he live?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.123.171 (talk) 03:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nat Wolff Article
It is saying citation needed. The only problem is that their is no reference leading to it to make a citation, but the reference on The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie is the one I need for this reference as well but how do I do that? --AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Are you referring to this passage?
- Nat kept putting signs on his door "I want to be a child actor!," but Draper refused to at first because she wanted her kids to have a normal life, so to please him he let him film his own sitcom, called "Don't Eat Of My Plate," then Draper changed her mind and let him be a child actor, and decided to make a movie about her kids band, they formed in pre-school with their best friends, since they were so talented.[citation needed] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes! But the part on "Nat kept putting signs on his door "I want to be a child actor!," but Draper refused to at first because she wanted her kids to have a normal life" and "then Draper changed her mind and let him be a child actor" is from another news article online and is a reliable source, let me find it again it will take a few minutes, it was a PDF file and I'll add it to the talk page, instead of the reference on the other article, because this article explains that part better not NYTimes. --AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 23:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I got it, I forgot it was from Nat and Alex Wolff's official website http://www.natnalex.com/ - http://natnalex.com/news/assets/peoplemag110507.pdf --AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 23:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry I got confused with another article, give me a few more minutes. --AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 00:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I already corrected it to the New York Times, but you can readd other info from other sources. I had to delete a LOT of text from some of the other articles that were direct copyright violations from the New York Times article; please be sure you write text yourself. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I could not find the recource article, but I saw it somewhere, but re-worded it differently because as you said, it would be copyright, but the text about the argument between Nat and his mom and him putting signs on his door I found somewhere, I'm positive, but I could not find it right now, and for the jumping out of the bathtub part, would be better on the background/production of The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie, since it says "Nat and Alex" and this article is just about Nat and if we decide to leave it like that, the Alex Wolff article would need it too and for the part on "they formed a band with their best friends" it's "Nat's best friends" not "Alex and Nat's best friends." --AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- yes, that's right ... it really doesn't belong here at all. I'm pretty tired of cleaning up these articles, so it would help if editors would 1) source their edits when they make them, and 2) add the text to the right place. This series of articles is very high maintenance. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I'll go and add that on The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie article and revert this article to how it was before these edits were made with the citation needed until I find recsources to this section. --AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 00:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- ATC, I don't know why you reverted cited text in favor of uncited text. You might have left the cited text in place until you find a citation for the text you added, at which time you could correct it. Do you read the edit summaries in history? You seem to systematically undo all the work I do on these articles. It would help if you would read edit summaries, and understand the importance of providing a source for any text you add to an article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
The citation on Nat putting up a sign on his door needs to be fixed. The link is actually [[3]]. I'll fix it now. SkepticBanner (talk) 08:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Religion
The article used to say he was traditionally Jewish but now says Catholic. Maybe we should leave that out until we know for sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.205.211 (talk) 05:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
He is jewish —Preceding unsigned comment added by JonathanCameyRocks (talk • contribs) 22:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that the quote marks around the word "culturally" give a patronizing impression, as though being "culturally" Jewish is not as accepted as, say, being Orthodox Jewish. While it may be true in some social groups that one form is more or less acceptable than another, I'd like to see the phrase 'culturally Jewish' written without quote marks, as though it were something quite common. Which it is. Thoughts? Eleven even (talk) 02:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Copyvio website
Please stop adding natnalex.com; it contains a copyright violation at http://natnalex.com/news/assets/peoplemag110507.pdf which isn't allowed per Wiki's policies.[4] "However, if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States (Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry [1])." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
