Talk:Stoya/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Inappropriate speedy

She is an award winning pornographic actress whose award is supported up by a reliable source (AVN). This is an inappropriate use of an A7 speedy. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Restoring

I've restored some things from my original version of this article. Some clean up still needs to be done. -Zoid a.k.a. Helios (talk) 07:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

The assertion about her prior work with Razordoll and Vivid alt DVD information needs to be directly confirmed by a secondary source. Hence the fact tag. Without a source, we have modify it to the vague generalised statements provided by her interviews. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Her Razordoll video work is confirmed by the AVN article source, which I assume you added yourself. Additionally, I've added reference from AFDB article where her VividAlt work is mentioned. Helios (talk) 12:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

AVN nominations 2009

Seems like Stoya has been nominated 5 times: one individual award (for Best New Starlet) plus 4 nominations for her scenes. Should they all be mentioned, or should we stick with just Best New Starlet because it's ..a personal award whereas others are more company-related (i.e. DP) awards?Helios (talk) 11:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Just go with all of them for now. If she wins one of those awards, we can drop the unwon nominations afterwards. Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Ok, all are listed for now. Helios (talk) 16:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The infobox picture

Let's have a discussion over her infobox picture instead of changing it back and forth. Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Interview

I would like to add this interview to Stoya: http://www.pornsaints.org/blog/double-interview-stoya-and-zoe-lacchei. I have proofs from Digital Playground and Stoya herself that it's reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellmer (talk • contribs) 19:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

infobox picture

okay, this has been eating at me for ages. the new infobox picture is horrible. the old one is still there, and i think it's a far better picture and more representative of stoya. i'd love to just go ahead and replace it but i'd like some consensus before i do. Kaini (talk) 00:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

You don't need consensus for that kind of change. That said, I think the infobox pic is fine as is. Your reasoning, that "it's a far better picture and more representative", is quite subjective and not very persuasive. --beefyt (talk) 03:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Nothing on James Deen?

there may be no reliable sources dor their rumored relationship/cohabitation, but there has got to be something includable about their collaboration in the porn world, where they have very frequently worked together and made highly lauded scenes. DeistCosmos (talk) 21:55, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

i would argue that considering the recent new york times article, there is most certainly WP:RS on their relationship. Kaini (talk) 01:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Well if we could reference James Deen's blog, we could essentially write a book on how in love with Stoya he is. DeistCosmos (talk) 02:40, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
....was.... Pandeist (talk) 20:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Real name added again

It is recognized as her real name by google knowledge graph http://www.google.com/search?q=stoya+real+name among other sources such as http://xmdb.org/index.php?page=name&id=93 and http://www.starnostar.com/Stoya-Info-Real-Name-Stoya-Bio-Stoya-Profile-Statistics/18416/Biography/ I do not see an issue with privacy since Google tells her name right away. Also as someone from Serbia I find it of value to see her last name; the fact that she carries her mother's maiden name is another thing worth noting, and the surname also serves to explain her stage name. So now someone explain to me why her real name shouldn't be here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.121.10 (talk) 01:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Google Knowledge Graph is not infallible, there's even a link to give feedback on whether then name is accurate or not. Also, you haven't provided a reason why her real name should be included. And, finally, you're complaining about a real name not being posted when you're editing without a user name or signing your posts. Trivialist (talk) 02:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


Google knowledge graph isn't the only source I've listed.
I've listed THREE reasons as to why it should be included, quoting myself: "Also as someone from Serbia I find it of value to see her last name {as it proves her Serbian heritage}; the {unusual} fact that she carries her mother's maiden name {instead of her father's} is another thing worth noting, and the surname also serves to explain her stage name."
Your last argument is ad hominem and I will ignore it. Here's a signature to make you happy. 109.245.121.10 (talk) 02:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Have you ever thought for a second that she actually carries her father's name (which she does), therefore her name isn't the one you keep inserting in?! Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
No, because why would she be called Stoya then? This way it makes perfect sense. Please back up your claims. 109.245.121.10 (talk) 05:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
You don't make sense, especially with assuming that she carries her mother's maiden name rather than her father's last name. She's said many times in past interviews that her stage name is derived from her grandmother's last name.[1][2][3] It's ridiculous for you to insert a name with flawed sources into wikipedia just because you think it must be true. Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:13, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Moreover, does this actually benefit Wikipedia to publicise her "real name"? What difference does it make? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Making information available is the purpose of Wikipedia. The amount of discussion about it on this pages proves alone this piece of information is not considered trivial.93.87.218.244 (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Please see WP:BLPPRIVACY: "With identity theft a serious ongoing concern, people increasingly regard their full names and dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object." Trivialist (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Stoya mentions her own name here 1, and talks about her surname here 2. I have not seen this problem with other pornstars' pages. Her name is also openly available on the web and sourced, for instance, here 3. 93.86.207.95 (talk) 10:44, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
That fanzine link states she adopted her grandmother's last name as an alias, not her own. She is Serbian on her mother's side. Morbidthoughts (talk) 14:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Two points for our anonymous commenter:
  • What purpose is served by adding her real name? She works in entertainment. It doesn't matter what her real name is.
  • In the NYT article, she doesn't even explicitly give her first name; she says, "my mother had considered it before naming me after Jessica Savitch". Based on that sentence, how do we know her real first name isn't "Savitch"? Trivialist (talk) 20:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm as anonymous as you are. Even less so, since you can see my IP. As for your questions:
  • What's the point of any information on this page? Whatever her real name is if we knew it accurately it would tell people instantly about her heritage, and possibly the origin of her stage name. Looking for this information was what brought me this article, and other people on this very talk page have shown interest as well.
At the very least, I think we have to separate the issue of properly sourcing her name with arguments that it should not be there even if we knew it. Morbidthoughts above has given a good argument which has made me question why she would be carrying her mother's maiden name.
  • She talks at another place in the article about people calling her by her real name, Jessica. Although it can easily be derived from the statement you quoted as well, if we don't pretend to be idiots.

Allegation that James Deen raped Stoya

Being discussed at Talk:James Deen#Allegation that James Deen raped Stoya.

  • There is now consensus to include this information. See the discussion. Pandeist (talk) 18:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
that was there. This is separate to whether it's relevant to a bio on her.
is being the victim of an attack (and becoming vocal about it in a way which sets off a firestorm of coverage) less significant than being the attacker? Well at least I hope we're not drawing that sort of line.... Pandeist (talk) 22:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
As I said on the other talk page, a mention of the accusation should probably be made (using HuffPo and Cosmopolitan sources, NOT her tweets) in the personal life section, with a "See James Deen Accusations" with a link to that section on his page. The whole thing doesn't need to be copied here. JamesG5 (talk) 01:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't think anybody's asking for the exact same thing on both pages. But having nothing at all about it is unacceptable. Pandeist (talk) 03:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Just suggesting what I thought might bypass the issues. JamesG5 (talk) 04:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I added a much abbreviated version before and was immediately undone. Pandeist (talk) 05:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stoya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Tags

I added two tags because the article is laid out in some loose list form, using a paragraph per sentence, in all but the "Early life" section. Otr500 (talk) 03:35, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Stoya's real name

Thanks for reverting the addition of Stoya's ostensible real name. With porn stars, the presumption should be that their real name are private, unless its been given in an established news story or other publication that meets WP:VERIFY, or they've outed themselves on self-published source like their own blog.

In the case of the name given for Stoya, "Jessica Nelson" is not just unsourced, its definitely not her real name ("Stoya" is derived from her real name), but rather the name of her character in "Debbie Loves Dallas". Iamcuriousblue (talk) 01:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, Stoya's actual name (Jessica Stojadinović) is openly findable all over the web, so I don't really see what the great private secret is supposed to be. -- Imladros (talk) 00:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Just because it's widely available does not mean it's true if it's not reported by reliable sources. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I find Morbidthoughts' comments is just dumb. You just said you won't allow people to post it even if it's true? So lets say someone makes a statement about the sun rising in the east and it is indeed a fact, you still won't allow it to be posted because CNN didn't report it? In this particular case, we all can see the picture and see that her hair is brown/black, but there is no citation nor an quote published. Now, go ahead and remove any mention of her hair color because it may be dyed... no wait, how do we even know she has hair at all? She could be completely bald and wear a wig all the time! No one told us she's not bald so we don't know for sure! While you're at it, strike out her birth date because where's that information printed? In fact, if you keep going, every sentence that is not cited by a reputable 3rd party cannot be on Wikipedia and shall be removed. When does it stop? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.254.23.109 (talk) 10:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
76.254.23.109, you'll have to explain how the birth name of a person under an occupational pseudonym falls under WP:BLUE. It's exactly the sort of thing that needs a reliable source. I agree that the birth name Jessica Stojadinovich is probably accurate, but publishing it here without a reliable source is a violation of WP:BLPPRIVACY. --Saerain (talk) 03:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

No win situation here. Morbidthoughts et al will not allow the inclusion of Stoya's birth name on the basis that there are no "reliable sources", but Wikipedia prohibits the use of public records, and she is not famous enough to be referenced in mainstream media. Oh well, c'est la guerre. Andy Stockton (talk) 03:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if the International Business Times would suffice as a reliable source from the mainstream media: https://www.ibtimes.com/james-deen-stoya-breakup-update-porn-star-resigns-apac-board-after-sexual-assault-2204980 107.195.167.195 (talk) 15:07, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
Not sure what the big deal about knowing porn stars' real names is anyway, unless someone's planning to stalk them or commit identity theft or something. Trivialist (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
I feel it should be listed for completeness. Wikipesdia entries for Woody Allen, Sting, Marilyn Manson, Bono, Tori Black, and many others all list their birth names. With regard to potential stalkers, as others have pointed out, her birth name can easily be discovered with a simple Google search, so omitting it from Wikipedia does nothing to deter people who want to learn it. Andy Stockton (talk) 03:47, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Those examples are supported by reliable sources. Completeness is not a reason to violate WP:BLPPRIVACY. Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:59, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
You are correct, sir. For the reasons you state, I feel it is also appropriate to remove her birthdate, which I have done. In addition to being a violation of WP:BLPPRIVACY, the Fanzine article referenced does not list her date of birth, and therefore this information is unverified. Andy Stockton (talk) 05:08, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Stoya's real name is shown at imdb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2851882/bio

imdb contains user-editable content and is not a reliable source Kaini (talk) 14:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I've stumbled upon a newspaper article citing Jessica Stoyadinovich as her real name: http://www.blic.rs/Zabava/Vesti/570007/Stoja-cita-naseg-Nobelovca-Porno-glumica-srpskog-porekla-ne-odvaja-se-od-knjige-Na-Drini-cuprija. This is from the biggest newspaper in Serbia. 93.87.206.186 (talk) 18:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Could I get an opinion on this, whether changes can be made? 93.87.218.244 (talk) 13:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
No, it can't. According to its article, Blic is considered a middle market tabloid newspaper and is inappropriate as a source. I have removed the associated text referenced to that source as required under the policy on biographies of living persons. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Over year later, I've added her proper name back in. While multiple arguments were presented as to why we shouldn't add it, only one carried any water - that of verifiability. I personally think it was dumber than a sack of hammers to fight the rising tide opting for inclusion, but it was the sole, valid argument.
Anyhoo, fast forward to 14 months later, and now we have a reference from a reliable source noting her real name. So, we are done here. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:40, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Except it is not her real name given that it contradicts two other lines in the article supported by the appropriate sources:
  • "Stoya is of Serbian and Scottish ancestry.[2]"
  • "She choose her stage name based on a shortened version her grandmother's Serbian maiden name[3][6] and trademarked the name in 2009.[3]"
Even reliable sources like newspapers can fall for circular reporting. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:53, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, but it isn't our place to call them on it, as that's kinda evaluative.
But your original point was that it wasn't her name. While it is true that she first adopted a stage name, later made it her legal name and then further marketed herself by trademarking it, it doesn't alter the basic fact that she was originally known by a different name. We don't leave out the original names of Cher, Bono or The Wachowskis, despite them being known by different names now. Edits intending to obfuscate facts should be avoided. She isn't in the Witness Protection Program (and if she is, she is the worst participant, evar), and the information noting her birth name is cited to a reliable source, so we include it. We will absolutely note that she was born with a different name.
You are entitled to disagree, Morbidthoughts. Start an RfC. I don't think you are going to like the outcome of that, but if you feel as strongly as you do about this, file it. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:24, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
There is some irony that the very first name mentioned in this section is indeed her name according to legal documents related to her trademark. The reported name is a result of circular reporting due to overeager Wikipedia editors miscapplying her interviews over the years. "if they get something wrong like one magazine put it down that my dad was Serbian and my mom was Scottish, it’s reverse".[4] Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:47, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Look, we have a reliable source that offers her birth name. Yes, she legally changed it. So did Cher. Yet, we list Cher's birth name in her GA-quality article (btw, aiming for Good and Featured Article status is the whole point of the editing process). Her choosing to trademark her stage name is her business, but it matters not even a little bit about how we note her birth name.

I know there was some back and forth earlier, but consensus changes, especially when better sources appear. To my reckoning, there were enough sources before to list it, but one editor just managed to wear everyone else down. That's not going to happen here now.
If there is an editor who disagrees with our inclusion of her birth name, initiate an RfC, and we'll bring extra eyes to the article and build a consensus for or against inclusion. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Not clear on what you mean here. Her legal and birth name has always been based on her father's name.[5] If you believe she had her last name legally changed, then it would be to adopt her grandmother's maiden name. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, the litmus for inclusion is Verifiability, not truth. We have reliable sources noting her legal name. It isn't disparaging or damaging to her person or livelihood. We use it, period. If you think it should be something else, please provide a source that notes it.
What we are not doing is leaving her article like she's some generic noun, like car, or three, or peanut butter. Her birth name will be used in the article. You are entirely free to initiate an RfC to argue that point; in fact, I challenge you to file the RfC if you believe in your position that much. I double-dog dare you to. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:09, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
I did provide you a source, her trademark registration which you dismissed. In case anyone else wants to view it. [6] Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
German news sources [7][8] Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:25, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
And that is exactly what you should argue in your RfC - what is her actual birth name? We have sources that say different things. Getting more opinions on this is a good thing. This whole thing hasw been about you wanting NO BIRTH NAME, which of course, is clearly not acceptable. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
The default presumption over inserting names especially one that has been disputed over the years is not to include mention per WP:BLPPRIVACY and this point has been mentioned over and over and over the years in this talk page! Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Including her alleged name for completism when it is in dispute

Stoya's birth or legal name has been in dispute over the past decade. Originally editors had speculated that her name was Jessica Stoyadinovich or Stojadinovich based on previous clues about her name and continually inserted it into the article over the years.[9][10][11][12][13] Sources then widely began to report and rely on it, turning it into a case of circular reporting, a phenomenon which the relied source[14] has been guilty of in the past(Wikipedia:List_of_citogenesis_incidents)[15]. In the meantime, her actual last name was also first inserted by a random editor in 2009[16] but this name has not been pushed by other editors with the same vehemence despite confirmation by trademark registration[[17]] and other sources[18] and consistency with how we understand how family names are derived. Why? I don't know. Given that her last name is in dispute, is it proper to mention either while still respecting WP:BLPPRIVACY? Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Comment - I don't care what name is used, as long as it is referenced to a reliable source. I am not buying Morbidthoughts' clearly biased thinking (I mean, look at the wording of it, haha) about circular sourcing. Clearly, one of the sources is wrong, or maybe she has changed her name more than once. The point is, we have people like Cher, Bono and others who are known by a single name, and yet in their articles, we note their birth name. It is not a privacy issue to note her birth name. We aren't giving away her ID number or home address. All our BLP articles have aka's, so this one doesn't need to snowflake. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:53, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
You just keep speculating about what she could have done with her name and its consistency. The trademark registration is from 2009. I agree that there is no harm to her in perpetuating a fake name out there, but keep perpetuating what she has commented about the media with that bitchy sass. Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
I am not speculating, Morbid. I am stating - as per your title of your biased RfC (ask someone how to actually do one of these next time, so we can help you along) - that you are arguing that it is completism to insist on a name for the BLP. As if "completism" is a bad thing.
See, what you should have been asking is whether a) her article needs her birth name, and b) what name should we use. Either through inexperience or indifference, you didn't ask that, and that's a damn shame. Only a damn fool would ask if we should include a birth name. The actual question we need to ask is:
There is distinct disagreement as to which name the adult entertainer Stoya was born with; some sources say Jessica Nelson while others say her birthname is Jessica Stojadinović. Both names are attributed to reliable sources, and there have been indications that the entertainer herself might be responsible for the confusion. How should we proceed, as a birth name should be listed in an BLP? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Sebastian (talk • contribs) 2019-09-01 (UTC)
I am definitely interested in learning about the indications that she is responsible for this. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:42, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

I have removed the name until a consensus can be reached to readd the name per our BLP policies, WP:BLPPRIVACY and WP:BLPNAME. I believe there is support for this removal for now due to prior precedent.[19][20][21]

  • WP:BLPPRIVACY - "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public."
  • WP:BLPNAME - "When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context." (bold for emphasis)

The question should be are there enough reliable sources reporting on either one of the names for it to be considered widely published. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:01, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose inclusion of her purported birth name, unless she decides to disclose it herself. There are two alleged names floating around. We have no way of knowing whether her legal name in government documents a few years ago is her actual birth name or not. Please see Gerald Ford for a well-referenced example of an early childhood name change. Adoption, divorce and remarriage often lead to childhood name changes, as does simple personal preference. References in this case are primary government documents from her adult years or contradictory. In the first of her two published opinion columns in the New York Times, Stoya wrote "The strangers who call me Jessica at publicity appearances lean in far too close. They hiss it as if they have top-secret information. All they’re doing is letting me know that they had 30 seconds to spend on Google and no sense of propriety . . ." Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:23, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Stoya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Question? A help request is open: yes. Replace the reason with "helped" to mark as answered.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

The citypaper link fails on WayBack, I fixed it here setting checked=true needhelp=yes, because it could be an unexpected bot issue. –84.46.52.214 (talk) 04:35, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stoya/Archive_1&oldid=1030871142"