Talk:Debbie van der Putten

Reverted edits by Pearboy19 - reasoning:

• From sidebar in the El Pais article: "Debbie Van Der Putten, nacida en Holanda, es también otra de las modelos con discapacidad famosas. Perdió el brazo derecho en un accidente." - hardly "not mentioned" at all.
• Why is the Vietnamese article unreliable? I found it on Google News search and as far as I can tell, it is a news website. I checked quite a few phrases from the front page and the website in general to check whether it looked legit and didn't see any alarm bells. Happy to seek out a Vietnamese reader to verify this.
• Also, the addition about porn blogs/nude modelling etc is unreferenced, and downright contradicted by the Vice source, which says "we have never shown any of our models in nude or erotic poses and therefore for us the question does not really arise. We have no intention of changing this policy in the future." So if Pearboy19 is claiming DVDP is doing nudes on that site, without a source, then that is original research. These are why I have reverted these edits. Mabalu (talk) 10:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Reply to above

• It is NOT original research or unreferenced regarding the word 'nude' : please continue to read the Vice article. There is a specific paragraph about Putten's decision to model nude for Ampworld (so I have put this back into the article) which is as follows:

"So Debbie van der Putten’s like extra naked then.

Debbie has been photographed nude professionally, and maybe others will choose to follow suit. But this is another endeavor in their individual voyage of self-discovery and a revelation to public attitudes…. Debbie is happy to try this and we're happy for her. But it is important that our models know that this is another journey, of a different kind, and that we are not providing this kind of service, so they don't have to worry about it. It makes the models who don't want to go there, which is the vast majority, more comfortable with the concept of being photographed in a normal way."

• The Vietmanese site is primarily a website/blog and as such an reliable source for biographical articles. The Spanish site, despite your reasoning, is essentially about another disabled model, so yes, it is indeed something of a side issue. I have again deleted that content.

PearBoy19 (talk) 14:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

The point of the references were to demonstrate that Aimee Mullins and van der Putten are often cited side by side as well-known disabled models, nothing more or less than that. It is clear that Putten has done nude modelling (as evidenced by Playboy). One wonders why you are so insistent on inserting "porn"/"nude" in this article, as while I'm not denying it isn't the case, an earlier version of the article indicated (without references) that Putten stopped modelling for the website upon realising it was porn - a contentious claim that REALLY needed a reference to stay up, and I couldn't find one. You have added the same titillating sentence again WITHOUT the citation that is essential for something controversial.

Also, as you are obviously fluent in Vietnamese - please explain why you think the site is a blog. It came up as part of a Google News search, the site generally appears to deal with lots of current news and suchlike, etc, and from what I saw, it did not appear self-published.

As we are clearly in disagreement, and in the interests of avoiding WP:Edit war, I will request a third opinion. Mabalu (talk) 15:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you for seeking a third opinion. I find your attitude rather defensive, I have to say, though you are clearly an experienced editor which I am not. I am on wikipedia primarily because I am interested in the reality tv show, Britains Missing Top Model, hence my interest in the contestents. I do feel that the comparison between Putten and Aimee Mullins is somewhat tenuous at best (Mullins was a paralympian and modelled on the catwalk for Alexander McQueen). Puttin is hardly in that league, with the best will in the world. I feel that the two refs you have given (the Vietmanese and Spanish sites) look like a rather desperate attempt to back up that claim. Surely there are other better refs you could have used? As you yourself note, it is evident that Puttin has modelled nude in the past. The VICE article gives a clear indication of her willingness to do so as well as the Playboy pose. Why is it wrong to use that adjective in the article? I can't understand why you call it titillating. I have given a citation for the nude photoshoots (VICE). Her presence on other devotee sites is clear by making a search on google. I am sorry you have taken exemption to my editing. I shall leave you to it. PearBoy19 (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

  I can confirm that the Vietnamese source is a verifiable source and not a self-published blog/forum. It is an online newspaper published by the Association of Non-public Colleges and Universities of Vietnam (per Vietnamese laws, all media has to be published by a mass organization affiliated with the Vietnamese Fatherland Front). DHN (talk) 18:43, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for that, User:DHN. User:Pearboy19, what I take exception to is that you have been on here long enough to know about the value and importance of references, yet you insisted on adding unsourced, uncited information in the same edit as you delete sources and cites. That is a strange contradiction. Let me explain - I came across this article recently, having defended it quite keenly in an earlier AFD, and discovered that the same person who nominated it for deletion had later, when nobody else was looking, made it into a redirect. Whether they did this on purpose to ensure it disappeared, or did it later in good faith, I don't know - but it looked suspicious. So I set out to find sources to show that she had sufficient international recognition. Due to the FUBAR Google News function, I was amazed to get SOME recent sources on there for her, which just happened to be the Spanish and Vietnamese sources. Ideally, I would've hoped to find better sources, but they sufficed as some evidence for international recognition (especially as she is listed alongside other models such as Mullins), and I hope to find better ones along the way. Please note that I have tried to incorporate your edits in such a way that it is supported by the sources. - I would say that Playboy modelling implies nudity was involved, but am happy to add the word "nude" in there to clarify. I also have no problem with calling Ampworld a paraphiliac site. However, the VICE source is EXTREMELY explicit in saying they are "not porn", so I cannot support inclusion of that particular term without a rock solid source. It is simply not the kind of thing that is fine to leave up without a cite. Mabalu (talk) 23:14, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Debbie van der Putten and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

It seems to me pretty obvious that Mabalu's reversion was justified. In the first place, as DHN has kindly confirmed, the Vietnamese page cited is a news site, as could have easily been confirmed by Googling for the name giaoduc and viewing the Google translation of its home page. Removing sources while retaining the statements sourced to them is absurd. As Mabalu correctly pointed out, the VICE reference explicitly said that Debbie van der Putten did not model nude for them, although it recognises she has posed nude in her professional career. As far as I can see, no citation has been offered for the claim that she is "often seen on porn blogs" and fetishist web sites. Such a statement should never have been placed in this article without citation, and especially not placed in a paragraph about her professional career, unless a reliable source can be provided for a claim that such appearances formed part of her professional work. In short: good revert. Stfg (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Stfg for giving such a carefully consdered and thorough third opinion. Mabalu (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Debbie van der Putten. 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/20141222023136/http://www.london24.com/news/london_gets_amputee_model_campaign_against_fashion_discrimination_1_1496689 to http://www.london24.com/news/london_gets_amputee_model_campaign_against_fashion_discrimination_1_1496689

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 19:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)