Talk:Victoria Silvstedt

Victoria does not earn millions a year...

Show several links in support of that by a verifiable third party. She only claims to but that is more vanity than truth. 108.46.134.60 (talk) 18:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm tired of this slow edit war. It wouldn't surprise me if she does earn millions a year, however this being a WP:BLP, we need to reference the information from a WP:RS. My Finnish extends to using Google Translate on the ksml reference—which yields: "The trendy fashion lady nets you a few million euros annually mallintöillään, television contracts and the various products in public relations works". Tabloids are not generally reliable sources, and I think it is pushing the bounds to accept one that isn't written in English. Is there another source supporting her earnings? Oh, and to the anonymous editor: please drop the conspiracy theories that she is somehow editing her own page. At WP we Assume Good Faith and stick to the issues. GFHandel ♬  20:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I have an overwhelming suspicion that this editor is the same one who just got blocked from editing the Kara Young article. Your best recourse might be to request semi protection for this page.Fasttimes68 (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I forgot to add, KSML is a broadsheet newspaper, not a tabloid. And RS refs don't have to be in English per WP:NOENG. Fasttimes68 (talk) 21:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say it had to be in English, but since it isn't, and since no one here has admitted to knowing Finnish, the best I can generate from the source is the sentence: "Silvstedt earns millions of euros every year via television contracts, product promotion, and her public relations work". I propose using that sentence instead of the one in contention. GFHandel ♬  21:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, User:Fasttimes68 has contacted me through Wikipedia:Translators_available to provide assistance in a translation from Finnish.

The article in question is published by Keskisuomalainen, a smallish regional newspaper from Jyväskylä. The article is a short writeup on Silvstedt and her career, apparently based on an interview with her during a visit to Helsinki in 2008. Translation of the relevant passage: "The trendy fashion lady earns annually several million euros through modeling, TV contracts and PR work for different products."

If this statement is disputed, I would suggest additional sources to support the short writeup by Keskisuomalainen. The journalistic integrity of the regional newspapers is not always that scrutinized, and this statement is most definitely based either on what she said in an interview, or on an undisclosed third-party source. On the other hand, I personally think a model who has appeared on Playboy could easily be making such money if they haven't blown their career. Cheers, hydrox (talk) 01:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello everybody! Keskisuomalainen is the oldest Finnish-language and one of the most respected broadsheet newspapers in Finland. In the newspaper article in question, as one can see above, the income information is the newspaper's statement, not hers. And therefore, I wrote "According to the Finnish broadsheet newspaper Keskisuomalainen" in the Wikipedia article as that sentence is very much true. Wodel (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

After reading the translation by hydrox, I agree with your assesment and think your edit make sense. Fasttimes68 (talk) 18:47, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

GFHandel asked me to take a look at this. My first take is to support his view that a claim like this needs a better source. He has asked me to semi-protect this article. I would rather do that if there was an agreement to do so here in article talk. I would only do so if there was a risk of a continuing edit war at the article, while consensus was being reached here. Is that the situation? --John (talk) 20:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Protect the article to prevent socking while consensus is reached here. I would also suggest protecting the talk page to auto confirmed editors to prevent socking in here while consensus is discussed. Fasttimes68 (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I have semi-protected the article for two weeks while a consensus is arrived at here. I will leave this talk page for now as IPs may have valid opinions to present here. As always I will reserve the right to change my mind. I hope that a strong consensus can be arrived at about whether to include the earnings material. Are there any other bones of contention? Would a RfC be any help? --John (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

The article does not claim as a fact that Victoria Silvstedt's earnings are millions per year. The article states very clearly that "According to the Finnish broadsheet newspaper...", leaving it up to readers to decide whether to believe it or not. In my opinion, considering Silvstedt's versatile work history (a beauty pageant contestant - a high fashion model - a glamour model - an actress - a television presenter - a designer - a singer - a promoter - an author), a mention of her possible earnings "According to the Finnish broadsheet newspaper..." is reasonable. It seems that everyone but one, who kept deleting the information again and again, agrees. Wodel (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well said. FWIW i belive this editor is the same one who is being considered for a community ban over at ANI. Fasttimes68 (talk) 13:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Income material

The edits are downright passionate. Only she could be this upset over simple non-verified facts being removed. Or verified facts that are unflattering being added. Someone should look into it. 108.46.134.60 (talk) 20:28, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I won't engage myself in this matter more than this: I'm not her nor am I upset. The income information is from a respected broadsheet newspaper, which does not quote her saying that her income is millions per year. It's the newspaper's statement. One doesn't have to believe in the statement, but one cannot go and delete the information just because one doesn't believe it. Wodel (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The statement is a "claim" and therefore not a proven fact. Find links about her from reliable third party sources that prove or confirm people's net worth and yearly earnings, then add it again. 108.54.225.22 (talk) 13:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

• I think a claim like this would need better sourcing than the Finnish one to be included, but I will go with whatever consensus is arrived at here. --John (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I happened to write the Keskisuomalainen article -- that regional Finnish paper would have no special knowledge of Victoria Silvstedt's income and if that's the only source saying it, I would not include it.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, considering her versatile work history (a beauty pageant contestant - a high fashion model - a glamour model - an actress - a television presenter - a designer - a singer - a promoter - an author), a mention of her possible earnings "According to the Finnish broadsheet newspaper..." is reasonable, leaving it up to readers to decide how to react to the information. I don't know, if you indeed wrote the original newspaper article or not, or why would you write that she earns millions per year without having knowledge of her income, but the newspaper article does include a mention of her income, and I don't see a problem with having that mention featured in the Wikipedia article as well. But I do think that the phrasing is important, and should be kept as "According to the Finnish broadhseet newspaper..." as that phrase is very much a fact based on the published article also available on the Internet. Wodel (talk) 18:38, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood. He started the wiki article, not the RS article. 19:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Income Material part 2

After the last round on this stunningly boring tidbit (see above) consensus says that the quote regarding the income material is ok. But does it belong in the article in the first place? Fasttimes68 (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Victoria Silvstedt. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120516155901/http://www.ksml.fi/erikoissivut/ihana-elama/puputytto-merkkivaatteissa/811685 to http://www.ksml.fi/erikoissivut/ihana-elama/puputytto-merkkivaatteissa/811685

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

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:54, 20 December 2017 (UTC)