Talk:Model (person)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fashion WikiProject
Fashion Portal
This article is within the scope of the Fashion WikiProject. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page to find other ways of helping. Thanks!
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of top-importance within fashion.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Starvation?

From the averages given (weight and height) it seems that just the average model (Both for bikini models and supermodels) has starvation (BMI's calculated for the minimum height 1.73 m and the average height 1.79 m of the former and the min 1.65 m and max height 1.73 m of the later with their given average weights 50 and 45 kg)190.42.118.10 (talk) 04:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I changed the picture from the Indian model to the Victoria's Secret model because the Indian model's picture is blurry and difficult to make out. I am not stuck on the VS one, but I think it is much better than the out of focus, poor angled shot of the Indian runway model. AriGold 21:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

It's a judgement call, but I reckon we should go the other way, for two reasons:
  1. The runway picture is free, the VS one is debatable fair use.
  2. The runway shot is more about modelling, the subject of this article than the lingerie shot is. Pcb21| Pete 20:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

In his younger days, Quentin Crisp was in fact for many years an artist's model. (His sole source of income, if I remember correctly).

I found this on google.com

Quentin Crisp's career as an artist's model is documented in his autobiography, The Naked Civil Servant, yet written and photographic documentation of his life's experience as a model does not exist. [1]

--Ed Poor

[edit] directory list removed

i have taken the list of people who are models but better known as other things. why? because modelling is not a directory listing- this is information about modelling. it just doen'st make sense to list these people in front of other models who earn millions more than these people do.

here is a backup incase some people want to put it somewhere else though:

  • In fact Tricia Helfer is a well known supermodel. She won an international supermodel competiton, whose past winners include Cindy Crawford. She has recently returned to fashion, as host of Canada's Next Top Model. Lil Flip246 23:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photo

To balance things out, there should be a photo of a male model on this page, too. DiePerfekteWelle 00:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I was just thinking the same thing. Could someone please working on balancing things out a bit? Thanks. —Mears man (talk) 23:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] what does this mean?

Non-professional models who appear on the list of women's magazines on which any magazine's name is, are known by the name of "reader model."

I can't quite make sense of it. It may need fixing? I am not sure how. ++Lar: t/c 01:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree, and I've removed the sentence. If you can figure it out, feel free to copy-edit it and add it back. --Muchness 20:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SEPARATE PAGE?

Should we make a seperate page for Fashion Models???? Lil Flip246 22:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

if you think one is nessisary and you can define and explain an encyclopedic article on the subject go for it and create it. Qrc2006 00:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't like the idea anymore. Anyways, I have a new idea. We should make seperated categories for fashion models. So fashion models have their own category, foot models their own, child models their own, and so on. Lil Flip246 02:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
You made that suggestion ten days ago, below, and no one has picked up on that being a good idea. Remember all of the other categories that you had deleted. Wait for others that agree. Doc ♬ talk 03:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Under "Types of Models", we now have 1.1 Fashion models 1.1.1 History of fashion models 1.1.2 Criticism of fashion models 1.2 Fitness Models 1.3 Hip Hop Models 1.4 Bikini Models 1.5 Fine Art Models 1.6 Body Part Models. The subcategories "History of fashion models" and "Criticism of fashion models" make the list difficult to follow. Should fashion models be a category on its own and "other types of models" lumped together? Also, should the fashion models category be split by subheadings into commercial and high fashion?Guava 15:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sexist?

i find this article rather sexist allthough this is somewaht subjective, since the article appears incomplete and in need of additions and history even with what there is the word man or male only shows up once and its in referance to a male actor or spokesing a product. ill add pics of fabio and the carlson twins in anattempt to put men on here, anyone wanna help put in some more text? anyone think there should be a page for Male Model? Qrc2006 00:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

not really necessary in my opinion. It's understandable that the balance would lean toward women, but there should be representation of male models. Doc 02:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Models Category

We should seperate fashion models from other types of models so it won't confuse the reader. We should make a seperate category for fashion model, to seperate it from other types of models. Lil Flip246 18:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference to Lauren Jones

Why is Lauren Jones given as an example of a swimsuit model? This is most likely promotionary, as there is no reason to reference her over other models. Removing the link.

[edit] models linked to anorexia?

I didnt know what to call the title comment, but I'm shouldn't there be a section of how models seemingly make the wholw " thin is in statement? I don't its 2:30 a.m ill come back on this. Hopfully you guys know what im saying "THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 07:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extra modeling link

I was told to post here for external link suggestions. I would like to suggest my website http://www.modellifestyle.com as a additional reference. There are tons of tips and advice for people interested in becoming a model. There is also an inexpensive modeling course available for download.

[edit] Model infobox

One of the editors working on Bollywood movies is using the model infobox for a number of actresses. I object vehemently to the use of this box, and come over to this article, and linked articles, to see how it was being used here.

The box states as fact these items: weight, measurements, dress size, shoe size. Just what are the sources for this information? I don't see any references anywhere. Furthermore, these items are being treated as if they are FACTS true for all time ... when in fact weight varies constantly, as do measurements. Dress size is completely meaningless, thanks to vanity sizing, and shoes sizes can vary too, depending on weight fluctuations. Why are we stating unsourced ephemera as eternal truths?

Above all, why are we putting this info up at the top as if it were the most important thing about models? Other biographical articles tell you when and where the subject was born, his/her occupation, etc. NOT dress size. This is trivializing a whole class of people.

I'd like to talk to folks here before I take this up at Biographies of Living Persons. Zora 01:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Organization of page

The page's organization and titling doesn't make sense. Almost all categories are under Supermodels, when clearly they belong under Types of models. The crticism sections shouldn't fall under a particular section unless it is a criticism of that section. Currently, "Criticism of fashion models" falls under no category called "Fashion models" - a new category needs to be created, or this one amended to be more general or changed to reflect the category. --DavidShankBone 00:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not worldwide requirements

I believe the requirements to be a model are different for every country. For example, 5'8" may be the norm for Europe and/or America, but it's rare to see a 5'8" woman in Asia. In Asia, I'm guessing the requirement would be like 5'4"? Someone needs to edit that. ― Sturr ★彡 Refill/lol 03:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions for improvements?

I'd like to make the following suggestions:

  1. Flesh out the criticism - there is far more that can be used here, and we have a good photo of a an anorexia-ish model.
  2. What about a gallery of models?
  3. We should think of a work-around to solve the ceaseless model additions. Perhaps a List of famous models?
  4. More refs and citations.

--David Shankbone 19:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] criticism article

I skimmed around the fashion category/articles as well as the model articles and found very little as far as criticism, which seems pretty ridiuclous to me -- especially considering the recent ban of overly thin models in Spain. There is PLENTY of controversy surrounding the modeling & fashion world and it seems very POV to hardly mention it at all. I expected to find an entire article devoted to the subject. I'd really like to see a wiki-savvy editor tackle the creation of such an article. I don't trust myself to make knowledgable edits, much less write an entire article!

Additionally, I don't really understand the "see also: size zero" link on the criticism section. I really don't think the two are directly related enough to warrant such an inclusion. I think we all know that 0 is pretty tiny, and the 0 article itself hardly expands on the information in the section that links it. -Jett Rink (not signed in) 74.223.3.210 14:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from saying that because volunteers haven't put in the work to create something, that it's POV. We're volunteers, and we work on what we want to work on. Since you are handing out assignments, you could have made all the same points without making accusations. --David Shankbone 15:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC) ==

[edit] Race issue

I'm aware that there are many great models of African descent e.g. Naomi Campbell, Alek Wek, etc. but it doesn't mean that this issue does not exist. I think this should be included. This is as important as the underweight issue. Number1spygirl 21:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] African American

Regarding Race issue, I don't think African American is the proper term because not all black models are African Americans. Number1spygirl 11:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

The image used for the entry model is currently the same as the image for the entry supermodel. This can't be too enlightening. -The Gnome (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] another model dead

there is also an israeli model that died i couldnt get her name but it said it so in google when i put model dies...she should be considered too. (i mean putting her name with the models that died...) Lucia (talk) 01:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image being changed

People, please discuss here why your image is better than the other person's. Don't just keep reverting each other because that is not very constructive. SWik78 (talk) 20:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It could have something to do with the fact that beauty is highly subjective. And...oh...maybe subjective discussions about what is most beautiful don't belong in an encyclopedia? Maybe words like "supermodel" didn't originally have any meaning, but pretentious models would like to create a meaning, so as to claim they are more important? Maybe. Just maybe. 24.130.9.210 (talk) 18:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gisele Bundchen image

As nobody is willing to agree on which image to use, and nobody has been willing to do anything other than edit war, I have applied the fairest solution possible, which is to not use an image of Gisele Bundchen at all. I have removed the Bundchen image(s) entirely, and moved a picture up from further down the article. Further edit warring over this image will see accounts being blocked. I suggest you do not test me on this. Neıl ☎ 14:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I have an idea! All problem is because Opinoso started an edit warring, he wanted to change the picture, I saw him writing about a picture with Gisele Bundchen on catwalk, I agree with this suggestion. Isn't fair take out a Gisele's picture just because Opinoso wants starting an edit warring. I think that everybody will agree with a pic with her on catwalk, as "Gisele Bundchen4.jpg" or "Gisele Bundchen6.jpg". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mywikipedista (talk • contribs) 18:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
We want Gisele Bündchen, the most famous model alive, on main picture again !!!!!! Wheneverwherever (talk • contribs) 04:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello users! I'm together on the fight! Gi-se-le! Gi-se-le! Gi-se-le! Gi-se-le! The best supermodel ever seen! Gisele rocks! Cantarevolare (talk• contribs) 00:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
OK! I did what everybody wants!