Talk:Milena Velba

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
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.

Contents

[edit] Notability

Milena Velba is one of the most famous big breast models in Europe. But I can't even get two paragraphs about her on Wikipedia. Why?

Zowiedied 17:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

The page was deleted several months ago in accordance with Wikipedia deletion policies because she was deemed not notable. Notability criteria for porn/erotic models are extremely high on Wikipedia. See WP:PORNBIO. --Beaker342 18:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. I'm interested, though... Nadine Jansen and Kerry Marie make it through, but not Milena Velba?--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 20:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moving Milena velba to correct capitalization

This article was created with an incorrect capitalization, presumably to get around the protection. Looking around, it seems an unreferenced version of the article was deleted at the start of the year. So the only question was whether to delete the incorrectly named article, or to move it to the correct location. After thinking about it, I think a professor at a respected university claiming the world's largest anything is sufficiently notable for an article. The AfD was 8 months ago, and the content is sufficiently different that I think deletion review is unnecessary; anyone can, of course, nominate it for another AfD. I'll notify the protecting admins. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I haven't investigated this enough to have an opinion either way, so if you feel that the article is now within policy, then I have no objections. But whoever posted this article should be aware that this is absolutely not an acceptable way to get an article onto Wikipedia. If people want to write a new version of an AfD'd article and they find new references and feel they can now address the issues raised in the AfD, then that's fantastic, but creating a lowercase version of the name to bypass salting is unacceptable. Cheers, Sarah 10:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
True, true. Let me see who did it, and leave them a note. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This can probably never be any bigger than it currently is

...just due to the lack of reliable sources in existence. What do you think, AnonEMouse?--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 15:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Why do you think so? The lady is still alive, and possibly active, so I don't see why stories about her would stop. Also, while the Czech republic isn't Uganda, it isn't as wired as the US or UK, quite possibly there are print sources already extant that haven't made it to the web. I have to admit, though, she's not my main area of interest, as I can't read Czech, and the online translators are terrible. http://translationbooth.com is the only one I've found that works on a page at all, and that none too well. I had to pick the academic source apart one word at a time with dictionaries. So I don't think I'll be the one expanding it further. :-) --AnonEMouse (squeak) 13:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
The Czech Republic is probably quite close to being as wired as the US or UK these days.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 21:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The third party sources are plainly trivial

If I was to put this to AfD right now, I guess it'd be gone within six days. Which is a pity, because she's got great breasts. Doesn't mean that I won't consider an AfD at some point in the future though.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 23:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, she's had enough coverage to pass WP:N. Although I can't read Czech, this seems to be an article entirely devoted to her in the Czech Republic's highest selling newspaper. Epbr123 (talk) 10:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, I'm not sure about the "one of the industry's largest natural busts" thing. If Milena Velba is a 36J, that's smaller than Alicia Loren (Alicia 36JJ) who is non-notable. There are other women in glamour modelling that have larger busts, I'm sure.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 14:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

A) I agree some of these sources are strange, like the link after the remark about her failed marriage. It leads to the biography page on her website which does not mention her marriage. Can this be confirmed elsewhere? and B) If you think anyone has better breasts than her, Im sorry, but that's erroneous. I know it's not scientifically/empirically verifiable, but honestly, there's a reason she is so popular. If a woman does have larger breasts, they are almost certainly not as thin as Milena body-shape wise and/or her have breasts which are not (Im sorry if this is too vulgar for this debate, but Im trying to convey a point) as well shaped. My only point in saying that is because she is extremely unique (in the size and in the shape to size ratio) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.237.216.70 (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Care has to be taken to avoid original research here, but it's odd that her own website biography doesn't mention that she's had 2 children and a failed marriage. I'm removing that statement per WP:BLP even if it is true (I don't know if it is). WP:V is more important than truth for Wikipedia.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 11:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
To say that there's a reason why she's so popular would be inherently POV and/or original research if added to the article.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 12:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)