Talk:Victoria Silvstedt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Photo request 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.
This article is part of WikiProject Beauty Pageants, a WikiProject related to beauty pageants, their contestants and winners.
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]
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Natural?

natural bust? Saccerzd 19:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


natural bust? Saccerzd 19:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


Whether it/they is/are or not, my expert opinion is that she is not the 36C stated in the article. Her cup size looks more like a D or E. Anyone have any first hand knowledge? -- EdX20 (talk) 20:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

first hand knowledge? I should be so lucky.. giggidygooo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.73.93.89 (talk) 10:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prostitution Allegation

Magore keeps reverting my edit, so here is a discussion (though this nonsense doesn't warrant one, really, but here goes) These are the unindisputed facts of the photographs alleging that Vilvstedt is prostituting herself:

  • Silvstedt was photographed with a middle-aged, out of shape, short man with gray hair.
  • In these photographs, Silvstedt and this man are clearly seen hugging, kissing and nuzzling.
  • The location is clearly a pier by a lake or calm ocean.
  • The unidentified man is seen clearly nuzzling Silvstedt's crotch area.
  • The unidentified man is not her husband.

The allegations of Silvstedt prostituting herself come from the fact that, to many people, it makes no sense for an attractive, married woman to be clearly engaged in romantic/sexual behavior with an unattractive middle-aged man for any reason other than prostitution. In what I wrote in the article, I presented the above-outlined facts, and presented the logic of the spurious allegations. This is POV neutral. Therefore, the reverts of Magore are unjustified. --TallulahBelle 20:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, there are more people watching this than just the two of you. And I, for one, happen to agree with Magore for the reasons stated in their edit summaries. Dismas|(talk) 20:23, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Bottom line - TallulahBelle, you have presented the facts that you base your conclusions and assumptions on, but it changes nothing - Your edits still violate guidelines/policies WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. Have you read these guidelines? If not, I suggest you do, since I get the feeling that you don't understand that your edits most likely violate the guidelines and policies that all articles on Wikipedia should adhere to. Anyway, as long as no evidence will support these prostitution allegations, no editor on Wikipedia should support nor dispute them, we should simply leave it out of this article. Meaning that your edits will be reverted again. I won't violate the WP:3RR rule, though, so I won't touch this article again for the next 24 hours. /M.O (u) (t) 21:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the prostitution allegations - could he not just be a boyfriend? Anyway, nothing is proven SO therefore following Wiki rules we can't say she is - we are an encyclopdia, we just report substantiated facts, and the allegation is NOT proven. What is fact is that the photo's were taken and posted, a legal action was threatened against SkyNews which was subsequently droped when they removed the photo's; and that the photo's do still exist out on the internet in other locations. I have posted a reference link which shows the full set of photo's to verify the story BUT have two concerns over them (1) The link uses a refrence/http link which makes it pretty clear which way that site sits on the issue (2) The link uses language which I am not sure is a wise idea for use on a "family" orientated website. I have added the link to verify the story but would be happy to partake in a debate around this. Rgds, - Trident13 10:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't a family-orientated site; anything encyclopedic can be added. You can provide a warning, saying that a link may not be suitable for minors or those that are easily offended, but you shouldn't censor Wikipedia. Saccerzd 19:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

Can someone add a couple of pictures to this page, preferably some from her Playboy issues? Full body shots would be good;) Also, someone should discuss her plastic surgery, her implants and supposed possible rhinoplasty & Botox injections.(SMM)

wouldnt a picture b enic eon this blonde beauty?--Matrix17 20:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

VICTORIA SILVSTEDT Blogs Can you add blogs on her to do externa links, http://victoriasilvstedtvideos.blogspot.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaolieraaic (talkcontribs) 22:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BLP

Per BLP, please don't post allegations & claims, particularly negative ones unless you have a Wikipedia:Reliable source. Nil Einne 17:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

You and I may not like the reference source, but the fact the pictures appeared with an unsubstantiated allegation which we can't mention, but that she and her husband did get the page removed from Sky News is substantiated - and since, she's split up with Wragge. I reinserted with ref. There was some discussion on this point a while ago, and it was agreed to keep the ref but remove the allegations - which I note you purposefully removed. You may think you were removing those discussions for the right reasons, but they are on the talk page and didn't break the rules as you suggested in your edit summary - plus, each time that piece of gossip turns up, we have a solid point by which to substantiate our text as to why it says what it does. Rgds, - Trident13 00:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)