Talk:Lusty Lady

Learn more about this page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lusty Lady article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Lusty Lady was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 9, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Pornography Low‑importance

	Erotica and pornography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organized Labour Low‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cooperatives (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cooperatives, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CooperativesWikipedia:WikiProject CooperativesTemplate:WikiProject CooperativesCooperatives articles

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality: Sex work Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sex work task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Good Article nomination has failed edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

The Good article nomination for Lusty Lady has failed, for the following reason:

The article is close, but misses some of the criteria for a good article. Bugmuncher 06:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

1. It is well written. In this respect:

(a) it has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to non-specialist readers;

ALMOST - could use some tweaks here and there. It needs to flow a bit better.

(b) it follows a logical structure, introducing the topic and then grouping together its coverage of related aspects; where appropriate, it contains a succinct lead section summarising the topic, and the remaining text is organised into a system of hierarchical sections (particularly for longer articles);

MOSTLY, but the lead doesn't addresss the scope of the article.

(c) it follows the Wikipedia Manual of Style;

AS FAR AS I CAN TELL - I am no style expert yet. (My specialty is leads...)

(d) necessary technical terms or jargon are briefly explained in the article itself, or an active link is provided.

YES

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect:

(a) it provides references to any and all sources used for its material;

YES

(b) the citation of its sources is essential, and the use of inline citations is desirable, although not mandatory;

The newspaper articles should include bylines, and all web sources cited should include retrieval dates. see WP:CITE

(c) sources should be selected in accordance with the guidelines for reliable sources;

YES

(d) it contains no elements of original research.

YES

3. It is broad in its coverage, addressing all major aspects of the topic (this requirement is slightly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FAC, and allows shorter articles and broad overviews of large topics to be listed);.

I think so

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy. In this respect:

(a) viewpoints are represented fairly and without bias;

YES

(b) all significant points of view are fairly presented, but not asserted, particularly where there are or have been conflicting views on the topic.

YES

5. It is stable, i.e., it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars.

I did not check this.

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic. In this respect:

(a) the images are tagged and have succinct and descriptive captions;

NEEDS BETTER CAPTION - See WP:CAPTION for advice.

(b) a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status.

This is pretty close! Maybe I'll contribute some changes myself tomorrow after I wake up...Bugmuncher 06:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Millennium edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The reference to Lusty Lady in the TV series pilot Millennium was deleted as "pointless trivia". The section header, "Miscellaneous", was indeed ill-conceived, and I changed it to "Popular culture references". Other than that, I don't see how removal of this fact helps our readers: we should let the judgement of whether this trivia is pointless or not confidently up to them. The trivia lacked a source, so I added one. AxelBoldt 03:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Lusty Lady. 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.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lusty Lady. 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/20090324120703/http://www.twistedpine.org/seattleuntimely/seattle_untimely_lusty_lady.php5 to http://www.twistedpine.org/seattleuntimely/seattle_untimely_lusty_lady.php5

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:21, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic