Talk:Veronika Zemanová

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Veronika Zemanová article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
More information about this article... This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

	Pornography Portal This article is part of WikiProject Pornography, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to the Czech Republic. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Old commentary from VfD

This is kidi wiki about a non-notable porn actress, who retired after two years on the game. Kidiwiki reflects badly on the foundation. The German version also contains a topless photo. Dunc_Harris|☺ 21:21, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Delete: Porno promo, with links to topless photos and more. Must delete. (I wonder if the 20 lbs. of silicone "accidentally" injected themselves into her breasts, too. She sure is purty, though.) Geogre 00:58, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Keep: 64,100 hits on Google can hardly be called non-notable -- Täter™
  • This is a potential sockpuppet, see special:contributions/Täter™, who seems to know his way around. Not 100% sure though. Dunc_Harris|☺ 16:33, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Agree that we must maintain professionalism when dealing with adult subjects. Keep. --Rossumcapek 16:18, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. But then we would have to delete also the Marilyn Chambers and Linda Lovelace pages, would we not? A Google search reveals that Veronika Zemanova is notable enough, in my opinion, to compete with the other porn stars that already have Wikipedia bio pages. But I would suggest that the Marilyn Chambers and Linda Lovelace pages should also be deleted. And the standard we should assert here is "resource usage." Assertion: It is wasteful to tie up Wikipedia resources on pages like Marilyn Chambers and Linda Lovelace. Those Wikipedia pages cannot give enough, and a Google search on "sex" can give you better things. :)) ---Rednblu 18:07, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • This is not a question of using WP resources. +sj+
• Keep. She's an exceptionally well-known model. Prudishly refusing to allow articles about people just because they take their clothes off (or even *gasp* appear in porn movies) cheapens Wikipedia's status as a universal encyclopaedia. -- Necrothesp 18:11, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Twice someone has alleged that there is a delete vote based on her being naked. No. There is a delete vote based on Wikipedia policy that we do not allow links to "non-family" sites. I.e. the external links go straight to a topless photo. Those most be removed. Geogre 18:57, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Not a reason to delete... +sj+
  • Secondly, we should talk about notability. Marylyn Chambers and Linda Lovelace are famous as test cases in law. They both got into the news on multiple occasions, both due to the legal troubles of Deep Throat and Behind the Green Door and for claims and recantations about abuse in pornography. Both have also gone on to be journalists, film makers (in the case of Chambers), and even provocateurs (Chambers with the Ivory Snow box). So, comparing this model with either of them is extreme. Instead, we need to assess notability. 1) Does she have some notability other than her beauty? 2) Is she so iconic as a nude model that she is the equivalent of Jenna Jameson -- the postergirl for girlie posters? 3) Is she spoken of and wondered about by people who don't already know about her? Failing all that, we can Google test. Googling for "Fra Lippo Lippi" gives fewer hits than googling for Kate Moss. Which is most notable? Google will flat out lie when it comes to nude photos. Given the avidity of the scam artists and porno business on the web, tens of thousands of sites will mention her. Does that make her notable, or just popular as an image? I actually don't care that much about this particular item, since we can nowiki the porno links, but please don't think this is prudery or point to high Google results. Porn pictures get vastly inflated hits, and it's policy not to link to nudity. Geogre 18:57, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Applause! Well said! ---Rednblu 19:19, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • I have no problem with removing the links, but I do have problems with removing an article about someone who is well-known, in whatever field. I really don't care how many Google hits a subject does or doesn't get (in fact, I think it's an utterly spurious method of determining worthiness) and I wouldn't use them to back up calls to keep or delete an article. There are plenty of people out there who definitely deserve their own article but would get very few or no Google hits. Maybe that's even a reason why we should have an article about them. You say it's not prudishness, but I have to say that some of the comments sound like it to me. See Rednblu above who wouldn't even include Linda Lovelace, an extremely notable individual - the implication seems to be that people will look up these people for sexual reasons instead of curiosity about their lives; that may be true to an extent, but that's no reason not to give them an article. Far less notable people who keep their clothes on wouldn't even get a mention on Vfd (I've come across endless numbers of articles about singers or sports people who are utterly non-notable outside their fairly limited fields, but I certainly wouldn't call for their deletion). Trust me, I'm not advocating including every nude model or porn star by a long way, or indeed some of the pointless porn star lists that have already appeared on Vfd, but some are more notable than others and should be included. Delete any references to 'adult' sites by all means, but I still vote to keep the article. -- Necrothesp 19:36, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, fix external links. +sj+ 09:59, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• I'd have to say Keep, although this entry does need some TLC to get it up to standard. Also, on a related matter, that story about her getting into modelling though a burglary which left her with nothing. Slightly too corny IMO, sounds like something her PR manager would come up with. Very Max Clifford. Saint will 21:38, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Insufficient evidence presented to convince me of notability. Delete unless further evidence is presented. Rossami 04:13, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Keep!: She is very well known and quite beautiful (in my mind she should be included based on that alone!). I have to say she was in this 'game' much longer than 2 years. I would also include this text "In addition to nude modeling, she has also posed in erotic photos and videos with other female models; no indication exists as to whether or not her pictorials divulge her true sexual orientation." since a link has been created to the list of gay lesbian and bisexual people. You could begin her story about being robbed with "allegedly". A non-nude picture of her wouldnt hurt the article either, people. As for the comment about her large breasts, well they are natural, a bit too big for my tastes but she has appeared in Perfect 10 magazine which insists on non-enhanced models and I'm sure they would have checked out if they were real or not. As for links to her nude website, I agree, by all means delete them.

• A question here, why is no mention of her retirement from the adult industry in 2004 in the article?

end moved discussionThese are rumors on the internet and word of mouth, that have been compiled. The truth or validity of the above is uncertain, and for reference and compilation purposes only!!!

REPEAT:

THE INFO. ABOVE IS UNCONFIRMED, ONLY COLLECTED RUMORS FROM FANCLUB MESSAGE BOARDS AND GOSSIP.

[edit] WikiPedia is NOT a porn Website

what is the usage of this Article? to buy some Porn Movie ?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.191.10.102 (talk) 10:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

Usage is to get some information about famous adult model —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.200.168.85 (talk • contribs)

She's never done porn. What a waste... 79.103.143.153 (talk) 17:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)