Talk:Jewell Marceau
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
[edit] Birth year
In what way can the birth year of a public figure add to victimisation? Does the article need detail on the alleged victimisation? Ian Cairns 23:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
The following response was moved from my talk page to here by me. Ian Cairns 08:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello there!
I feel that I need to make something clear. Those of you who moderate (or whatever the more appropriate term might be) seem to be under the impression that I am trying to force my "P.O.V." about Jewell Marceau (and others) upon the readers of Wikipedia. This is definitely NOT the case! What IS true is that Jewell is unsure how to go about making changes to her profile herself and has asked for my help. She was extremely distressed to find that the year of her birth, her hometown, and her birth name had been posted here and she asked me if I could please try to fix what she considered to be a major problem. She understands that her recent legal issues have indeed already caused her legal name to be made available to the public (should they go looking for it), but her feeling is that the average Internet surfer would be far less likely to stumble across an article about her court case than they would by deliberately looking her up on Wikipedia.
We in the adult industry certainly understand that "civilians" have very little knowledge of how frightening it can be to become "famous" simply for performing in adult movies. We deal with stalkers, cyberstalkers and...erm...overly-ardent fans on a daily basis. Whenever our legal names and/or hometowns are published somewhere, people with less-than-kind intentions practically jump to find our families and share whatever they (think they) know about us. I know so many women and men who have suffered greatly because of this and have also experienced it myself. (Yes, right. We made the choice to join this industry and we should be prepared for the consequences. Of course it's more complicated than that.)
Many adult models really dislike Wikipedia because literally anyone with a grudge, a bad attitude, or just a cruel streak can come on here and say anything they want. I cannot even begin to tell you how many blatant -- even ridiculous inaccuracies I have found in the pages of Wikipedia...but I have only made changes when the involved party has asked for my help. One model/producer (who is quite computer-literate and did not ask for my help) was shocked to see that whoever had set up "her" Wiki page had done so with an utterly laughable amount of error in both grammar and spelling. Models I know usually try to divert attention away from "their" Wikipedia profiles because they never know what will show up on there next.
Well, that's pretty much all I have to say and I'm sorry to have droned on so long. Please know that I definitely DO NOT want to get into any kind of a battle with ANYONE over information posted here. Wikipedia has such great potential as a source of useful and entertaining information. I just want to help/protect my friends whenever I can.
Most Sincerely, Darla Crane
- Hello Darla. I don't wish to battle with you either - I recognise your excellent intentions. However, I think you need to be fully aware of the various Wiki policies, since I think you may be swimming against the tide. I also have to disagree with you slightly. People can NOT just come on here and say what they like. Either what they say is true and verifiable, or it is false or hearsay. If it is verifiable, then the information is already published somewhere - albeit newspaper, tv, book or other online ref. If it is false or hearsay or POV, then Wikipedia has policies for dealing with this - and it is part of my duties as a Wikipedia editor (and all other Wikipedia editors - not just Admins) to look out for this and to redress this whereever it is found. I would have no problem for you to delete or modify any unsubstantiated remark on Wikipedia - with a short edit summary explaining why it had to go. However, I would have a problem with the deletion of pertinent verifiable information from any article. How many original names and dates of birth of Hollywood stars can you name? There are dozens in the public arena. Wikipedia has quite a collection too. Presumably all of them too have had to deal with the downside(s) of being famous?
- I have no independent source of information of the date in question - so I will tag it as citation required. Unless a public, verifiable, source is produced and quoted, then the information will be unverifiable. This is preferable to a censorship battle. I hope that helps. Best wishes, Ian Cairns 08:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- This brings up an interesting question - does the wiki foundation let censorship attempts slide whenever it's done to prevent possible victimization, even when the information in question is already available to the general public?
