Talk:Penelope Black Diamond

She looks turkish to me. There is a large turkish population in Germany. --Flaxapa 12:58, 13 March 2007 (PDT)

she could be. some kind of confirmation is needed though. looks can be deceiving. originally i, like a lot of people, thought Kerry Marie was east indian ;) --Hexvoodoo 16:56, 13 March 2007 (PDT)

She isn´t turkish. I know her real name...it´s a good old German name...! ;) --der_thomas 14:27, 04 october 2007

Hey, Prophecy, why did you re-publish Penelope's real name? Why you don't respect, that Penelope won't to publish her real name? Why do you publish a false-information about her birth year (it isn't 1984, it is 1982) and her measurements?

I corrected the information and you made a revision?! ;)

Hello Thomas and welcome to Boobpedia.

Perhaps there are a few misunderstandings about my function and how Boobpedia works.

First of all: Boobpedia is free for everyone to edit. It was not me who published any "wrong" information about her. Another editor thought it was her right birth year and filled it in, in good faith. Good faith is what should be assumed first if you find any edit you do not agree with.

As for my person: I am just another Boobpedia editor. I reverted your edit, because the other birth year was not more plausible then the former one - there was no source cited and no reason given, the birth year was just replaced. So the new birth year was not "more correct" than the old one. If you cite a source, everything is ok; perhaps she mentioned it on some of her pages. I'll be happy to assist you how to provide sources and references in the Boobpedia system.

As for her real name: You asked me why I did not respect that she does not want to publish her real name. She already did. By registering her trademark, she made her real name accessible for everyone. I wrote it in my edit comment: Her real name is already publicly accessible through the reference I provided. If she does not want this information (which can be found out be everyone in the net) to be published on Boobpedia, it would be useful if she herself addressed to one of the administrators and asked them to delete her name. But nevertheless - she has become a public person (and she wants that, otherwise she would not have become a model), so she should be aware that people find out about the registration of her trademark.

As for the revert of your entry: Although Boobpedia might allow to show X-rated pictures, although Boobpedia might not be as strict an encyclopedia as Wikipedia is, it has certain rules about the content and the form it is presented in. An entry in the field "real name" that she "won't publish her real name" does not meet ecyclopedic criteria. Either delete the whole entry or leave the name in, but a sentence like "She won't publish that" (although, once again, she already did), is not written from an objective point of view. If she mentioned this in an interview or something like that and it could be sourced, this would be ok. Mention in the article that she said in an interview that she does not want her real name to be spread around, provide the source where this statement can be found, and everything is ok. Please don't get me wrong, but an encyclopedia cannot allow statements just added by people who personally know a performer. Boobpedia is not a blog and not a forum to discuss what a performer has in mind or what she said to one of the editors. If a statement can be proven, add it. If not - just leave it out.

Last: Thanks for using the discussion page. This is the proper way to discuss such topics. To avoid an edit war, I suggest to leave the entry for her real name blank, but to avoid statements like "she won't do that". She did, and it would be by consensus of the editors and a sign of respect for her if the Boobpedia editors decided to leave this information unmentioned - or perhaps just write that her stage name is a trademark, with a reference to the official trademark database entry. If someone wants to know about this entry, he or she can click the link and find out about her name, but we did not mention it explicitly in the article.

Please do not get me wrong, but the community does not know you, so why should we believe that your statement is true if it is not sourced? I could state myself that she told me this and that and write it in the article. I could write that she explicitly agreed to publish her name, but how could I prove it?

So I suggest to delete her real name from the infobox, but leave the link to her trademark entry intact, as a source for that fact that her stage name is a trademark. Would this be a way you could agree with?

Regards

Prophecy 07:03, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

I had a lot of contact with Penelope via e-mail or letter. As she registered the word mark "Penelope Black Diamond" she has to bring her real name on the document, but she seperate her private live and her model live, strictly. In the web, she is Penelope - only Penelope and not Nadine. Nadine isn't public, Nadine isn't Penelope, she said to me... ;) I have some insider-information, because I had a lot of contact via e-mails and letters. That's all...

In my opinion, there must be the correct information on the site about Penelope!