Talk:Nikki Benz

Removed section

I removed the following section from the article, which had been added by User:Lavishprincess. There are some good factoids in here, if they can be referenced, but the tone is completely off.

Height: 6'5" Weight: 310 lbs Measurements: 36D-24-36 Hair Color: Blonde Eye Color: Hazel Shoe Size: 7 Birthday: December 11

About Nikki Benz:

Nikki Benz is one of the top superstars of the Adult Industry, a breathtaking blonde beauty whose career crosses over into the world of mainstream entertainment, having appeared on MTV's Fast Inc., Show Time's Family Business, VH1's SuperGroup, HBO's Sin City Diaries, Playboy TV's Canoga Park and the world famous Howard Stern Show.

As well as rocking a successful website NikkiBenz.com. Nikki is the star of over 50 triple X movies with a consecutive streak of top selling DVDs including the smash hit, Test Drive! Published in virtually all adult men's magazines including universally known publications; Hustler, Genesis, High Society, Swank, Fox, Cherie, D-Cup, Club and Club International just to name a few. Even mainstream magazines have succumbed to her; Urban Male Magazine (UMM Canada), Stuff and Maxim have all featured Nikki Benz!

Nikki has her very own radio show on KSex Radio which she hosts every third Wednesday of every month!

Nikki Benz is one of the few performers, if not the only one, who was able to get three contracts with three different production companies. Most performers would be lucky to get just one. She has been a contract girl for Pleasure Productions, Jill Kelly Productions and Teravision!

GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

/* External links */

About a month ago I added an External link pointing to her ZZ Insider page http://www.zzinsider.com/babes/view/nikki_benz. I am wondering why the links was removed. I am certain that the link is relative and adds pertinent information to the article if readers require it. --Markjonjonathan (talk) 16:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Indeed you did. And it was removed here. That was found by clicking on the "View history" tab at the top of the article. It was removed by User:Tabercil because he felt it was linkspam. If I had seen it first, I would have removed it as well since it doesn't really add anything. All the info there is pretty much here as well. See WP:EL for more on external links. Dismas|^(talk) 19:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Origins

As far as i'm concerned, she's ukraine not canadian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.210.130.138 (talk) 15:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

How did she got into the field?

I want to know how did she got into this field? Please post if anyone knows. I am Ben and not a terrorist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.135.10.153 (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

birthplace?

The infobox only states "Ethnicity: Ukrainian". Is there really no reliable source stating Ukraine is the birthplace? IAFD is used in some articles as a source, so it should be. 85.217.32.182 (talk) 23:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

- She was born in the Ukrain but family moved to Canada when she was a child, 7 y. old.
She sais so herself in the interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23YjWhDxSCA&t=2m45s at around 2min 50sek.
So she is NOT an "Ukrainian porn actress" as some whant to portray her, saying that is factually incorrect, she did not start her porn career as a child in Ukraine.
--82.131.15.249 (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

She has Canadian citizenship and grew up in Canada so hence can be considered a Canadian pornstar. However, even her own website states she was born in The Ukraine and moved to Toronto at an early age. Can't find anything anywhere that suggests she was born in Quebec. http://www.nikkibenz.com/blog/bio/

Gogopurplemonkey78 (talk) 18:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Now there reads: Benz resides in Los Angeles, California, USA, but is originally from Toronto, Canada.

So she lives in California, but is Canadian, though actually originally from Ukraine... 82.141.119.130 (talk) 02:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Photo

You can put a photo and do not change it Alf5435334777 (talk) 20:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

There already is a photo in the article. And there is no discussion about it being changed. Could you clarify your point? Dismas|^(talk) 20:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

there are users who vandalize Alf5435334777 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes but this article hasn't been for a while. What's your point? Dismas|^(talk) 20:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

We need to change the photo. her appearance has changed from that blonde look long ago. this is September 2016. the photo was like 5 years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.76.129.158 (talk) 04:17, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the Defamation lawsuit

Judge Denies Nikki Benz's Motions in Tony T Suit, Case to Proceed --SamWinchester000 (talk) 17:39, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Birthdate

Why is the birthdate (BLP violation removed) not included? This is information found on numerous sources.... 2604:3D09:927F:E900:34FB:BAEF:36B:88A5 (talk) 04:32, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has higher standards for sourcing regarding personal information about living people; see WP:BLPPRIVACY. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Why was the date removed here in the talk page? What have I violated, come on man... 2604:3D09:927F:E900:C:DC1B:8E8E:1B80 (talk) 15:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

BLP policy linked above applies to all pages, including talk pages. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 17:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Birthdate (2)

Several sources list this as the date, and I will continue to post this as a discussion topic. 2604:3D09:927F:E900:FD2E:EC13:175C:EACE (talk) 18:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Naughty America ® on X: "@nikkibenz Happy Birthday, Nikki! 🎂 🥳 Cheers to you on your special day! 🥂" / X (twitter.com)

Response from the official Nikki Benz account was "Thank You" 2604:3D09:927F:E900:FD2E:EC13:175C:EACE (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

The "thank you" tweet is not a confirmation of anything, and the Naughty America tweet doesn't even state the date explicitly, let alone the year of birth. It's also a WP:USERGENERATED source, not reliable. Combining different sources (one for the year, another for the day) to arrive at a date of birth is also WP:SYNTH. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Removal of birthdate

I won't stop. Grow up 2604:3D09:927F:E900:C028:6865:A4E7:19EF (talk) 19:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User Sangdeboeuf is not engaging in:

2.1 – Mutual respect

We expect all Wikimedians to show respect for others. In communicating with people, whether in online or offline Wikimedia environments, we will treat each other with mutual respect.

This includes but is not limited to:

Practice empathy. Listen and try to understand what Wikimedians of different backgrounds want to tell you. Be ready to challenge and adapt your own understanding, expectations and behaviour as a Wikimedian.

Assume good faith, and engage in constructive edits; your contributions should improve the quality of the project or work. Provide and receive feedback kindly and in good faith. Criticism should be delivered in a sensitive and constructive manner. All Wikimedians should assume unless evidence otherwise exists that others are here to collaboratively improve the projects, but this should not be used to justify statements with a harmful impact. 2604:3D09:927F:E900:C028:6865:A4E7:19EF (talk) 19:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

They are right in removing the date of birth though, they should only be added if they have either been widely reported in reliable sources or has been explicitly stated by the subject. Unfortunately your addition is not taking these points into account, and so are not improving the encyclopedia. Rather than trying to force you addition through repeated edits I suggest listening to the concerns of other editors. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

It is not being ADDED TO THE ARTICLE

Having it in the talk page is here to generate discussion. If I am not blocked I will continue to write , until I am stopped. I have no problem being obstinate in the face of ridiculous, authoritarian, behaviour.

2604:3D09:6A86:F300:7932:A573:B23A:D0B1 (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Additional sources stating DECEMBER 11, DECEMBER 11, DECEMBER 11, DECEMBER 11

https://babesdirectory.online/profile/nikki-benz

https://adultfilmindex.com/actor/214/nikki-benz

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1617488/bio/

https://www.bornglorious.com/person/?pi=233140 2604:3D09:6A86:F300:7932:A573:B23A:D0B1 (talk) 23:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

From official Nikki Benz facebook : [1] 2604:3D09:6A86:F300:7932:A573:B23A:D0B1 (talk) 01:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

The Facebook post by Benz only says "It's my birthday this Sunday", with no indication of her age. As I explained previously, Combining different sources (one for the year, another for the day) to arrive at a date of birth is also WP:SYNTH. This is explained under WP:DOB: Original research must not be used to extrapolate the date of birth. The other links are to more self-published websites, not reliable. WP:IMDB in particular is considered generally unreliable. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Are you serious man?

She clearly states her birthday is December 11, your responses are absolutely baffling... 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 04:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Is it not possible to state December 11, 1981/82.... 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 04:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

The subject of this article states their birthday is December 11, but that's not enough? Ok, then... You can use all of your Wikipedia esoteric terminology, that doesn't make what's going on here correct or appropriate. 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 04:56, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I'm serious man. This would be WP:SYNTH giving potential stalkers a 50/50 chance at guessing the subject's actual date of birth. The only halfway acceptable source here is the Facebook post by the subject, which doesn't indicate their age at all. Benz is borderline notable anyway, which means we should probably just list the year (or range of years as appropriate). —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:57, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

There are numerous confirmations from her verified Facebook that state DECEMBER 11 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 05:09, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

[2] 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 05:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

[3] 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 05:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

None of these include the subject's age or year of birth. "Thank you for all of your birthday wishes!! <3" doesn't even indicate the day. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

[4] You are just being willfully antagonistic.

She clearly says I was born on December 11 here : 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 05:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Great. Fantastic. Where does the subject state her year of birth? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:28, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I never stated there was a source for the year, I was always talking about the DATE.

And that date kept being deleted from this talk page.

I think it can be reliably shown that the birthday is December 11.

This does not have to be added to the article, but should be left for reference on this talk page. 2604:3D09:927F:E900:ECE9:8136:2301:7A99 (talk) 05:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

What you are talking about is a birthday, not a birth date. Birth date includes the year of birth. Talk pages are a place to discuss ways to improve the article, not a general discussion forum or repository of poorly sourced biographical info. If a piece of information is worth referencing, then it can go in the article. If not, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia anywhere. Once again, there are different standards for material relating to living people than for other topics. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

>giving potential stalkers a 50/50 chance at guessing the subject's actual date of birth

Why does this matter for adult actresses and not every single other notable person on the entire website? TheNeutroniumAlchemist (talk) 12:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

It matters because porn actresses and other sex workers are at increased risk of stalking and harassment. Wikipedia has an explicit policy of not exposing subjects to victimization, even unintentionally. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

BornGlorious mirrors Wikipedia content, it discloses this at the bottom of the page ("Text content from Wikipedia licensed under CC BY-SA"). This makes it unreliable, as you can't use Wikipedia or a site that mirrors it's content for referencing.

IMDB is user editable, so it's content is no more reliable any random person (this doesn't apply to everything on IMDB, but it does to the details in question).

BabesDitectory and AdultFilmsIndex don't look immediately unreliable, but they don't look like they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Biographies of living people (BLP) are meant to use high-quality sources, and these don't look like 'high quality' sources.
You should never use any social media posts that are not directly from the subject in a BLP article. The policy on this is quite clear, and not respecting BLP policies does reault in editors being blocked.

In many cases when it comes to personal information such as birthdates, statements from the subject are the easiest sources. If the have personally made certain information public it removes any concerns about keeping it private.
It both common and acceptable to have date without the year, so I don't see why "11 December" couldn't be added to the article using this Facebook link[5] as a reference. But there is already a reference from the Independent[6] stating she was 36 in 2017/2018, which would make her birth year either 1981/1982.
What can't be done is combine these details, creating a birthdate from parts of different sources is a bad idea. Calculating backwards from a year to get an exact full birthdate isn't always clear or easy.
In my personal opinion I would remove the year range, and use the date/month without a year instead. There's two reason for that, one the date range is calculated from her being 36 when the suit was filled but doesn't state what year that was and the year range is not widely reported (outside of the Independent article), and two the date/month is something the subject has confirmed themselves and birth year can be something individuals don't always want to exposed. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 14:56, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

TLDR the first four sources presented are crap, and using social media posts in a BLP that are not directly from the subject is a quick way to find yourself blocked. However the subject has stated their birth day/month, and I suggest that is used instead of the birth year range currently used. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

As an aside - 2604:3D09:927F:E900:... I strongly suggest you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's policies on living people (WP:BLP) and reliable sources (WP:RS). If you're unsure if something is reliable you can ask questions at the reliable sources noticeboard (WP:RSN). Just because there's a website online that has stuff doesn't mean its automatically usable on Wikipedia. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I reverted the addition of the day and month per WP:DOB: Original research must not be used to extrapolate the date of birth. Inclusion of the birth day/month as well as the year using different sources amounts to WP:SYNTH.

I disagree with listing the birthday by itself; this is trivial information more suited to a fan magazine than an encyclopedia. Whether an individual wants their birth year to be known is immaterial; the year alone is too general to present identity theft concerns or concerns about harassment, etc. It is, however, useful information for the reader to know a subject's approximate age. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 03:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm ok with that, but please don't mass revert over other changes - it's disruptive. You could have just removed the value from |birth_date= without the need to mass revert. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 14:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)