Talk:Vanessa Blue

discussion of the article

Real birth name of an actress should not be added —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.70.251.90 (talk • contribs) .

This has been discussed many times before -- as long as the birth names come from verifiable sources and are not the result of original research, then the information stays. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 19:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Real name, redux

(selective copy and paste from a discussion on User talk:AnonEMouse#Vanessa Blue --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 18:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC))

I've been in e-mail contact with this article subject, who is complaining about the use of her real name in the article because weirdos see it at Wikipedia and use it to stalk her. I checked into it - the information is sourced to an online Syracuse student newspaper. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• Side note: that same newspaper reference is used in Lexington Steele's article. I know because I used the same ref to back up his real name. Tabercil 11:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
• Also, I want to emphasize that I am not questioning anyone's good faith - I completely understand the information was added to improve the encyclopedia. In regards to the article subject's privacy, this may be a case of trying to bolt the barn door after the horse has fled, but I'm wondering if there's anything we can (or should) do. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 12:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• Well there is precedent for removing it... I don't have a chance to check right now, but how important is the Syracuse reference to Vanessa's article (as opposed to Lex's)? Tabercil 14:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• It looks like it is the only reference on the article, but it is only being used as a reference for her name. She gave me some other information and references that I plan to use to reinforce the article. Also, I advised her to contact the newspaper publisher to request that they redact her name from their online version because of the stalking problem - if they have any humanity hopefully they will do so. But I'm thinking that perhaps we should remove it regardless of what they do, as I don't believe our articles should cause people problems in real life. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• I gather you two are leaning towards removal; the article doesn't really hinge on the presence of the name, and she's not Charles Manson. But I don't want to put down anything that says that that Daily Orange article isn't a good source, since it's an absolutely excellent source for Lexington Steele, it's not just his name, it's his whole life. I think the "any humanity" thing should be what we're mostly considering. Do we have humanity? Not too much :-), but I think we do have some. And there is a stronger case here, since the Daily Orange article is about Lexington Steele, and only mentions Vanessa Blue in passing. The name is not that important to their article, and their article isn't that important to our article, and the article subject is complaining, we don't want to annoy people unnecessarily. But I see Talk:Vanessa Blue has a comment about the name issue from none other than User:Joe Beaudoin Jr., the first administrator "from" WP:P*. I respect him highly; but it is from a year and a half ago. He's been more active just recently, let's drop him a note, see if he has changed his mind from back then. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• I'll have to lean towards removal as well. The issue is Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy; mainly presumption in favor of privacy, since Blue isn't really as famous as, say, Jenna Jameson. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 17:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Given all that, 4 editors weighing in, several for removal, none against, I think we have at least temporary consensus to take the real name out of the article, on the joint grounds that:

• the information is not widely spread, we only have one source
• that source doesn't really focus on the article subject, only mentioning the information in passing
• and that our article on the subject doesn't really hinge on the information
• while the article subject seems to be personally hurt by it, and is nicely asking us to remove it
• and that we are at least somewhat human. (Or muscine, as the case may be.)

If anyone disagrees, please let's discuss it here on the talk page first (without mentioning the name itself). --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 18:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

If the subject makes a reasonable request for privacy, especially in an industry in which the use of pseudonyms is the norm, I think we should respect it. I just can't get over the fact that YOU GOT AN E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM VANESSA BLUE! — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 03:03, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Real name, thrice

I added the real name since 1) it is in two adult industry sites (adultbizlaw.com and xbiz.com), 2) it is a matter of public record given the federal lawsuits and their settlement.--BumbaBaby (talk) 04:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

At this point, I'm going to say the wishes of the subject of the article should still have some say in what occurs. Since she's wishing some privacy on that count, I'm going to say we should respect that. Tabercil (talk) 01:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

While I respect the removal of the real name (and agree with it on some levels), it should be noted that this information is not difficult to find. Her real name is posted on a popular industry news website concerning the details of her lawsuit with Lexington Steele (see references in article). BumbaBaby (talk) 23:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Official site

Which one of the several sites that carry her name is her "official" site? The article lists vanessablue.com, but there also seems to be clubvanessablue.com, and femdomx.com as mentioned in the external links; are some of them just a collection of pictures and a domain name, indeed are any of them official? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:26, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

The one that indicates that it's official, which is the one listed in the article.  Xihr  04:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vanessa Blue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303190704/http://www.xbiz.com/news/news_piece.php?id=105919 to http://www.xbiz.com/news/news_piece.php?id=105919

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)