Talk:Natalise

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 22:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Age

On her offical myspace it says she is 21, but I should point out it has said that for at least the last two years. The earliest reference to her being 21 was from an article dated from February 2003, giving a 1981 year of birth. I also checked on ussearch, and there is (as of feb 2006) a 24 year old Robin Nathalis Chow having resided in California.--Fallout boy 23:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

on the word of Fallout boy, the myspace age hasn't changed in the past two years. on the word of an uncited article, the birth year is 1981. are we to assume this individual on ussearch is in fact the individual to which this article is referring? have we gotten a little lax on what is verifiable? Wayne530 08:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

IMDB states the year of birth as 1981. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 08:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

IMDB has been notified of the inaccurate information and is in the process of changing it in their system. -- Brooke 11:13, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Name has been updated in IMDB as of 4/12/06.

I'd hate to bust her as an "ancient" 24 year old, but IMDb's "inaccurate" information appears very accurate on closer inspection. Articles published her school [1] and by SF Weekly [2] and the "Miss SF" pageant [3] say her real name is Robin Nathalis Chow, and that she was 21 in July 2003 (also note the Stanford article says she was a junior in college in May 2002, if she had been born in 1984 she would've still been in high school). Every person born in the state of CA has their birth info indexed by the California Department of Health Services. Go to ancestry.com and search under "Robin Nathalis Chow" and there is a record, search under "Natalise Kalea Chow" and there is nothing. Here is the text of her record:

 CHOW, ROBIN NATHALIS 1981-09-27 Mother's maiden name:CHEN gender:FEMALE county: SAN FRANCISCO 

For a free version, go here [4]. That dismisses "Natalise Kalea Chow" as her birth name, but for all I know she changed it at some point to her legal name. Article from San Jose Mercury News says she was 21 in Feb 2003 [5]. Also googling "Natalise, 21" and all responses are from pre-Sept 2005 articles. As for her myspace profile, I can prove that it's said 21 for more than a year: it says she's been a member since April 2004, but if you google it [6] [7] there is no record in the Google cache of her age ever being 19 or 20.--Fallout boy 07:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I suggest the wording "Natalise Kalea Chow (born Robin Nathalis Chow)". Also, if she had her name legally changed, isn't this a matter of public record, thus something that can be proven by finding the right courthouse and asking a question? —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 12:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Judging from this discussion, it seems that we have good evidence that her birth year is 1981, yet a lot of people keep insisting on changing it back to 1985. Is there any reasoning behind that? Until we get some hard concrete evidence that 1985 is correct, I'm changing it back to 1981. 71.139.175.231 (talk) 04:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Seems like some people still insist on constantly altering the birth year to 1985, despite this discussion proving to be being more substantial than anything else pointing to the later year. All articles I've searched regarding a later birth year have been inconsistent with each other regarding the year (some say or hint at 1984), and otherwise provide little if any new or unique information on the singer. It's obvious someone's trying to hide something, but we don't know if it's Natalise herself or someone close to her doing it for show/stage purposes (like what Akon has done), or just crazy fans too afraid to defend themselves. 98.210.151.12 (talk) 01:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Natalisecover.jpg

Image:Natalisecover.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 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 04:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)