From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please see Porn stars WikiProject for the proper templates and guidelines for creating and maintaining entries on erotica performers.

Contents 1 How to use the template 2 Field descriptions 2.1 IAFD & IMDB 3 Discussions 3.1 no fields visible? 3.2 New fields 3.2.1 num. films / name 3.2.2 iafd/imdb links 3.3 Applications 3.4 This template has gotten too huge now 3.5 Remove "orientation" listing 3.6 Question 3.7 "alias" 3.8 Natural Bust neccessary? 3.9 Birth Name? 3.10 The name of the template 3.11 Added "Eurobabeindex" field 3.12 Hair length field

[edit] How to use the template

Basically, the template should be inserted into an applicable document near or at the top of the textbox, using the example below:

Female adult bio
Birthdate:	June 12, 1980
Birth location:	Manchester, Connecticut, USA
Birth name:	Jane Doe XII (challenged. One Wikipedian recommends this is inappropriate to include.)
Date of death:	July 4, 2010
Measurements:	72QQQQ-23-34
Height:	53 ft 4 in (16.3 m)
Weight:	1100 lb (500 kg)
Eye color:	red
Hair color:	puce
Skin color:	white
Natural bust:	yes (contested)
Orientation:	lesbian
Ethnicity:	Chinese (contested)
Alias(es):	Jackie Love, Mistress Passion
No. of films:	248
Official Website
Female adult bio at IMDb
Female adult bio at IAFD
Female adult bio at AFDB

{{Female adult bio|

 photo= [[Image:Bouguereau venus detail.jpg|200px|Bouguereau venus]]

|birth= [[June 12]], [[1980]]

|location= Manchester, Connecticut, USA

|birthname= Jane Doe III

|death= [[July 4]], [[2005]]

|measurements= 35DD-23-34

|height= 5 ft 4 in

|weight= 110 lb

|eye color= hazel

|hair color= auburn

|skin color= white

|natural bust= yes

|orientation= [[heterosexual]]

|ethnicity= [[Caucasian]]

|nationality= [[American]]

|films= 248

|alias= Jackie Love, Mistress Passion

|homepage= http://en.wikipedia.org/

|imdb= 4858588

|iafd= MistressPassion

|afdb= 69/Mistress-Passion

}}

The result is on the right.

This will align/float to the right of the article's main text. Also, there shouldn't be any need to repeat the same information in the article's main text with the exception of the birth name, location, and dates of birth and death.

Please also note that the pipe in front of {{Female adult bio|}} is not accidental, it is required for the template to render correctly. Instead, you'll just print out the syntax.

[edit] Field descriptions

Each field is fairly straight forward. Should you have any confusion on what a field is for, click the linked field name. It'll lead you to the appropriate article on Wikipedia.

For consistency:

• keep the dates in the Month Day, Year format;
• measurements should be in a bra-waist-hip format;
• measurements, height and weight should be in both the metric system and imperial system whenever possible;
• orientation should be one of three things: bisexual, heterosexual or homosexual;
• ethnicity should be specific and proper -- avoid "black" or "white" -- if you don't know the proper term for an ethnicity, refer to the List of ethnic groups.

Remember to try and make the template human-readable, so that others who follow you can easily make any corrections or additions to your template.

For fields which you are uncertain about, define them but do not enter any text after the equals sign.

[edit] IAFD & IMDB

For these links, you do not need the full URL. You only need the id part of the URL. Here are two examples, where the ID number location is boldfaced:

• For IMDB: http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0000000
• For IAFD: http://www.iafd.com/person.rme/perfid=JJameson/gender=f

[edit] Discussions

[edit] no fields visible?

Presumably due to User:Melancholie's latest edits, nothing is showing up for me except a pink box with the actresses' name. -EdgarAllanToe 14:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, this is intended! A table row is only shown if you fill in information in an article. If any parameter is undefined (not given at all, or the parameter line was removed from the article (that's rather often the case)) or empty (mentioned, but with no value "|death="), the superfluous, unnecessary table cells are not shown! --- Best regards, Melancholie 15:00, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that many articles on my watchlist had most of the fields filled in. Now when I check on them, there is only the name and no other information. For instance, Anna Malle. -EdgarAllanToe 12:08, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I checked out Anna Malle and didn't find any fields missing. Perhaps you need to purge your browser's cache or simply do a hard-refresh of the page in question. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 15:03, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Purged, forced a refresh of the page, and still just see a pink box with the name. If others can see the information, it's obviously a peculiarity of my setup. Damn. -EdgarAllanToe 16:26, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Which web browser and operating system do you use? Maybe it's a problem of your browser (but if so, I do not know why, because the whole thing is done by the Wikipedia server)? Could you additionally have a look on the HTML source code? -- Best regards, Melancholie 17:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, I have made two changes (one in the row "birthdate" and one in the row "birth location"! Does your browser show one of these? I recognized that Opera and Firefox prefer style="" to class="", and when style="" is used twice, they prefer the second of these both. So "style" and the "last mentioning" has most weight (like it should be, of course ;-). Maybe your browser works different? Dillo, for example, shows everything, as long as the parameters are defined (valued or empty). If not, {{{..xyz..}}} appears (Dillo generally does not render CSS,..). This means we should not delete the parameters ("|death=") in the articles! -- Best regards, Melancholie 21:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Birth location shows up for me now. I am using IE 6.0, by the way. -EdgarAllanToe 11:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

For your information: Still having the same problems with this template as reported by Edgar... Is this really a browser thing or is some other repair to be done? Regards, --Garnier 10:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Garnier, EdgarAllanToe: Is everything visible for you now? --Melancholie 20:05, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

The example on this page is now working for me. -EdgarAllanToe 15:02, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Confirmed. And thank you. --Garnier 19:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New fields

[edit] num. films / name

Two missing fields that I would like are:

• Number of Films — estimates are available from the adult DBs
• Name — so I can change it

What do people think? --vossman 20:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. Problem now is that once the changes are implemented to the template, each page using the template will have to be edited to ensure that the template displays correctly. (Otherwise some of the results will turn out to be less than desired...) -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 21:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and did the changes. You may now edit the name attribute by adding "name=" (sans quotes) to the FAB template syntax. (Make sure to use the pipe as well to denote the end of the field!) Unlike the other fields in the template, you do not need to explicitly declare this line within the template syntax; it'll just default to the name of the article. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 03:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've noticed your comments, but didn't respond. Good job. --vossman 16:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] iafd/imdb links

Wouldn't it be much better to add links to iafd/imdb at the end of the infobox ? These are extremely useful and should be present on every article anyway. This avoids cluttering the "See also" section. This is done on the film info box (Template:Infobox_Film). Actually I am a little bit reserved about the usefulness of imdb links but if we want them anyway it is still better to put them in the infobox, for consistency. -- tonigonenstein 23:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I am fine with this. I'll begin work on the template Monday. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 01:07, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. Now all that needs to be done is to add the proper id numbers/strings to the iafd and imdb fields. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 03:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Applications

Should this template be used for non-pornographic actresses? Right now it's being used at Rachel Sterling and I'm just curious if it's the right template to be using for her. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 01:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it works and it's the right tool for the job, I guess it can be applied to articles akin to Rachel Sterling. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 02:13, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

And Benazir Bhutto? It works, but I don't think it is the right tool for the job. --Palnatoke 11:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It's also in use on Jodie Foster's article. Would you disagree with its usage on that page as well? I'll grant you that the template was originally meant to summarize porn actress info, but it can be used on other pages that have absolutely nothing to do with pornography. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud — WP:PORN BIO?} 01:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This template has gotten too huge now

Does anyone else agree that all the public hair/body hair other miscellaneous crap, ahem, information bloats the template? If so, please lets begin discussion on how to condense the template. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 01:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Skin color, underarm hair, and pubic hair are of little use, especially the later as it may change almost daily. Dismas|^(talk) 03:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I've cleaned the template. I did keep the skin color (although I think I may remove it, but I'm still undecided on its being in the template) and I kept the blood field as well, seeing as the latter is a sought after attribute in Japanese porn stars/idols. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 02:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Remove "orientation" listing

This could lead to a libel case. Just because a woman has appeared in a lesbian role does not mean she is lesbian or bisexual. It's acting, just like any non-porn actress who has played a lesbian but does not identify as such. I propose moving the item from the template. Jokestress 03:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I got your e-mail. :-) I believe that the field just needs to be clarified. Perhaps we would be better off noting "on screen" orientation, rather than real life orientation. Thoughts? -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 19:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I took it out for the time being because of a complaint by a porn actor, but, I guess maybe a "Roles played" vs. "Orientation" could be OK. I'm not sure what the value of that is, though. It seems like pretty much any woman in porn has done a scene with another woman. In addition, I imagine any complaints are going to come from males who object to being labeled (which started the issue). Jokestress 10:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

i think it's important to distinguish "roles played" and /or "orientation". in the industry, a big factor in the work one gets is who he/she is willing to have sex with. 67.172.61.222 23:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

What does "afdb" mean? I Am Ri¢h! 23:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It's an acronym: Adult Film Database. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 01:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

What's the URL for the site? (last question) Never mind, I figured out. I Am Ri¢h! 01:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "alias"

Is this to include aliases OTHER than the main one? Because as it currently is, if that's the case, then it's very confusing. --Golbez 14:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Perhaps the wording could be made a bit more precise. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud — WP:PORN BIO?} 01:06, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Natural Bust neccessary?

Is this category heading neccessary? This topic is frequently a subject of dispute with various female celebrities and models, and is often hard, if not impossible, to conclusively resolve. Some plastic surgery techniques can make breast implants much harder to detect than normal (such as submuscular underfilled implants.) For a lot of celebrities, the only real way to be fully certain of this is if the person in question admits to having had surgery. In any case, this category doesn't really seem to be all that significant for most of the articles (and for many of women for whom this question would be relevant, it is as mentioned impossible to find a 100% certain answer.) -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.30.206.67 (talk • contribs).

Actually, given that this piece of information is of interest (particularly for the big-busted models), I would say it's relevant. However, in cases where we don't know, the field could easily be left blank depending on the article's subject. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud — WP:PORN BIO?} 13:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Birth Name?

I think it is inappropriate and dangerous to include birth names in pornstar bios on wikipedia. Pornographic film actresses work under assumed names for very good reasons including reputation and safety. There is also no public interest served by including that information.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.58.56.5 (talk • contribs).

I don't think its either inappropriate or dangerous, unless the information does not come from a verified and reliable source. If we don't have a valid, reliable source for the information, then I do agree that it should be removed. However, neither Wikipedia nor any self-respecting information source has, amongst its goals, to protect people from themselves or to decide which information is "dangerous". In addition, the "public interest" is a weasel term at best. It's also an oxymoron of sorts like "common sense". If we went by that, you'd be surprised by what the public is interested in. We are here to report, not to protect. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud — WP:PORN BIO?} 20:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The name of the template

In the Russian wiki, the translation of this template is heavily debated. One of the issues is the title. The translation of the title was more like "Female porn star" literally Pornoaktrisa (Порноактриса). The opponent claimed that this title bears heavily derogatery connotations. Let us perform an imaginary experiment: what if the English template is renamed into Female Pornstar? (The specifics of the Russian language is that it is only hardcore that is called Pornografia. The softcore is called Erotika (Эротика)). Wouldn't the women editors protest because of this renaming? Alexei Kouprianov 00:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why only the women would complain. --Golbez 01:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Then, I reformulate the question: why the authors of the English template didn't call it Female pornstar bio and used Female adult bio instead? The other issue is why the orientation field renders invisible on the pages, even when filled? Alexei Kouprianov 06:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I would suppose that the person who named it used "adult" because "porn film" is more of a colloquial phrase whereas the industry term is "adult film" (e.g. Adult Video News). Also, softcore films, as well as hardcore, both fall under the umbrella term of "adult movies". Dismas|^(talk) 09:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added "Eurobabeindex" field

I added a field for Eurobabeindex, since this database lists website appearances that are not listed in the film or video databases like IMDB or IAFD. There are actually several databases along the lines of Eurobabeindex, but Eurobabeindex is the most complete that I know of. Iamcuriousblue 18:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hair length field

I suggest a hair length field. There are large communities on the Internet of admierers of very short or very long hair. Hair length is a just as important key factor as hair color when searching for a model you don't remember the name of. Based on this factor, the model may be listed in the list page Women with very long hair. The field may reflect the most extreme value, for example the longest or shortest hair length the model ever has had. Examples of possible values in this field - commonly used in various hair dicsussion forums:

• Crew cut (or cropped)
• Boy's cut
• Chin length
• Shoulder length
• Upper back length
• Mid back length (or Bra strap length)
• Waist length
• Tailbone length (or butt-length)
• Thigh length (or Mid-thigh length)
• Knee-length
• Floor length
• Beyond floor

If I don't here any comment on this within a few hours, I will add the field. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Longhairadmirer (talk • contribs) 12:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC).

That's hard to find information on. The other numerical fields - date of birth, and "measurements", for example - are more common, and can be found in the IAFD, and Adult Film Database for example. Also many performers that have a personal web site put them up there. Where are you going to find a reasonably reliable source for hair length for most of our articles? AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Note that the uncommon or extreme lengths - say greater than waist length - are probably going to be important enough to note in the body of the article in a sentence or two. But their rarity is what makes them noteworthy. An info box is for important stats for most of the subjects. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Given that such a thing is hard to find information on, and since hair styles can (and do) change drastically and frequently, I do not think the infobox would benefit from such a field. Furthermore, the information is so uncommon that it doesn't merit inclusion in an infobox. And any unique or rare hair lengths can easily be noted in the article's body. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 05:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm also opposed to having the field included. I agree with the statements of both Joe Beaudoin Jr. and AnonEMouse. Dismas|^(talk) 05:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)