Jump to content

Talk:Cindy Crawford

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

Disambiguation

[edit]

Can someone explain why the hatnote to the porn acress is warranted? I don't think the two need disambiguating. Since the porn stars greatest notarity comes from the fact that she shares a name, the argument could be made, but seems silly to put it in a hat note, rather than a foot note. 64.53.192.64 (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While it may seem obvious, there are probably people who only know of the one, Cindy Crawford, the porn star. Should they arrive at this page by mistake, the hat note is there to redirect them. GcSwRhIc (talk) 19:01, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It seems almost a cheap shot to have the hat note, but it is the customary way to handle the situation :(. A disambig page would be worse, because there's only two articles and many more people actually want to come here, where they would all go to the disambig page if it existed.
Thanks for the insight. I'm more of a wikipedia user than editor, but it always irritates me when someone hijacks a name. (The ones that bug me the most is when a non-notable band has a song named after a famous person, and puts that in famous person's entry.) Since searching wikipedia or google shows both entries, the other with Cindy Crawford (porn actress), seems like disambiguation is unnecessary. What about moving the porn actress link to a "Controversy" section or footnote of the main article? 64.53.192.64 (talk) 21:52, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, disambiguation pages are becoming obsolete, because of autosuggest that the wikipedia search box uses now. Actually, creating a disambiguation page might work. The default could still be here, and the hatnote would just say "for other persons named Cindy Crawford, see Cindy Crawford (disambiguation). It's just a bit odd to make one for just two articles and definitely says we don't want to mention the other Cindy Crawford by name. If there was also a third person that an article could be created for that would be an ideal solution.
A section could be created about the name controversy, but if the link is put in the text, it still doesn't do a good job of redirecting the reader as it would be buried where someone looking for the porn star won't bother to look. BTW, this article gets 8x the traffic of the pornstar, but the pornstar still gets over 100,000 page views a year. Diderot's dreams (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't the only cheap shot, the top picture is just ugly, but it is the only free one. Someone might upload an earlier one from her modeling days, neccessarily a non free one, and claim it under fair use as it shows her looks during her career and is relevant to show something discussed in the article. But uploading a nonfree pic of Cindy will likely be given short shrift by admins. I uploaded one (albeit a recent one) and an admin speedily deleted it. This was not proper, as I provided a rationale for its use, but I was too shy to appeal. Diderot's dreams (talk) 21:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Descent

[edit]

She looks part–Italian.Lestrade (talk) 17:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

She does look "exotic" when compared to most Caucasian Americans, but I specifically remember a Rolling Stone interview from the early 90s where she stated that she was a mutt and alluded to the possibility of having Native American ancestry but she couldn't specify which particular tribe/nation. If you've seen pictures of her mother she definitely has features like some White Americans who have distant Native ancestry, but that's just my opinion. I notice that her Wiki profile states that she's primarily German, English, and French (based on her comments from Twiter) but I don't know how she quantified that plus the fact that she mentioned "mostly" which implies she mixed with even more ancestry. --71.177.199.194 (talk) 08:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More Photos ?

[edit]

I'm surprised that more have not been added. Q1Q2QThree (talk) 17:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More photos need to be added for all supermodels - it is a career entirely based on visual fashions and impact. (I would write this on all supermodel pages if Wikipedia fully embraced semantic Web tech(, but alas - look up Semantic Web).) I think we should select core photos that represent the fashion styles she was famous for, ideally her magazine covers. They must be in chronological order.

As a side and to re-iterate we should collect photos on the SemanticMediaWiki which is a Wikipedia child I think. Correct me if I'm wrong. This is relevant to Cindy because she is famous, not because I like her above others. Photos of the model will result upon a name search, relevant photos will come up on photos tagged as a certain style, 'Models with beauty marks' or 'Beauty marks' will result in photos of her where her mark is visible. Again, it's not about Cindy... It's about Semantic Web technology and the power of cross-referencing... Powerful images or educational metaphors are used and reused. Wikis are about education right? Poor metaphors are relegated to those who fail to understand the best we have (this is called stretchtext - another under-utilised Semantic Web technology)

To summarise, yes we need more photos and those we choose should be hosted on the Semantic Web Wiki so that they can be cross-referenced.(Roby Vicary (talk) 10:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)) Edit Roby Vicary (talk) 10:26, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who do you think you are?

[edit]

Everyone is distantly related to or descended from famous people. This should not go in the article unless it can be shown it had an actual impact on her life. --NeilN talk to me 13:50, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The Charlemagne ancestry claim is highly suspect, given that the primary source is a sensationalistic television show, and the source cited for this article is a British tabloid, which is insufficient for a Wikipedia article. I propose these dubious claims of the subject's ancestry be, either better sourced, or removed altogether. Lorzu (talk) 10:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


This is indeed most doubtful. I say: I am a direct descendent of Alexander the Great, hence the legitimate pretender to the throne of Macedonia, the Middle East, Persia and India. My ancestor didn't make it to China, nor to Western Europe, the Americas or Australia. Nevertheless, I claim to be the sole ruler of the world. 91.9.89.132 (talk) 20:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Oprah shall hear of this! Hullaballoo, Baron Wolfowitz, Defender of the Realm (talk) 23:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Death Hoax?

[edit]

Should this be somewhere on her page? It is on other celebrities as I recall. There was a mediamass . net story. *shrugs*

Mrobviousjosh (talk) 13:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cindy Crawford. 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: 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:14, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cindy Crawford. 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, 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) 01:16, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Political supporter

[edit]

Cindy Crawford, why did you endorsed Mitt Romney in '11 or '12? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.127.49 (talk) 11:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cindy Crawford. 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: 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) 04:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About Charlemagne

[edit]

Considering that almost every European probably descends from Charlemagne it's kind of silly to state that she descends from Charlemagne. It's basically just a matter of probability. (If you go back to the time of Charlemagne the number of ancestors of any now living human gets larger than the number of humans ever lived. Therefore, once you find a noble in your family tree you can be sure that there exists a documented line from Charlemagne to you.) I would just state that she found out about her descent from some nobles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.167.125.100 (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cindy_Crawford&oldid=1252184057"