Talk:Jennifer Santiago

This article was nominated for deletion on 29 March 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Jennifer Santiago's Playboy background is not "poorly sourced" or "non-notable"

Inaccurate information has no place on Wikipedia - there is no disagreement about that.

In this case however, there are numerous references as to the accuracy of the information previously entered, regarding Jennifer Santiago having posed for Playboy publications under the name Jennifer Klarman:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20010926/ai_n13915630 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20010829/ai_n13922021 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20030715/ai_n12511385 http://www.onthemedia.org/yore/transcripts/transcripts_090101_mike.html http://www.gaskellmedia.com/102001.html

These sources include reputable mainstream newspapers (Chicago Sun-Times, 3 articles reprinted on findarticles.com site, links above), public radio programs ("On The Media", transcript linked above), and industry-specific publications (Broadcast & Cable article originally linked in main article before removal, and Gaskell Media publication linked above).

These publications reference direct quotations from Jennifer Santiago herself that confirm that the facts reported are correct. None of these publications or programs has issued any retractions or corrections that would suggest that the facts reported are incorrect. Nor have Jennifer Santiago or WFOR-TV issued any statements denying these reported facts, or threatened any legal action regarding the reported facts. Moreover, the Sun-Times continued to publish multiple articles over a period of years reaffirming that they stand by the factual accuracy of the reporting.

Thus, there can be no credible suggestion that the printing of the fact that Jennifer Santiago of WFOR-TV is the same person as Jennifer Klarman who posed for Playboy publications is factually incorrect or constitutes libel, nor that it is "poorly sourced" by Wikipedia standards.

The next question is whether or not this information is "notable". I first reprint a relevant excerpt of Wikipedia's guidelines:

If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented by reliable published sources, it belongs in the article — even if it's negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it.

I submit that the information about Jennifer Santiago's past work for Playboy is not "negative" in any objective sense. Furthermore, it should be mentioned here for the following reasons: (1) Jennifer Klarman is mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia in the listings of models who have posed in Playboy publications, and to not link those listings to this page would be tantamount to a denial by Wikipedia that the two are the same person, which they are. (2) Other models who have posed for Playboy have their publication data printed on their personal pages, regardless of their other work, and there's no good reason that pattern should be broken here. (3) The fact that she had posed for Playboy has clearly been relevant in some respects to the course of her career, and so why should it not be relevant for the purposes of Wikipedia?

For an example that might be comparable in some respects, please see the Paris Hilton page. Here, the privacy implications are clearly less compelling -- Jennifer Santiago was not surprised by the publication of private photographs, she agreed to pose for photos that she knew would be published. This fact is well-sourced to multiple reputable publications, is not disputed by the subject herself or anyone else, and is notable enough to have been brought up in reference to her current career, and to be listed elsewhere in Wikipedia.

The information should be returned to the article.

(Not wanting to be a jerk about this, I am not going to unilaterally undo the edit until we have a chance to discuss this.) Obiwan11 02:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Information about playboy pictorials restored with additional sourcing and text edits

Having given all parties an opportunity to discuss the matter, I have restored the information previously deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Obiwan11 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Self-promotion

This article kinda looks like a self promotion piece. See WP:SOAP. 99DBSIMLR 16:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This whole page is promotional piece. A simple glance through the history shows that someone with the username "Santiagoesq" has been editing this page on and off for years. Hmmm... I wonder who that could be. Nothing on this page rises to the level of a Wikipedia entry. Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. Producing a movie no one has ever heard of, mailing the president a report, and interviewing a governor just don't cut it. Tens of thousands of people have interviewed governors. None of the referenced links work. The Angelina Jolie comment is laughable. One guy on a blog said that (who knows because the link doesn't connect to it) and that is somehow Wikipedia-worthy? And why is blogger plural if it was only one person? Perhaps the modeling information is relevant, but even then, the argument is rather weak. The entire page should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.218.190 (talk) 01:53, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Follows Wikipedia guidelines regarding neutrality, verifiability and no original research

Every recent addition in this article is referenced as per Wikipedia requirements. There were certain links to stories that re-direct to a CBS4, CBS Evening News and personal website of Jennifer Santiago. Those external links have been removed. The link to a youtube video of an Evening News broadcast remains. The line that references "www.jennifersantiago.com" is not "self-promtion." Many Wikipedia entries include an "official website" link somewhere in the body of the article. See, example, [Anderson Cooper] A list of awards is also common on Wikipedia entries for Journalists as is also the case with the [Anderson Cooper] site.

Removal of paragraph regarding subject's modeling work and list of appearances

These removals were claimed to be based on WT:P. The discussion on WT:P is about inclusion in WP of individuals whose notability is based entirely on appearances in various kinds of adult media, including Playboy Special Editions. This is mis-applied to Jennifer Santiago, whose notability (based on her mainstream media work) is not in question. The question is not whether she should remain on WP, but whether her modeling work deserves to be mentioned on this page. As far as I can tell, the discussion on WT:P is not related to that question.

For the reasons stated in previous discussion here going back to 2007 which has not been contested, I maintain that the modeling work is notable and deserves to be included in this page.

(Deleting the listing of actual issues and pages is a different matter: I can accept that being removed as listcruft.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obiwan11 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jennifer Santiago. 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/20070826224702/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20010829/ai_n13922021 to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20010829/ai_n13922021

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) 05:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jennifer Santiago. 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/20070927192520/http://cbs4.com/bios/local_bio_053140426 to http://cbs4.com/bios/local_bio_053140426

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) 13:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Jennifer Santiago. 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) 07:12, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]