Talk:Madonna

Trying to Add Photos

Hi, I'm trying to add photos of what Madonna's chest looks like in a bikini from the 80's as well as recently, please allow me to add them and show the unretouched truth about the smallest breasts in boobpedia. thanks BreastKing

Move to Delete Article

Unless this article is given some redo and fairness it should be deleted. BreastKing 04:03, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Photo Should Be Changed

She looked like that for only three minutes. Madonna is barely a C and has no place in Boopedia. Here is a video that explains why. If she's allowed in then it will be a B and tiny C cup invasion! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nyQT_QsTug

Well false or not. We can't go just go by observing, and saying so and so doesn't belong here or so and so is this bra size. Madonna is debatable, not a definite "no". She very well could had breast implants. I remember reading this somewhere, but can't remember where. Even if she's "barely" a C cup, then she still is a C. Apara 03:03, 4 January 2009 (EST)

SHE IS NOT A C cup Madonna has notoriously hyped her modest breasts, especially from 1984 till 1985 when she was fifteen pounds heavier and therefore bigger chested, she still lives of this era in regards to her chest to this day despite being it visibly much smaller looking. Many unretouched photos from before 1984 and after her legendary slimming and muscle makeover in 1986, show her to be virtually flat chested or a modest B or C cup, with the exception of her two pregnancies and any other that she chose to terminate. It is also clear from the majority her photos that she has never had an hourglass figure. Despite her measurements listed in the imbd as by her PR Liz Rosenberg as 34-23-33. Madonna is known for a flat stomach and very narrow boyish hips and virtually no hip to waist ratio. Photos show her looking more like 33B/C-27-32 in regards to physical symmetry. Her current breast size after nearly two deacdes of fat burning and muscle building workouts appears to be only about a B-cup.There are no current photos out of costume or photo shop that prove otherwise.

Hi BreastKing, please sign your remarks with ~~~~, so it's easier for us to see whom we can address to and when you wrote it. :-)

As for the discussion: The cup size is cited and sourced, and her early pics show a breast that deserves to be called a C cup. We have a lot of other models here (especially Japanese models with a so-called "metric C cup" which I'd call a small B or A cup) and again others who are always cited as having a C cup, but seem to have smaller breasts (British bra sizes for example seem to have bigger letters for smaller breasts) - but all of the are still here. There is a clear rule: As long as the information is sourced, they can stay. And the C cup is the only Boobpedia rule for a woman to become notable.

Regarding the point that she may have had a C cup, but does not have it anymore today: That does not count. Linsey Dawn McKenzie had a breast reduction, for example. She still has more than a C, but what if she had a B now? Should we delete her? The clear answer is: No. She was notable for a certain period, there exist pictures and sources for that period, so she is still notable today. The same with Madonna. She does not have to have a breast reduction for still being notable - losing weight is just the same. As for many other models who had a C cup, but might not anymore today.

And some other remarks: Please refrain from

• deleting images from articles without specifying a detailed reason
• writing from a personal point of view ("has notoriously hyped her modest breasts", see General rules and Neutral Point of View policy)
• writing down original research (this is not allowed in an encyclopedia, cite others who said so instead)
• writing whole passages without any sources at all, above all if the content is debatable, concerns living persons and might not be shared by others.

Use the discussion page instead. If a consensus is reached, the article text can be changed accordingly.

As everything you wrote violates all of the above rules, I will delete your edits completely from the article until a consensus is reached on the discussion page.

Regards

Prophecy 03:30, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Sure, but she has not looked like the black and white photo for almost 25 years, the new photo is what she looks like. Madonan is NOT a C and barely ever, in her eraly days she was virtually flat chested. i have sent pics to an editor to show you what i mean. Cone bras does not a bust make.er was she has not been for ages and my text is very relevant to boobpedia so I'm disappointed that is deleted. The article reads like a madonna fan cut and paste-this is a site about big boobs not over hyped ones.BreastKing 04:03, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Hi BreastKing, it might have escaped your attention that the only content in the article so far was about the fashion Madonna wears and weared. There was nothing about her breasts or other details of her body of life so far, because I wanted to continue the article some time later. The so-called "cut-and-paste" fashion content was well-sourced and did not contain any point-of-view or personal remarks. Everything written in it was quoted from reliable third-party sources. Your comments, on the other hand, were unsourced, biased and written from a non-neutral, personal point of view.

You asked why I deleted the picture? You placed it right in the infobox instead of disussing here.

Please refrain from placing non-existent templates at the top of articles if you are not familiar with the wiki syntax.

And one last time: Please refrain from personal remarks against other Boobpedia users ("the author is being bias and does not understand breasts"). This violates again another Boobpedia rule and gets you close to a permanent ban.

Regards

Prophecy 04:07, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Other then what Prophecy has already said. I'd like to add that not all C cup breasts have the same shape, size, and form. We already had a problem with a certain editor who kept replacing sourced bra sizes or making them up from observing from eye. Because you disagree with it, doesn't give you the right to change it to way you see fit. That just disrupts the project and causes more grief then there has to be. Apara 04:18, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Additional Text I'm Adding With No Weasel Words

Madonna has notoriously hyped her modest breasts, especially from 1984 till 1985 when she was fifteen pounds heavier and therefore bigger chested, she still lives of this era in regards to her chest to this day despite being it visibly much smaller looking. Her current breast size after nearly two deacdes of fat burning and muscle building workouts appears to be closer to a B cup. User:BreastKing

An executive opinion

I'm willing to allow Madonna because she appears to have been around a C cup in the 1980s and 1990s, before she went crazy with the exercise. So, yes, she's on the borderline (no pun intended). The article *should* mention that she is less busty than in the past, but in a calmer manner, and with some documentation if possible. (Maybe we should just raise the minimum to D cups?) The Honorable 14:42, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks Honorable, I appreciate it. I apologize for the tone to Boobpedia and to my fellow Boopedianas, it's just frustrating to see a person who has so over hyped and retouched themselves but allowing a boob connoisseur's observations in is helpful and important to truth in boobage. So thanks so much. BreastKing 19:42, 4 January 2009 (EST)

"Maybe we should just raise the minimum to D cups" - Funny... That was one thing I thought when I first stumbled across Boobpedia, because I personally thought that big breasts start with a D. But that was my personal opinion, and I have been proven wrong, because there are some models with quite considerable breasts who declare themselves a C - a pity if we lost them. :-) Thanks for intervening, Honorable. I'll consider the edits when I'll continue working on the article. I'd still like to point out that every statement there is unsourced and that the remarks

• are still written from a personal point of view ("has notoriously hyped her modest breasts")
• contain pure personal research not stated by others (although there might be plenty of sources around).

Madonna is a living person, and she's a very well-known one - so we should be extremely careful about writing UNSOURCED negative or disrespective things about her. I am still for deleting the content and just leave her breasts uncommented until we have sources. Why does BreastKing not provide sources if he is so sure?

But I'll leave the article as it is until I continue working on it, for peace's sake. I still strongly disagree with the sections, though. I am not used to my articles containing personally toned statements that are not proved.

Regards

Prophecy 14:11, 5 January 2009 (EST)

Hi prophecy,

You wrote" Hi BreastKing, it might have escaped your attention that the only content in the article so far was about the fashion Madonna wears and weared."

I though wikipedia was first and foremost about BOOBs? :)

Please do remember, as I will, that you may have created an article but is not your's to call all the shots on. This is a site that allows the public to edit and for a much more relaxed vibe than wikipedia. This is the "peoples boob fetish site" not the media's. If you feel that I'm incorrect then recent untouched pics of her in a bikini (see above) also need to be in the article along with her early nudes below, it's what she's looked like for the bulk of her career. The B&W nudes you pull from are before a documented abortion when her tits were fuller and even then she's small chested. You can cherry pick shots if you want to but even the pics you chose show a b cup woman which I'm surprised you can't see. There is not one consistent group of UNRETOUCHED photos of her scantily clad that show a C cup. The biggest lesson of Madonna is that she is a liar and a cheat about everything and everything is for drawing attention to herself. so of course she is going to carefully hype herself as a c with an hourglass figure because that is much more preferable than what she really is: a b cup with a boyish/athlete's figure.

Other nudes from that era show here a 100% flat chested frame. She was shrewd enough to know that exploiting tits that were bigger than Debbie Harry's, Joan Jett's or Cyndi Lauper's would make her stand out when anyone who was not supper skinny was unheard of. Hype city on a pair that's frankly very average with almost no aureoles-small nips add size to even the smallest breasts visually as everyone knows. Madonna is the queen of hype-it's her legacy, it's like the sky being blue.Her fans always point to shots of when she was breastfeeding to prove she has chest, which frankly does not count in this case.

The only sources of Madonna's obvious fake and doctored stats are her OWN PR. the same PR that said she had a 'happy marriage.' one can see with their own eyes that she is not only a borderline C cup but in no way has an hourglass figure. She may have had a slight C cup from being heavier TWENTY FOUR YEARS AGO FOR A YEAR- give or take a few pregnancies exploited for photo shoots, but all her photos ALWAYS show -VERY CLEARLY- a very narrow hipped frame with no hip to waist delineation. It's in all her photos, esp photo number two below where she is clearly an A/B at the most without the cones. readers need to not be mislead that's why the obvious must be stated.

If you are her fan then we will most likely never see eye to eye because I think she is an insult to the many truly buxom, voluptuous and sexually explosive women on this site but rules are rules and sadly she stays for now. I'm used to her fans fabricating what is not there about her body to give her the allure of more exciting women that she's blatantly stolen from. It was in my opinion a far more authentic site before you created the article-Madonna just has no place here. Here are some photos from ALL along her career-no padding,no cones,no photo shop lighting or airbrushing- that prove my point beyond a shadow of a doubt.I'd like to know what you think and I hope the editors of this site will take note. The eyes don't lie on this one. -Breast King 1-5-09

A new section after all the pics

Hi BreastKing,

no, I'm not a fan of her, but I am a fan of objective writing. Again: CITE! We do not need original research here. Write a personal article in your own blog, in a forum or where-ever. That would be the right place to show your personal opinion. I appreciate, however, your efforts to clean the article from personally toned and weasel words. I understand if you are upset if everybody makes a hype out of her body or whatever, above all if it's only her PR division who made up this public image - but this is the case for nearly every single celebrity. You will not find unretouched photos of them nowadays. Which causes paparazzi all over the world to try to shoot as ugly as poosible pictures in order to show the "real" face of these celebrities.

By the way, there may be ugly pics of many other big boob models too - but do we show them here? No, why? If this site is for boob fans, they deserve to see what they want. And if a public image differs very much from the so-called "truth", one can link to a newspaper article who discusses this and cite it. There's no need to show it in the article and prove it oneself - because this is original research, which is not welcome in an encyclopedia. Some other editor added a paparazzi pic in my article about the German chancellor Angela Merkel - but note the difference: He sourced his statements well and made clear the notable relevance of the incident. Although I was very sceptic at the beginning, I have to admit that it has its place in the article, and it's not harmful.

I actually never noticed serious discussions about Madonna's breasts - if she declared that they are a D cup publicly, there would be much discussion, but she didn't. She focuses on reinventing her image every time, and one has to admit she has been quite successful at this over the years. That's all. That's a neutral point of view. Period. She does not state she has bog boobs, only you state she hasn't. This is personal. And please do not quote badly edited amateur digital videos spreaded somewhere on YouTube as a serious source. We all know that the celebrity world is a world of images the public want to see, not about the reality.

You said you wrote most of the Russ Meyer article on Wikipedia. Yes, and like here on Boobpedia, you did not source your statements at all; others did the work for you. On the other hand, you attacked editors who tried to expand the article in good faith, not refraining from personal attacks against the editors themselves instead of what they wrote. So what's the use of this? Did you think that a simple boob page like Boobpedia is less tolerate against disrespect of fellow editors and constant breach of basic writing rules? That the quality of an article becomes better if you add lots and lots of pictures to it (and destroying the layout) instead of only once providing a serious source where Madonna's breasts are discussed? I think you do not have to remind me that articles here are public and can be edited by anyone who feels entitled to it. As long as these are edits, not mere expressions of personal opinions, I welcome this and I am grateful for everyone working on stubs I created - that's what they were made for.

Of course, Boobpedia is all about boobs. That's the only rule for notability here: A cup size larger than C, as we all know. But it would be quite poor to stop there and describe the boobs af each model in her article and nothing else. We should leave this to porn sites. If a person has an influence on other aspects, it can and should be included too. Even if she did something important with her left toe.

Prophecy 06:34, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Prophecy,

I think this can qualify as at least a soft core site! that's what makes it so great! Regarding my great article on Russ Meyer from wikipedia, you are extremely incorrect and lying as there are tons of notations and citations on my wikipedia article, THAT I PUT IN, that's why I was awarded my Barn Star for it as it was only two paragraphs when I got there.Perhaps you are not clear as to what my wikipedia name is?

That You Tube video speaks the truth for anyone interested in understanding women's bodies and how the media lies. There is a reason why there are no A list stars with large breasts and why madonna and Gisele lie about how they are built. If you are not a woman then it may not matter to you. But many who love women and truly buxom hourglass bodies want the truth out.

You need to allow the pictures of madonna to stand and I am going to request that the editors allow them to stand if this article is not deleted which it really should be. It's clear she has has been a B cup throughout the majority of her career, she is very small breasted by the standards of the women here.Unlike Kate Winslet or Jennifer Connelly who NOW do have visually smaller breasts following child birth, weight loss etc the majority of THEIR careers they HAVE been busty.

With madonna it's the inverse, she had a kind of busty look that was exploited from 84-to 85 and that was it . Before and after that she has been too small for notability on this website. The photos you call ugly? THAT is what Madonna's body and breasts look like. Many have been featured on her own website too... I think a better compromise would be to allow many of the above photos in the article. It's her body, it's her breasts, she's world famous for it and it's what she looks like. Finally, I did recall her measurements from costuming DURING THE 80's as being released as showing her having a B/C cup. I will find a reliable source and hopefully that will be enough to prove the obvious truth and rid this wonderful site of such an obvious interloper.

BreastKing 10:24, 6 January 2009

Trust me, it was easy, even for me as a non-native speaker, to spot you out in the history of the Russ Meyer Wikipedia article. We do not have barnstars here at Boobpedia. We are just polite to each other and say it to an editor if we appreciate his or her work. In your comments, on the other hand, I only read such words as "you are lying" and so on. This is the opposite of friendly culture. Why don't you use all this energy you spend into personal attacks to research instead and present well-written, well-formatted and well-researched information on a topic?

It's not me who has to allow pictures in an article. It's the community of editors by consensus. And for the time being, I cannot see any possibility for you to reach any consensus with other editors, as you are busily building up a more and more rigorous front against yourself. And this will become even worse if you do not calm down and refrain from attacking editors personally instead of objectively dealing with their edits.

It's not our task to reveal the truth about someone. This is the media's and other writers' task outside Boobpedia so we can cite the discussion and include it in an informative article. Prophecy 18:27, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Hi Prophecy,

You wrote:

"She focuses on reinventing her image every time, and one has to admit she has been quite successful at this over the years..." Personally this has only been possible because she is a sacred cow of the media, they have alawys allowed her to be and stay famous at the expense of much more talented performers, not because she 'reinvents herself" The media tells people that exact line and they repeat it verbatim. Just something to be aware of.

You wrote: "Yes, and like here on Boobpedia, you did not source your statements at all; others did the work for you."

It's not a personal attack on you to tell you that you wrote a false statement. It's 100% false, a lie whatever, I did virtually all the work on the Russ Meyer article, especially quoting Jimmy's book and A Clean Breast, so folks could not come along and say "Jessica Simpson has a Russ Meyer body..." We live in a culture of pop culture illiteracy due mainly to people like madonna who stole and prepackaged the original ideas of others and mass marketed once cool, underground things like bdsnm to Kmart America.

I for one see sites like this as bulwark towards that changing. If one person reads this discussion and thinks wow, I felt that way too, she really is just a load of hype then ok, thats what this is about. Truth in and history of boobage.

BreastKingJanuary 2009 (EST)