Jump to content

Talk:Katie Price/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Birthplace

Can't fix because of protect - Katie Price not born in Brighton - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/8543016.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.241.11 (talk) 22:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done Jim Michael (talk) 01:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Spelling I can't fix because of protect

I think it should be "calendar" not "callender" in the section under bibliography. 90.202.140.212 (talk) 22:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

No shit. And that ain't the only thing. Looks like some imbecile doesn't like to be corrected.

Name

We better use full name as title. Wshun 23:48, 10 July 2003 (UTC)

Not if that's not how she was known. RickK 01:18 11 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I think this page should be moved to her real name. She is using the name Kate Price more and more often nowdays. I am Hot! 22:45, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Still overwhelming known as Jordan by the population at large. I think the current balance is correct. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:31, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Well ok but we should keep an eye on the situation. She used Kate on I'm a celebraty get me outta here, and so did everyone else. I am Hot! 11:37, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Agreed. Though note how "in public" e.g. when Ant or Dec spoke, or in titles, she was Jordan, but "in private" in the camp, she was Katie. That appears to be the status quo and as we write about her "in public" she is, for the time being, Jordan. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 14:17, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yeah But She is known as Katie Price a lot more expecially as she is now an author as well. besides Katie price is her real name so i think you should use it in the tital. --78.146.97.89 (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Hehehe...How can one be an author if one uses a GHOSTWRITER?82.6.1.85 (talk) 23:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)Lance Tyrell

Spyware

Since the old pic had spy ware, a new pic should be found —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.245.212.88 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 27 October 2004

A 'pic' had 'spy ware'? O RLY?

Tumour

Did she have a tumour or a finger removed? Dmn

Just the tumour. She still has all 5 fingers. ;) 65.100.33.50 07:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Name again?

So what's the thinking behind the title? There is no precedent for double-naming things - means that every user has to come here via redirects. Pcb21| Pete 13:08, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Requested move (2005)

From WP:RM:

I've added this to WP:RM; this should be at either Jordan (model) or Katie Price. tregoweth 15:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC) Well, that's been taken care of. tregoweth 22:01, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

what about katie price AKA jordon ! as thats what she says x —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.3.105 (talk) 23:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Name move

I propose that the title of this article be changed. 'Jordan (model)' is not acceptable, an the circumstances are different as Katie Price is giving up the Jordan image (it is only used when she models), and she is also known as Katie Price to the public.

I offer the article to be changed to 'Jordan/Katie Price', as it is a combination of both of her 'celebrity names' used at present.

Leon.

I'm sorry, but I do not agree. Despite Katie Price giving up her Jordan image, she is better known as Jordan than as Katie Price. For instance, a Google search lists over 13 million hits for Jordan (search parameters: Jordan + model) while only 2 million hits for Katie Price (without any additional search parameters). Since Wikipedia perfers that the article title should generally be the name by which the subject is most commonly known, I don't see the point in changing the name. Yes, Katie Price should be a redirect, but combining the names is a misuse of time better spent elsewhere -- and by combining the namespace, as you suggest, it serves only to confuse the namespace. This is in stark contradiction to Manual of Style on biographies, which promotes clarity and cohesion of biographical articles on Wikipedia. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 19:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Leon. She is giving up the jordan image and she uses the name katie price a lot more e.g.when she writes it says by katie price. Yes i do agree when you say shes better known as jordan but shes becomming more known as Katie especially when me and all my friends are reading her books (crystal was Great!) So i agree with Leon. --78.146.97.89 (talk) 23:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Name

It says Katie Andre at the top, but as far as I know she never uses her married surname (like most famous women). Change back to Katie Price? Jess Cully 08:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I Have found a Interview of her in AskMen.Com UK Journal. Interview with AskMen.Com Is it ok to add it to External links? --Messi 20:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

What about this short Intro, Comment and Biography? Model Of The Week, Katie Price --Messi 20:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

After reading this article, it seems to jump a lot at the end (probably because people just throw in information without working it into the flow of the article). A little rewrite is in order, for someone willing to do it. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 02:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, "freakin hot" come on. Evil Vin 01:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC) rrrrfbvwcbkhebvknebgk.hb3.hfkerb ljrh lhelihfl3b j.kljbfkb khbkjbfk/jbwkjbfkj 

kwnflkjnejbn

wrknf knergl 3jpkngfdv ] pij[vpk[oek ]etp]pkerg;e hi babe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.119.231 (talk) 08:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Comparison with Paris Hilton, glamour vs. topless

Can anyone tell me where the comparison between Price (Jordan) and Hilton is please? Anderson maybe... if you ignore the TV acting and film appearances, jordan has none. I think the comparison line is not necessary or should hold a better comparison. 195.93.21.135 22:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Jordan has been compared to Hilton. Both are career women known for sexual scandals, dress in similar provactive outfits, and are often described as "famous for being famous". I think the comparison to Hilton is more justified then the comparison to Anderson. Reverting again. Celebrity-Benji 05:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't revert till it's discussed by others please, very poor show and vandal like. Anyone else like to add a view? Is being an heiress and buying a career the same as being a bit if a chav, filling your chest with plastic and building a career on your breasts the same thing? Jordan had 2 illegitimate children, Hilton none. Jordan no sitcom, Hilton, loosely, acts one. More misses than hits here. 195.93.21.135 12:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Further she is not a TV star, that suggests she has made TV shows of her own and known for that specifically. Her glamour model slant is a sham also and suggest topless model is her niche. 195.93.21.135 12:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Calling her a "topless model" is legitimate if you can find citations that show this is how the press primarily refer to her. The article already makes clear that she has modeled topless; the question is what her primary image is, not what any individual may think of her. I would like to see the comparision to Paris Hilton supported by a citation, but am reverting that change also; the argument given for leaving in the comparison seems sufficient to me. Mike Christie 12:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
A couple of the more recent edits are less apparent vandalism than the prior ones. They look more like someone who doesn't like Paris Hilton endeavouring to add their point of view to the article. Some of the recent reverts could be argued as NPOV reverts rather than vandalism. However, if this change is a movement on the part of the persistent IP vandal towards trying to work with others to make this article more accurate, that would be great. If there are sources or references that would support any of the statements, please post them. Mike Christie 16:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks MC. I find the glamour model tag may be confusing for anyone not familiar with Jordan as a brand. She primarily made her career topless and is best known for that. i would suggest that she makes little use of anything other than reality TV and glossy mag stories now for income. i don't think there was ever a true glamour element attatched or suggested. my understanding of a glamour model would be the Marilyn Monroes of the world, these are few these days i'm sure you'll agree. the hilton likeness i still find confusing for the reason explained. if you have to suggest there is true work involved in 'getting your kit off' then work she did but hilton merely paid for her career with inheritance. hilton isn't known for topless modelling. Anderson is an easier comparison as there is atoless element and tv link. again tho i would not class Jordan as a TV star, i think that suggests she is an accomplished entertainer, which she clearly is not. 195.93.21.135 17:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

"Glamour model" is an industry euphemism for a girl who does topless/nude/sexy/fetish stuff that regular models wouldn't do (or might be too skinny for). It's not really saying she "possesses" glamour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.174.24 (talk) 03:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I have just done a quick search and found the official jordan fan club - www.jordanfanclub.co.uk - i didn't join! but in the search text while looking for it it states... Hi, my name is Katie Price - Jordan to my fans, and I'm one of the UK's best known page 3, topless and nude model's. This is my home on the Internet, ... i think that is enough to suggest topless and not glamour as it is her official page. 195.93.21.135 17:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC) If i can pick up on the IP mention. i am aware that anyone using AOL has the same IP which causes problems for those who either choose not to register or choose not to log in at a particular time or for a particular subject.

I had a quick look and could not find that text; can you spot it on the site itself? I agree it is a reasonable basis for the change in text, but I think we should find a page we can link to as a reference. Re the IP: if you are not aware, you should know that there has been persistent vandalism from your IP. I'd suggest you get a userid and use that; it will enable people to know they're talking to the same person each time. Mike Christie 13:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

without joining the fan club i hope the text from the web search is enough. the search txt was - The Official Jordan Fan Club - which then led to I'm Katie Price - Jordan to my fans, and I'm one of the UK's best know page 3, topless and nude model's This is my homepage and the official jordan fan club ... http://www.jordanfanclub.co.uk/

hope the TV 'star' tag can be addressed too. i have noted the IP thing and understand the problem. 195.93.21.135 14:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I won't be able to take much of a look at this till tonight, but I'll see if I can find a reference. What we really need is a link folks can click on where we know they will see text that supports the description. If you don't come up with anything I'll have a look around. Maybe searches for "Jordan" and "glamour", vs. searches for "Jordan" and "topless model", and see what looks predominant. Mike Christie 14:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, I had a quick look. Turns out that text you have is a meta tag; the content is: "I'm Katie Price - Jordan to my fans, and I'm one of the UK's best know page 3, topless and nude model's This is my homepage and the official jordan fan club. I hope you enjoy your stay, like the pictures and come back and see me again soon. Wet Dreams, Jordan (Katie Price)" The keywords are "official Jordan fan club katie price nude pictures jordan nude model pics page 3 girls jordan pictures katie price topless model".
This certainly makes it clear that she thinks "topless model" is a reasonable description. However, a search for "topless model Jordan" (as a single string) returns 178 hits, whereas a search for "glamour model Jordan" (again as a single string) returns 19,100 hits. So it's also clear the vast majority of her press coverage is as a glamour model, and I think it's likely that her website uses the words "topless" and "nude" to pull in fans looking for that, who are more likely to pay money than fans looking for glamour pictures.
Given the big disparity in hits, I think "glamour" is the right word in the WP article lead-in. The rest of the article does make it clear that she does topless modeling, though the word "nude" never appears. I think it would be reasonable to add mention of nude modelling and of the nature of her website. --Mike Christie 23:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at it anyway. i just have a different idea of glamour i guess, like i say the Monroes and Macphersons of the world spring to mind. i think if the general public were asked what Jordan meant to them it would be the topless side but hey nice to discuss it. Do you stick with the Hilton comparison? And also TV 'star' tag. just looking to give a true reflection so WP visitors don't get a different impression of the person. thanks for taking the time to discuss. 195.93.21.135 23:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll take a look but I'll be away from the net for large parts of the next three weeks, so it might be a while. Mike Christie 00:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I dont think she is like paris hilton. she has 'turned her life around' as it were, after im a celebrity get me out of here. she has started writing books and many people are also thinking of her as an author now as well. --78.146.97.89 (talk) 23:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Revert request

Could someone remove the content from the article added by Elm1985, since I would run afoul of the 3RR were I to do so. Thanks! --Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 21:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Source?

I question the following passage: "the baby was concieved during a filmed sex session with a number of footballers and it was only due to a DNA test that the baby was deemed to be Mr Yorkes." Is there a source on this? We are going back a few years here, but it is my recollection that the Dwight Yorke was named as the father at the same time she announced her pregnancy. Chops79 14:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

No, what actually happened was there was a big fuss made of the DNA test due to the possibility it could have been any of 4 or 5, can't remember the number exactly, Mr Yorke did say if it proved to be his he would make sure the child received payments but had no intention of staying with Ms Price. The inside story was it had been a publicity stunt initially, similar to Ms Hilton and the 'leaked' home video, but she went too far due to a cocktail of drink and other substances, which to her credit she has cleared herself of, this is then where the story regarding the disabilty her child has came from and is still a possibility but in dispute.

Her child's condition is not caused by drug or alcohol abuse. They don't know why it happens, but there is no research indicating those to be potential causes. It comes from nowhere.
It's just part of some idiot's repeated vandalism. It's been removed. f(x)=ax2+bx+c 08:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

ha ha. idiot? this was heavily publicised at the time. look, it's you with an equation for a name. i will find a link so you can put it back. such petty name calling, you sad lonely individual. name calling...oh dear. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.135 (talk • contribs) .

And your response is no better, either. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud — WP:PORN BIO? 01:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Just an observation, calling someone an idiot would normally get a worse response. just an opinion but i think it is a measured response considering. but hey, does it matter THAT much? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.135 (talk • contribs) .

Yes, I called you an idiot. I feel that's entirely justified after dealing with your POV (and poorly written) edit to this article over and over again. I guess I'm the sad, lonely individual with nothing better to do than repeatedly vandalise Wikipedia articles, right? :) For the record, it's silicone, not silicon. Also, sign your posts. f(x)=ax2+bx+c 00:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That wasn't my edit. So your idiot jibe is misdirected. And you are right it is silicone, the choice of the talentless.

Hey dude you're being jumped by a cousin of Prince and a porn queen...WAY TO GO! WHo is this silcone valley anyway? Looks like a shallow gene.

Italian origins?

I don't believe it, but I read she can have italian origins...

Probably be helpful if you mentioned where you read that. Static Universe 00:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
I dont know any italians with 44DD breast implants!
just cause you don't know any italians with big boobs doesn't mean its not true idiot!! god woman of all kinds have big boobs latins/white/black/asian. and jordans had breast implants her naturally size is wayyy smaller so it also doesn't count —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veggiegirl (talk • contribs) 23:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Carmen Russo, Gina Lollobrigida and so on...
Hi - it is true. I saw video footage of her saying that she was half-Italian from her biological Fathers side. I also read this online: http://www.katie-price.org/articles/3 which explains this. She has also mentioned her Canadian roots. Amae1983 (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
That link is of what it claims is an interview of her in M8 Magazine. It quotes her "I'm half-Italian and half-American". Jim Michael (talk) 17:10, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Grammar edit

Edited bad grammar at end of page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.142.80.38 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 12 October 2006

Quote

The quote seems to be false. Please remove it.

Deleted non-POV

I deleted the following: Hear her talented music stylings here: http://dump.com/rvrte/ This isn't a promotional website for Jordan or anybody else. Andacar 02:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Welsh and Jewish?

Is it correct to call her Welsh? She doesn't sound Welsh and she didn't grow up in Wales, and her mother is English. Also as a Jewish person, I'm a bit unhappy that she has Jewish roots (asuming that this is correct??). She isn't a good advert for people of Jewish desent.

Not all Jewish people can be doctors, scientists or writers. There are hundreds of thousands in the Uk alone after all. I'd never heard it before, but if her mum's mum was Jewish she certainly counts as such.--MartinUK 12:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree with MartinUK here (yes, I'm aware that this part of the discussion has been dead for a long time) - frankly, whether you or me for that matter are unhappy with the fact that she is of Jewish descent, is irrelevant - if it can be sourced that Price's maternal grandmother was Jewish, then Price is a Jew by the Halacha, like it or not. I am ashamed to share my Jewish heritage, of which I am indeed proud, with people like Baruch Goldstein or Meir Kahane or Meyer Lansky (OK, all three are dead) or, to take living examples, Avigdor Lieberman or Yigal Amir. Those people are worse "role models" than Price, whose only "crime" is the marketing of her body...Not exactly an offense, nor anything a person should be ashamed of. Yet, all of the people I mentioned above were or are Jews, and it can be sourced, and thus should in any case be included in a biography entry in an encyclopedia. We ourselves (i.e. us Jews) should stop idolizing and exalting ourselves...it's not a trait of character which suits any nation. Vargher (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
True. You seem to have cherry picked the criminal element of a (very) few Jewish people. I agree with you. Katie is not in this league. Wallie (talk) 11:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Which re-raises, by the way, the interesting question of why Wikipedia articles always have to make a big note if someone is jewish but not if they are, for example, christian or agnostic. I always laugh when I read that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.207.131 (talk) 10:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Wizzard's Sleeve

'Although she was already a well-established model, with frequent appearances on Page 3 and in men's lifestyle magazines such as Horse And Hound and Wizzards Sleeve to her credit,'

Has anyone ever read a copy of 'Wizzards Sleeve', and if so, could you tell me where I can buy it?FlubClub 16:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Rv of "orgy" note

The Sun's not a reliable source, though for something like this it might be acceptable. However, this doesn't seem like the sort of thing that needs to go into the article in the first place; this is not a list of all gossip about and by Jordan, it's an encyclopedic article about her. Mike Christie (talk) 10:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

New picture needed

Surely you can find a better picture of her than THAT! She looks terrible there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.234.229 (talk) 12:20, May 28, 2007

I think this picture of Katie would be good on the article. Could someone maybe upload it? I always get the Summary and License wrong. LOL
GMctalk 15:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Since that image is not free content it can not replace the current image. See Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. Garion96 (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

New baby born

Their new baby was born today 29th June 2007 at 8.49 am weighting 6lbs 13oz, born by c-section, please update page. 81.156.80.180 10:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be added to the wikipage that it has been alledged that the abnormalities of her first Born baby Harvy have been attributed to her drug taking whilst in pregnancy, despite being told not to undertake such activity by medical doctors.

I think it is important to state that as she repeatedly plays up to the fact her first child is disabled, and plays on the sympathy of the press and public to this, but ironically, it was her that caused his disabilities in the first place by being deliberately irresponsible during pregnancy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.30.172 (talk) 19:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality

This article needs a serious re-write. The language is poor and doesn't seem impartial. Also, I hate to focus on her breasts, but seriously, are we supposed to believe that they're only "D" implants? Someone needs to do some more research, because she's obviously had multiple surgeries. Knjb 04:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The Books and Published works section contradict

The article has both a section labeled Books and one labeled Published works but the same to have different information in each one. Do they both need to be there? Which one is right? Unfortunately, I know nothing about the woman who is the subject of the article, so I don't know how to merge the content. Andrew.langmead 02:50, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

What about the sex tape that's circulating?

Rumor has it she let it out herself, a la paris hilton, to up her sex profile. Why is all that being expurgated by wikipedians? 84.254.51.97 01:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Looking in the revision history, I can't see anyone expurgating anything about this. If they are, I would imagine it's because we have to be firm about high quality references for material added to biographies of living persons (see WP:BLP). We cannot publish unsubstantiated rumours. — Matt Eason (Talk • Contribs) 11:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Video of said tape is at {link removed as it at banned site} —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.68.176 (talk) 06:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Just because the link/reference is banned because it is a porn site does not mean it is not a reliable source. The fact remains that this tape is out there and its existence/authenticity is not in dispute. It should therefore be included in her bio.69.143.84.116 (talk) 18:28, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Heather Mills

What did Jordan say about her? - 91.106.54.221 11:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Number of implants

She has had more than one implant, there is only mention of one in here, is this a fault? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.253.84.11 (talk) 18:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

"Natural Breasts: No" ?

1. I'm not British and have never heard of this person before today. 2. I have not been able to find any models' articles to compare this to. But, nonetheless, I think that the profile on the right side of the article should not say "Natural Breasts: no". Is that normal? Having the information in the article's body would seem to be preferable. Why is it displayed so prominently? I don't know if that is the kind of info that is meant to go in that space. Denis Diderot II (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it's a strange think to have in an infobox. I think it turns Wikipedia into a tabloid. You need to discuss it on Template_talk:Female_adult_bio as it's a template issue. -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 14:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I've changed the template to {{Infobox Model}}, which is more appropriate. DWaterson (talk) 18:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Ethnicity and nationality

What is her father's background? And given that her mother is described as "English," saying that her grandmother is merely "Jewish" seems odd. English Jewish? An immigrant from some other country? "Jewish" isn't a nationality, and if her maternal gandmother is Jewish, then so is her mother, technically speaking, and so is she. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.72.94.110 (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It is important for every Wikipedia article to make a note if someone has jewish ancestors. Her father? If he was not jewish then he is not interesting and that is why we have no background information about him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.207.131 (talk) 10:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Name (2008)

The old discussions about her name are from ~2005/2006. With the Andre surname now being taken on after the renewal of the couple's marriage vows, the article's title deserves some more discussion. I would like it to be moved to something that is more standard. This article and that of Jordan (Pamela Rooke) are the only ones that I know of that have the name scheme of stage name (legal name). Every other bio article, that I know of, that needs to be disambiguated uses name (profession). I can see why that's not an option here since there are three models listed at Jordan (disambiguation). So, I'd like to know from people who follow this woman's career more than I do (which is not at all) what name she goes by and what the article should be titled. Should the "Jordan" be dropped entirely? Should the article be moved to Katie Andre? Can we get some input? Dismas|(talk) 14:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined to think that Katie Price is now the best location for this article, with appropriate redirects. That seems to be the name she now prefers. DWaterson (talk) 18:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Does she ? Any change needs to be evidence backed in accordance with WP policy/guidelines. She spoke about the issue in her biography. -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 08:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Newport

A few months ago this article said she was born in Newport, East-wales. Did someone vandalise or was it a misconception?

sign your post please using ~~~~ that help us comment and whos comments are from who, but yes if it was a misconception then the one that edit it should've said here which they didn't its there misstake for not tell others about it which is why now people that visit now that visited not long ago might be confuse about it maybe others her can tell anything moreVeggiegirl (talk) 00:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
It is now referenced to a BBC article that she was born in Newport, Wales. I think she should be described as British, as she has lived in England for most of her life and it doesn't seem apparent what nationality she self-identifies as. Jim Michael (talk) 17:10, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
The birth index shows that she was born in Brighton, as births have to be registered in the area they occur in. The BBC article is wrong, so the birthplace has been changed back to Brighton. Jim Michael (talk) 16:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Dead?

I just searched google news, and found nothing about her being dead. Jan 7 is just a few hours old, so does anyone have a source?

Size wrong

it says at the start about her mesrsurements but katie is NO WAYYYY a GG cup she wasn't even than big before she had them made small so why in hell would she be that big now, god who writes this crapVeggiegirl (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Split with Peter Andre?

Hello all,

My wonderful girlfriend has just pointed this out to me; From OK Magazine

Don't know if wikipedia trusts this as a source, but with the photo I think it seems pretty real?! I'll add the information (if someone else doesn't beat me to it!) if noone has any points or objections? --LookingYourBest (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Requested move (2009)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus. -- PeterSymonds (talk) 09:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

. PeterSymonds (talk) 09:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Jordan (Katie Price) → Jordan (model born 1978) — Let's end this properly. The current title ("Jordan (Katie Price)") is a rather ghastly compromise, and this format is not used on high-quality articles. The (x born 19xx) disambiguation variant appears fitting here and avoids any questions over whether we should be using her maiden or current name when she doesn't go by either consistently and is far better known as Jordan. — Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
Oppose Perhaps this has been answered elsewhere but is there a reason why the real name of the models are not being used? A couple of examples from the world of wrestling: Dwayne Johnson (better known as the Rock) and Adam Copeland (better known as Edge). We do not use The Rock (Dwayne Johnson) or Edge (Adam Copeland). We do not use The Rock (Wrestler born 19XX) or Edge (Wrestler born 19XX). So why is this different? Why not just Katie Price? The idea of using (model born 19XX) strikes me as extremely unattractive and unnecessary. Furthermore, nobody is going to enter such a cumbersome phrase in the wiki searchbox. The article will more likely be arrived arrive at through the disambiguation page or by searching for Katie Price. --Bardin (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The problem with the above [alternative] suggestion is that Jordan (Pamela Rooke) should really also be renamed along the same rationale, and Pamela Rooke was also a model. So Jordan (model) isn't really unambiguous, even if it currently redirects here. I'd rather both were Jordan (model born 19xx), which neatly resolves the issues with both titles. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

  • You're thinking about this too concretely. Consider the implicit underlying principle behind primary topic, and apply that. But I agree a secondary dab page is not required. The point is, Jordan would be the appropriate name for this topic, if it were available. It's not, so we need to dab. This Jordan is a model, so Jordan (model) makes sense. Yes, there is another model, but, given that this one is the primary one in the spirit of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, it's okay to use Jordan (model) for this one, since she's the primary model known as Jordan. Adding more to the title is arguably a violation of WP:PRECISION which calls for more precision only when necessary. More precision is not necessary here. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:59, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  • To clarify... what I mean by the underlying principle of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is that just because there are multiple candidates for a given title does not mean that none of them should use that title. For example,
  • Just because there is more than one Paris does not preclude the most notable one from being at Paris.
  • Similarly, applying that principle in this situation yields:
Nope. As I said, WP:PRIMARY only applies to the root title. Anything which isn't the root title should have a unique qualifier. End of story. To do otherwise would require the construction of elaborate and contrived hierarchies, and leads to train wrecks like the various John Smiths in British politics - there are eight of them, organised along similar hierarchical lines to your suggestion, and I dare you to be able to find a single one of their articles by guessing the title (which is the only reason the concept of "primary topics" even exists). Remind me to tackle that one in future. For now, let's not make that mistake here as well. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Again, you're thinking about this too concretely. I know it's hard to see outside of a box once you're inside of it, but please try. Yes, literally, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC only addresses root titles, but the implicit underlying principle should apply here (and similar cases) never-the-less. Put another way, why shouldn't it? And when there are eight John Smiths who are British politicians, none of which is clearly primary, that's an entirely different situation from here where there are only two topics in question, and one has primary use of the name in the given context. And you did not address my point that including born 19xx in this title is unnecessary precision. On that point alone the proposed title should be rejected. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies not only to "root titles", but to any ambiguous term, name or phrase: "When there is a well-known primary topic for an ambiguous term, name or phrase, much more used than any other topic covered in Wikipedia to which the same word(s) may also refer (significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings), then that term or phrase should either be used for the title of the article on that topic or redirect to that article." So even interpreted literally, Jordan (model) is an "ambiguous term, name or phrase", and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies here. To whit, currently, that term or phrase redirects to this article (consistent with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:D, WP:PRECISION, etc.). My alternative proposal is to make it be the title of this article (also consistent with all naming policy, conventions and guidelines, so far as I know). --Born2cycle (talk) 21:35, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I see absolutely no benefit to introducing yet another level of ambiguity on top of the current one. And you missed my point about the John Smiths - they already are organised by some contrived hierarchy - the "primary" one (the last-but-one leader of the Labour Party) is at (UK politician), and then from there there's another level of "primaryness" in that (English stateman) is assigned to someone, and then we get to individual constituency level with (Manchester politician). This is precisely what you're proposing but taken to the level of absurdity. I propose that we do not make that mistake here. As for the argument about unnecessary precision, (model born 19xx) is the bare minimum level of precision required to disambiguate two models with different birth dates. This exact system is used to great effect throughout the project's football biographies precisely because it's the only manageable way of handling the things as complexity increases. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:35, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
The fact that Jordan (model) currently redirects here means that this article could be at Jordan (model) and therefore adding "born 19xx" is unnecessary precision. It is that simple. This would not be introducing yet another level of ambiguity - we would simply be moving an article over an existing redirect to it. --Born2cycle (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
The existing redirect is a mistake, the result of fallout from previous page moves. As it is ambiguous which article is should refer to, it should not exist. That it does exist does not compel it to be used. Having Jordan (model) and Jordan (model born 1955) be articles with different subjects is just a flat-out failure of the dab system, and a misunderstanding of what WP:PRIMARY is designed to address. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
So, you're saying that for any A (x) that A should be the one and only x named A. It's the parentheses in both titles that apparently make the difference for you; that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC refers only to the topic associated with a given root name, not to a phrase formed by a name plus additional information in parenthesis added for precision. I'm still not sure why you make that distinction, but I will give that some thought, though I'm still having trouble understanding why George Washington and George Washington (Washington pioneer), and Paris and Paris, Texas is okay, but Jordan (model) and Jordan (model born 1955) is not. In all three pairs the second case could have the title of the first, if the first did not exist. By the way, you keep referring to WP:PRIMARY, but I think you mean WP:PRIMARYTOPIC - very different. --Born2cycle (talk) 23:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, my bad on the wrong link to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. You've accurately summarised my position, so far as I can see. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

US fame?

The statement "Katie & Peter was also successful in the United States, where it aired on E!, helping to establish Jordan's fame State-side" is highly debatable. Not only is the statement subjective in regards to success and fame, but the show was canceled (after being bumped to a 2am slot). The show did not rank highly on the Nielsen ratings. Additionally, I wouldn't call Katie Price famous in the US (just my humble opinion). Generally speaking, most US citizens have no idea who Katie Price is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.224.31 (talk) 07:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Height?

There's no way she's 5'9. anyone have any sources for this? I've read 5'4 - 5'7 in most places.

Paul O'Grady show

The show was aired on the 18th.[1] Was it show on the 16th or the 17th? Banaticus (talk) 07:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Split with Peter Andre (May 2009)

They are not divorced yet, so do not write (-2009) as for all we know they might not get divorced. They are currently still married.

There is also the outside chance that they will have a renewal of vows for OK magazine after a few months of selling my split hell type stories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.153.179 (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Birth name

Her birth name is Infield, so the opening paragraph should read: nee Infield. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.227.124 (talk) 17:52, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Poppadom series

Sorry about restoring this, but I found what seemed to be a relaible source.... a slip of the pen by the Irish Times, or what? Viewfinder (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I checked it this afternoon. The isbn refers to "Perfect Ponies", and the "poppadoms" is a prank. Evn a quick Google shows vastly more sources for ponies than poppadums. Probably better to revert this. Rodhullandemu 21:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Father figure?

"Price and Andre released a duets album ... with all proceeds going to their chosen charities affiliated with the many health conditions of her eldest son and as a father figure to her son, Harvey." - What? I have no idea what this rather garbled sentence is trying to say, but it desperately needs translating into English... Dom Kaos (talk) 10:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

"André"

I've changed Peter Andre's name in several places on this page: on his own page there is no accent on the final letter of this surname. See his talk page for further details Dom Kaos (talk) 10:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Controversy regarding threatening to "cut" a journalist...

I think this an important piece of information. She recently threatened to "cut up" a journalist from New! Magazine for printing a column written by her ex-husband Peter Andre. She's been going proper off the rails since the split. Something should be mentioned in the article.

(Ref: http://new-magazine.co.uk/latestnews/view/10917/Jordan-s-vile-threats-to-new-girl/ ) 83.71.44.183 (talk) 20:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Author?

Katie Price is not and never will be an 'Author'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.166.82 (talk) 18:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

She has written several books. Therefore, she is an author. It is not our job to comment on the quality of her offerings, assuming that's what your comment was about. Sky83 (talk) 18:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
She hasn't written any books they were written by other people and credited to her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.166.82 (talk) 10:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh please. If you dislike her, fine, personally I don't like her either, but I see you have provided no proof that she didn't write the books herself. Until then, this issue is pretty much closed. If you can find proof that your theory is at all true, feel free to raise the point here again. Sky83 (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1037344/Katie-Price-reveals-I-dont-write-best-selling-novels.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3757275.stm

Selective quote from Daily Mail link.....

Far from writing her own novels, Miss Price - better known as Jordan - instead reveals she merely thinks up the plot - leaving the complex task of conjuring up the golden prose to an assistant.

"I'm not going to lie, I don't sit there with a typewriter and write it, of course I don't," she said.

"I don't have time to do that. I say how I want the storyline to be, each chapter is done, I read through it change it and then it goes away to be written.

"So I'm not going to sit here and say I write it word by word because I'd be lying. I actually say how I want the story and that's how it happens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.24.197.157 (talk) 11:19, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Surrey police

It is SURREY Police not Suffolk Police - she lives in Ockley, Dorking, Surrey

 Done Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

What?!

"Price and Andre released a duets album on 27 November 2006 titled A Whole New World, with all proceeds going to their chosen charities affiliated with the many health conditions of her eldest son and as a father figure to her son, Harvey." That sentence makes no sense. 86.138.65.138 (talk) 21:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Inaccurate footnote

Footnote 8 does NOT lead to an article reporting an F cup. Some breast fetishiest is playing a joke --207.237.223.118 (talk) 03:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Jack Tweed

Hello, I am taking issue with you on the matter of the "unnecessary pejorative" description of Tweed as a convicted thug. It is a matter of legal fact that he has been repeatedly convicted for violence on the person, twice in 6 months: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/03/jack-tweed-jade-goody He is, by any definition, a thug. As such I have undone the edit. Captainclegg (talk) 12:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

As it stands right now, the section reads "... criminal and convicted thug Jack Tweed..." We don't need both "criminal" and "convicted thug" in that sentence as they have a heavy overlap in meaning. Given that the word thug has baser connotations, I'm removing that one. Tabercil (talk) 12:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Well that explains it! I spent a sleepless night trying to work out your meaning! I quite agree and think that your edit in the article is correct. Captainclegg (talk) 10:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm a Celeb

she has been on i'm a celebrate get me out of here 2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.28.37 (talk) 11:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

More recent picture?

Considering the picture we currently have is five years old, maybe somebody could do the nice task of replacing it with a more up to date one :)? Alex250P (talk) 19:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Katie Reid

Just wondering should a name change be in order? She has stated that she now wants to be known as Katie Reid. What do you guys think?

Where does it say she wants to be known as Reid? Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 00:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
On this week's Alan Carr: Chatty Man, Alex Reid said that his wife would be calling herself Katie Reid from now on. I suspect a page move may become necessary - plus it'll really help with disambiguation problems! DWaterson (talk) 00:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
If there is a verifiable source a move shouldn't be a problem. Nymf talk/contr. 00:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC

Full name variations

In this article there are quite a few variations of her birth listed, however none of them are the name that the sourced link lists. The link states that her birth name is Katrina Amy Alexandria Alexis Infield. I think that any of the incorrectly listed names in this article should be changed to match the source. Cait g328 (talk) 20:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move (2010)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:40, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Katie Price (Jordan) → Katie Price — "Katie Price" already redirects here. This double naming is frowned on on Wikipedia. There is a case for moving her to some variant of "Jordan", but some arguments against e.g. we would have to disambiguate her in some way, the default option is to use fist name + last name, she is moving towards becoming better known as "Katie Price" these days. PatGallacher (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Paternity

The paternity of her two younger children has not been indicated. Is this known? 109.158.80.45 (talk) 14:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The Children subsection of the Personal life section states that their surname is Andre. Jim Michael (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Reid separation

I think the separate and all references to the name 'Reid' should now be removed.--Epsommm (talk) 10:47, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

We don't remove a relationship from a biography because they have separated. We say the relationship happened and has ended; we need a reliable source for the latter to be added. Jim Michael (talk) 01:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Whole_New_World_(album) This is the album that should be on the page. If you click on the link, it redirects you to the Aladdin one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.226.49.236 (talk) 12:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

New picture

I think there really needs to be a new picture. The current one is so old and she doesn't really look like that anymore. I more recent one should be used. calvin999 (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The current one does her NO justice! Stephenjamesx (talk) 16:26, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Katie Price's grandmother is Jewish

I think it should be added that her grandmother was/is Jewish and technically by Judaism she is Jewish herself.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/katie-price-we-love-to-earn-money-who-doesnt-955318.html

"She is, I think, but it's perplexing. In researching her I kept reading that her "maternal grandmother" was Jewish which is weird, because Judaism is matrilineal so if her grandmother was Jewish, then so is her mother and so is she."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Jews

http://www.ovguide.com/katie-andr%C3%A9-9202a8c04000641f800000000019f66d

http://katiepriceonline.com/

http://www.twotsi.com/katie-price-jordan

http://www.bestsexymodels.com/Celebrity/51/models/1/

Should this not be added? --Jimmyson1991 (talk) 13:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Found two reliable sources and have added her maternal grandmother is Jewish, with both references.--Jimmyson1991 (talk) 00:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

British Playboy?

However, she would continue modelling and has graced such covers like FHM, Maxim, Nuts, Loaded, Vogue, British Elle and the British edition of Playboy.
British edition? I think such have never existed, as confirmed in Playboy#International editions. There is a Playboy UK website, but how can anybody be in cover of that? Interestingly, there is a link to "Playboy UK" in 'see also' section in Playboy article, but it redirects to "Playboy Enterprises". 85.217.22.105 (talk) 01:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It says Nationality: US..?

shouldnt that be uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.144.84.212 (talk) 11:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

PIPS squeak?

She has problems with her French breast implants, and they have been condemned as a biohazard by the French Government.212.139.98.189 (talk) 23:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)twl212.139.98.189 (talk) 23:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

"Bibliography"

It is public knowledge that many (all?) of Jordan's books were NOT written by her, but ghost-written on her behalf. Surely they should not then appear in her "bibliography", or at least the true authors should be credited. I doubt Jordan is even literate to be honest. 86.135.115.218 (talk) 22:16, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Hear, hear. Yet net worth 40 million sterling. Funny old world. What's she been up to in 2012 anyway?81.178.147.64 (talk) 13:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
It may or may not be "public knowledge". Claiming that in the article, however, requires strong sources, per WP:BLP. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:05, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Birth year

she is not 31-32, her real age is 36-37 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.243.182 (talk) 12:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

she is was born on the 22nd of may 1978, making her 34 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.150.152 (talk) 17:43, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

There's no source for a birthdate in the article. I've removed it.

Edit date of birth

Set Date of Birth to 22 May 1978 as per Biography on: http://www.starpulse.com/Supermodels/Price,_Katie/Biography/ DarthUberPanda (talk) 14:10, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mdann52 (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit title

it says 'Miss Price will not be making a statement to police'. It should be Ms Price if the article is being quoted correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.85.21.66 (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

As far as I could tell the article used 'Miss'. But what seemed more of an issue to me is that it is used in a different context, as that quote is not actually in the article at all. Those facts could be gathered from reading it, but the current version is not the source of the quote on this page. I don't really know what to do in this case, but the quote should probably be removed unless the source can be found.130.216.69.33 (talk) 23:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 August 2013

katie price had a baby boy called jett riviera Howiedara (talk) 13:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done It was already in the prose but not in the info box. In the future, it would help if you pointed out where this info should be added as well as providing a source if necessary. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 13:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

First memoirs

'In a departure from industry norms, she conducted a 10-day book-signing tour...' Why is this considered abnormal? Valetude (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2014 (UTC))

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2014

page states "Recently, she announced her plans to divorce Kieran." citing potentially inaccurate/out of date source (http://news.biharprabha.com/2014/05/katie-price-announces-her-divorce-with-kieran-hayler/) which contradicts more credible current reports, e.g. http://metro.co.uk/2014/07/15/pregnant-katie-price-appears-to-confirm-marriage-to-kieran-hayler-is-back-on-track-by-wearing-wedding-ring-4798816/, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2715887/Katie-Price-gives-birth-baby-girl-going-labour-two-weeks-early.html. recommend removal Catriona176 (talk) 13:57, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Done -Anupmehra -Let's talk! 23:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Rape Allegation

Ex-husband Peter Andre said he was unaware of this allegation. Price says he was informed and lied. Rape Allegation(Coachtripfan (talk) 19:15, 1 December 2014 (UTC))

Images

Can we really only find 3 free images of KP? I know she has a reputation for keeping a tight grip on her intellectual property, but she lives her life in the spotlight: thousands of people must have photographed her at personal appearances etc. Having to repeat one of the photos really looks like scraping the barrel. Eric Pode lives (talk) 20:10, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Page 3

Who the hell wrote 'Her time at topless female glamour model pictorial Page Three'

Page 3 of the Sun always has a topless woman on it. What the above is referring to is the fact that she was once the topless model featured on page 3 of the Sun newspaper.

There is no such pictorial as 'Page Three' - this is just someone trying to make it sound more, I don't know, significant than it really is.

'Pictorial' is not just a grandiose synonym - it's incorrect. It should say 'her appearance as a page three model in the Sun newspaper'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.193.129 (talk) 08:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


'Page 3 of the Sun always has a topless woman on it' - untrue. --82.41.251.96 (talk) 19:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Katie Price. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 18:59, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Katie Price. 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.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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) 06:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Katie Price. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 13:43, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Net worth

We need a citation here. --82.41.251.96 (talk) 19:55, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

45million Michael9317 (talk) 10:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Katie Price. 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.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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) 07:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2018

Under the Television heading there is a reference to Katie Price's Top Gear lap time with a 'citation needed'. The citation is as follows:

{{cite episode |title=Series 4, Episode 3 |series=Top Gear (UK) |network=[[BBC]] |date=23 May 2004}} Vizax (talk) 15:42, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Names

I'm not sure her married names should be listed in the infobox - she has never been known by any of them; only Katie Price or Jordan. Smurfmeister (talk) 13:15, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

They are factually correct entries. One imagines that she was known by those names to her respective husbands and probably many other people. But I'm not sure they have to be in the infobox. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

It seems whoever is in charge of this page is doing anything to not have anything bad about Katie

posted here. She's been arrested for drink driving, not long before that was arrested for driving without a license, was filmed rapping about taking coke with the drug nearby, she's ended up in rehab, stormed out and was arrested for the drink driving incident not long after. She's days away from bankruptcy and had to enter rehab for a second time. None of this has been mentioned here Neptune23456 (talk) 09:35, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you have some reliable sources? Care is still required, with regard to any potentially criminal activity, in terms of WP:BLP Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC) p.s. no one editor, or group of editors, is ever "in charge" of an article.
Rehab:https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7323215/katie-price-rehab-priory-post-traumatic-stress-disorder/
Drink driving arrest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45810541
The video of her rapping about coke is on the internet in quite a few places but I guess that doesn't need to be posted, it doesn't matter Neptune23456 (talk) 11:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
The BBC source looks ok. But we would not use The Sun as it's a tabloid. As for the drink-driving, yes she as arrested on suspicion of drink-driving, but has "since been released under investigation" suggesting that no prosecution will take place. So I don't think that's really notable. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:45, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
WP:BLP articles are written conservatively and are not newspaper articles. The arrest for drink driving was not notable enough in this form, while BLP articles have to steer clear of material that can only be sourced to the red top tabloids.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Here is a very reliable source about Katie being in rehab https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/katie-price-rehab_uk_5ba74c9de4b0181540ddcb86 Neptune23456 (talk) 17:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

It says "According to The Sun.... " So HuffPo is just "very reliably" regurgitating tabloid trash. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

It is pretty much common knowledge she did go to rehab, but I understand the rules about tabloids Neptune23456 (talk) 03:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

What about a link to a video of her talking about her stint at rehab. Neptune23456 (talk) 16:15, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

On 4 dec 2018: Katie Price has avoided bankruptcy after reaching an agreement with her creditors. (BBC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:517E:3595:96BA:321C (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Tue 26 Nov 2019 declared bankrupt after having failed to stick to the terms of said agreement. How many bankruptcies does that make? Still worth 40 million (or whatever it was)? 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:9466:6B6E:BD1D:615 (talk) 14:30, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 October 2012

Katie Price did not go to Blatchington Mill School, she went to Varndean School in Patcham. I know this as I am a local and she even went back to Varndean in one of her early TV shows when she was discussing her modelling Lynz123456 (talk) 20:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I just loooove how the horse's mouth (straight from) is not reliable in wiki world. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:9466:6B6E:BD1D:615 (talk) 14:32, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Updates to article

FOXY BINGO MUM OF THE YEAR. Kate was announced as Foxy Bingo Mum of the year 2012, is this going to be added? Also it was announced that she is suing ex husband Peter Andre. This article is out-of-date. http://www.foxybingo.com/skin/community/celebmum.php http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-25/news-and-interviews/31236411_1_model-katie-price-alex-reid-first-husband http://www.u.tv/Entertainment/Katie-Price-sues-Andre/6f84af81-937e-4db1-a465-8448d0771f83 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.205.119.203 (talk) 21:48, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

How is "FOXY BINGO MUM" to be parsed? Is she a mum attending foxy bingos, or a foxy mum at plain bingos? 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:9466:6B6E:BD1D:615 (talk) 14:34, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Bankrupt

Declared bankrupt at the High Court in London, 26/11/2019 - see BBC News --2A00:23C6:9D05:4D00:606D:82EA:3597:46C1 (talk) 15:06, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

 Done Now added, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:27, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

"Author"

She is credited with having written several books. Sources say one of them was ghost-written. The remainder, speculation aside, are sourced as having been written by her. I'll let this go for a couple of days. Barring substantial, sourced arguments to the contrary, I will be adding "author" back to the infobox. Comments? - SummerPhD (talk) 18:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

If you check inside on the credits it's usual to list the name of the "ghost" on the copyright page. I don't see how anyone could credit this vacuous woman as being an author. I'd be surprised if she could write a couple of pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.34.73 (talk) 13:26, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Sources say one of them was ghost-written. The remainder, speculation aside, are sourced as having been written by her. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
No doubt one of them was ghosted - I've seen the credit inside the cover. It's debatable as to who wrote the others; probably worth someone popping down to a bookshop to check.Smidoid (talk) 23:37, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Google books has a search facility and I've chosen her most recent two titles. Both are credited as katie Price and Rebecca Farnworth. This is probably a legal attribution where Price takes the credit and Farnworth gets a nice paycheck. Sickening, but there you have it. 82.29.204.131 (talk) 02:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
As an author myself, I think that Ghosting is a practise that should be outlawed except in exceptional cases. In Price's case, she is a virtual author since she would have told the tale to the writer. 81.97.100.208 (talk) 13:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
No that doesn't wash. Chatting and rambling for hours on end to the long-suffering ghosty (who has to translate it onto reasonably structured and readable prose) does not equal a writing credit. Next you will claim D. Trump is a political philosopher. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:9466:6B6E:BD1D:615 (talk) 14:27, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Not sure it's "sickening" in any way. It's a very common device to get books published by celebrities who can't write, Rebecca Farnworth herself was also a novelist in her own right as well as a notable ghost writer, But she died of cancer in 2014 aged 49: [2] She might even be sufficiently notable to have her own article. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
With eleven novels up, there ought to be some coverage of their style and content - maybe on a dedicated wiki page. Valetude (talk) 01:41, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

How come there is nothing here about her conviction of being in charge of a vehicle while drunk? Neptune23456 (talk) 17:50, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

This was discussed in one of the sections above. There are various issues here such as WP:NOTNEWS and WP:10YT. It isn't really notable enough to mention that she received a three month driving ban for being in charge of a vehicle while drunk in February 2019.[3] This isn't the same as drunk driving, and according to the BBC News source, "A charge of drink-driving was dropped due to insufficient evidence".--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

This section has now been expanded and includes non-tabloid sources as far as possible. The section also now includes all of her driving convictions, let-offs, and bans. This way there can be no selectivity or bias in the conclusion of the information. The same has been done regarding her husbands and engagements. Unfortunately, this information is notable about Price, and needs including in totality. Price is notable in UK driving law as showing the mechanics of Driving law and so on. Price also has so many legal issues that they are a notable part of her notability. Without the continuing legal issues, Price would not be featured in the media and would not be continuing with her current notoriety. Sparkle1 (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2020

Under Drug Use, change 'in an interview in February 2018' to 'in an interview in February 2019' 2A02:C7F:3ADC:7A00:F911:7960:2663:DAE4 (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 21:22, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Driving

Do we really need this overlong section? Other media people do not have every minor driving problem listed like this, so why here? It is over 10% of the entire article and is really not noteworthy. It should be summarised into 1-2 sentences, or removed completely. I will come back in 1-2 weeks and if there are no objections I will remove this sectionGiant-DwarfsTalk 14:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I've refined the section of its excessive detail. No Swan So Fine (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Like Topsy, this section just growed. Most if not all of it could be removed. Three points on a driving licence in 2008? But it's true! Even the drink driving conviction is of borderline notability.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Her driving offences have been a little more serious than that. I have trimmed the section of excessive detail. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:22, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
For most BLPs a single three-point offence would certainly not be notable. But one could argue that "there's a bit of a pattern" here, especially when the accumulation of previous offences leads to a ban? So the inclusion of minor offences is a valid part of the history? A bit like a Wikipedia editor's block history, haha. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
The three points originally linked to 'In December 2010, Price was banned from driving for six months by Crawley Magistrates court for accumulating 13 points on her driving licence'. After trimming, I linked the first usage of 'points' so non UK readers would understand the definition of the term. No Swan So Fine (talk) 15:32, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Surgery section - bra/breast size

This section possibly needs updating. It currently states:

"In December 2007, Price underwent surgery in the United States to reduce the size of her breast implants and also had rhinoplasty. However, she was unhappy with the results of her breast implants, so returned to Beverly Hills, California in July 2008 for corrective surgery. She returned to the United Kingdom with much smaller size 32C breasts.[74]"

However, in a video on Katie Price's official YouTube channel (it has the tick mark as being verified as official) in a video in 2019 she says she's got "a new pair of boobs" and that she doesn't know what bra size she is. She says in the video her implant size is "750 CC". In the video she confirms that she is a "34 E" bra size after trying on bras. This then possibly indicates she has further surgery after July 2008 increasing her size or that the information regarding her being a 34C is/was wrong. We could include this information on the Wikipedia page as its from her official YouTube channel although per WP:YOUTUBE using YouTube as a citation is not generally preferable, however this does handily deal with this matter quite directly. Does anyone know of any other sources that state whether she has had more breast surgery post July 2008 or have any other thoughts about this? Link to the youtube video in question - REVEALING MY NEW BRA SIZE - KATIE PRICE. Helper201 (talk) 00:04, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Undue

The article as it stood yesterday fell well foul of WP:UNDUE. BLPs need to follow strict rules, and an article with a laundry list of every bit of negative tabloid gibberish does not do so. I removed it with a clear edit summary and was reverted without comment. I've removed the sections again. WP:BLP policy is clear: if you somehow disagree then at a minimum use an edit summary and start a discussion. En♟ Passant♙ 12:38, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't see being arrested for driving offences, after turning a car over, and facing a jail sentence, widely reported in mainstream UK news, as "negative tabloid gibberish". Martinevans123 (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC) e.g. [4], [5], [6] , etc. etc.
It appears you haven't read WP:UNDUE. Just because something was reported in the news doesn't mean it needs to be covered here. BLP is a hard policy. Laundry lists of every negative interaction a living person has had with the public and/or police, when it's not the reason they're notable in the fist place, aren't acceptable. En♟ Passant♙ 13:12, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Is this really a list of every negative interaction a living person has had with the public and/or police? She has a repeating history of getting arrested for driving offences. Are you suggesting that Wikipedia ignores this? There may be some rational for removing some of the more trivial legal issues, but a blanket removal is completely uncalled for and not in any way conforming to WP:BLP. Happy to hear which ones you consider WP:UNDUE. Although I have to admit, I'm unclear what part of WP:UNDUE or WP:BLP the article currently falls foul of. Please be specific. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 13:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
What is Price famous for? According to the preponderance of secondary sources, she's a model and a media personality. WP:UNDUE speaks directly to the issue here, which is that some seem to want the article instead to carry nearly 13k bytes of text about her personal life. She isn't notable for her legal issues. And WP is WP:NOTNEWS. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm afraid that as a "media personality" Price is famous for her personal life. Her life is what she trades in. This is what makes her notable. Take that away and what's left? That covers the good and the bad. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
I certainly have read WP:UNDUE, thanks very much. You seem to be saying that we should carefully hide all of these offences away as if they never happened. They form a major part of the public perception of Price, whether she (and you), like it not. Nationwide coverage by UK television news suggests these incidents are notable and not some kind of pernicious "invasion of her privacy". It's surprising she hasn't injured or killed another road user by now. "What is Price famous for?" - at the moment she's famous for a string of motoring offences. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC) p.s. take a look at the "boob job video" for her explanation of why she never got to tell police who was driving when she got her "paparazzi points" - she has five houses, all with the same postcode, apparently, so she doesn't always get her post delivered properly.
Just to add another voice, criminal convictions by someone notable enough for an article are notable. Perhaps we could leave out some of the tedious other things she have done - panellist on a show, one among many participants in competitive shows that she lost, etc.? Pol098 (talk) 14:49, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Larger tits? Not a direct danger to the public, as far as I can tell. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Martinevans123: the question or whether "you or I like it" is irrelevant. The text in question is irrelevant to why she is notable (not famous). While you say you've read WP:UNDUE, you don't seem to understand it very well. Your followup is to mention something about a "boob job video" to somehow explain why you think a 12k plus bytes of text about legal issues should remain in an article about a model? EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 15:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Pol098: criminal convictions by someone notable enough for an article are notable Another editor who has not read WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 15:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Many of her legal troubles and driving offences have, for a number of years, been widely reported in reliable sources such as BBC News Online, Sky News etc. Possibly there might be a case for a slight trim of the "Driving" section, but I would not support the complete removal of the content or a whitewashing of her offences. Regards, Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 15:13, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
EnPassant: that p.s. was an aside and not part of my rationale. Sorry if that was unclear. I'll move it here, so it's out of the way: take a look at the "boob job video" for her explanation of why she never got to tell police who was driving when she got her "paparazzi points" - she has five houses, all with the same postcode, apparently, so she doesn't always get her post delivered properly. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
EnPassant, WP:UNDUE opens with: "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." We are just including what's reported widely by RS sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
EnPassant, I don't see the words crime or criminal appearing at either WP:UNDUE or WP:NOTNEWS. Perhaps you could explain further? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
As above. EnPassant, rather than just linking, could you please point us directly to where WP:UNDUE applies to what you see as a problem in this article? Similarly for WP:BLP. Serious question. I wonder if you are reading something into the policy that no-one else sees. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:32, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
I notice that the "Guest appearances" section of the article is entirely unsourced. The unsourced "Guest appearances" section could be removed as per WP:VERIFY, but with reliable sources covering her legal issues and driving offences, I wouldn't support the complete removal of this content. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 16:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
I moved the undue weight template to the Legal issues section because this is where most of the problems are occurring. This was previously discussed in the two of the sections above, where I agreed that all of this was getting a bit bloated. As an example, the incident in October 2003 doesn't seem to have enough WP:10YT relevance.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:53, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
The answer may be to selectively trim. I don't think wholesale removal of entire sections is justified on the basis of WP:UNDUE or WP:NOTNEWS. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Having now actually read the section, I agree that it could well be trimmed drastically. Even something like "Price has been convicted for driving offences at least x times since 2003, had at least y points on her driving licence, and £z in fines and costs for offences including speeding, driving while disqualified, driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs" etc., with references. Maybe a bit more detail than that. Pol098 (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  • WP:NOTNEWS: Celebrity gossip and diary. Even when an individual is notable, not all events they are involved in are. For example, news reporting about celebrities and sports figures can be very frequent and cover a lot of trivia, but using all these sources would lead to over-detailed articles that look like a diary. Not every facet of a celebrity's life, personal details, matches played, or goal scored is significant enough to be included in the biography of a person. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 13:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  • WP:BLPGOSSIP (taken from WP:BLP): Avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject.. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  • WP:PROPORTION (From WP:UNDUE): An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news. . EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 13:36, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Let's get this straight. You think that being arrested for drunk driving, driving without insurance and driving while disqualified, and facing a possible custodial sentence, is just "gossip" and/or "trivia"? Or that being hospitalised after a motor vehicle accident is disproportionate to a description of Price's life? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
If she had done nothing else but get arrested for drunk driving (and related issues) and been hospitalized for an accident, would she have a Wikipedia article? The answer to that is no. The fact people find her distasteful or dislike her for whatever reason isn't a reason to include the material in question. Otherwise it's POV pushing. That's why we have these policies in the first place, so people don't use Wikipedia to detail all the salacious tabloid details of whatever celebrity they find obnoxious. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 21:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Just to break down what EnPassant says above

  • "should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject" - These events in Price's life are almost entirely the coverage she receives in reliable published material.
  • "but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic." - Price's significance is almost entirely related to events in her personal life. What other significance does she have?
"This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news." - The only recent event mentioned is her driving, which has been a significant, repeating and a long running issue. This is not "news".
"If she had done nothing else but get arrested for drunk driving (and related issues) and been hospitalized for an accident, would she have a Wikipedia article?" - Of course not. But I don't follow your point. It's all part of her notability and reflected in how reliable sources discuss her. Wikipedia is full of notable and famous people having issues like this. It becomes part of their notability, because they are notable.
"The fact people find her distasteful or dislike her for whatever reason isn't a reason to include the material in question." - Agree completely.
"Avoid repeating gossip." - Please indicate the parts of the article that are merely gossip.

--Escape Orbit (Talk) 13:24, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Bankruptcy etc.

We seem to be back in the realm of mass removals: [7], [8], [9] and [10]. Do people (who are the subject of Wikipedia articles) "file bankruptcy every day"? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:13, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

You do not WP:OWN this article. As you ceased discussion above, I began trimming the UNDUE rubbish out. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
The discussion directly above was about driving offences? I don't recall announcing that I had "ceased discussion". Martinevans123 (talk) 18:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
And here's another, somewhat larger one : [11] (removing 9,558‎ bytes). All six removals done within the space of 16 minutes? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:28, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
And now five, almost equally rapid, reverts? I suggest we return to the last "stable" consensus version, of three days ago, and then discuss possible edits one topic at a time. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:39, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
What is your connection to User:Okay,okayhshshs? EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 19:44, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
They're my lil Katy Price sock, of course. Better run a quick SPI?? What do you say Okay?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:28, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
And you physically stopped responding to me up above. Don't play games. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 19:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm not "playing games", thanks. I have a few more than just this one article on my watchlist. Just like the other threads here, this is an open discussion, not a exclusive conversation between just the two of us. Your "If she had done nothing else but get arrested for drunk driving (and related issues) and been hospitalized for an accident, would she have a Wikipedia article?" is a complete strawman argument. Many people get married and don't get an article created as a result; most people who have a Wikipedia article and get married, get this detail mentioned. Along with the fact that they were born, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
I see that you've now also opened a thread at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Katie Price. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
So, are you expecting discussion to proceed here, or there, or at both venues? I wouldn't wish to be accused of "playing games" by contributing to the wrong thread. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:36, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
I guess you could just ignore my question entirely. But what has happened over there? Is there some kind of conclusion to be brought back here? Or will it all just be closed, and/or archived, and forgotten about? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:50, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
It seems you stopped participating in the discussion there. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 15:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Did I announce that? Has everyone else? Have I stopped here as well, or have I "started again"? But by all means answer the first three questions. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:41, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Please continue the discussion at the BLP noticeboard where it has been proceeding for some time. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Ok, after 6 days, you've asked a question. If that's what "proceeding for some time" means. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:47, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

You can tell this was significant, because it also made the serious news, in addition to the literally hundreds of tabloid reports and celebrity magazine articles (including interviews with the woman herself). The BBC can certainly see that for some reason it's important for the world to know that Katie Price was once worth a reported £40m but now she's broke. That is the general gist all the coverage, people are interested because they can't believe she ever made that much money in the first place, and they want their suspicions confirmed regarding how she lost it. Like it or not, as that BBC report made clear, Price is known as much for her tits and marriages (all of them) and her legal issues, as she is for her TV and publishing and fashion career. What EnPassant is doing, is frankly absurd. Wikipedia doesn't have much of a reputation to start with, it should probably start pushing back more aggressively against people who seemingly just want to waste people's time with absolute nonsense like this. Cameron Dev (talk) 21:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC) — Cameron Dev (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

A brand new account who magically knew to come here and comment on this talk page. Take a moment to learn the policies of this place before sharing your opinions on what is absurd because otherwise you sound clueless. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 23:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
EnPassant, you might want to consider removing this comment, as it's a bit insulting. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:43, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Since EnPassant has reverted this comment, and chooses to ignore me on his talk page, I invite him to reflects on whether it does him any credit, and what policies and guidelines he has chosen to breach in making it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:51, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
I invited you to bring it to AN/I if you think I'm breaking some rule. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 16:10, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
If you think it's ok to insult a new editor as along as you keep to the rules, so be it. Not very nice though. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:13, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

EnPassant'a childish behaviour shows exactly what I was talking about. He isn't remotely interested in explaining here why anyone should believe Katie Price going bankrupt is some kind of trivial detail. I came here because his attempts to whitewash this biography was being highlighted on an external site as an example of the sort of crazy thing that happens on Wikipedia. Their apparent point being not so much that it happens, since if you open the site to anyone, then anyone will wash up here thinking they're smart enough to write a biography, but that once it has happened and someone like EnPassant has shown exactly how his mind works and how certain he is that he is right, even though he is so wrong it really is absurd, nobody ever does anything about it. Worse, he even seems to be so confident that absurdity is just tolerated on Wikipedia, as if everyone has the time to waste on stuff like this, he appears to be taunting people. Cameron Dev (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC) — Cameron Dev (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

It appears you have plenty of "time to waste on this stuff". Care to add your enlightening comments at the ongoing discussion [12]? EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 23:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Note: Cameron Dev has now been indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I have readded All of her legal issues. The selective removal is NPOV pushing, either there are bright-line rules developed by discussion as to what to include or not to include, or it is all or nothing inclusion. NPOV requires the selection bias of users to be minimised as far as possible The information is notable as it keeps Price in the news, and she uses it to further her celebrity. It is also verifiable and sourced. There needs to be justification for selective removal and removal of personal bias like "removed silly shouting at woman". Not liking or liking something is not a justification. Sparkle1 (talk) 00:48, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

There is such a thing as WP:EXCESSDETAIL. I am not trying to whitewash Katie Price but a laundry list of every driving incident is not good Wikipedia writing style. Consensus was that this needed trimming. WP:BUTITSTRUE is not sufficient grounds for including it.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:59, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
There is no such absolute "all or nothing". This article would be improved by a sensible overview and balanced summary of her repeated legal difficulties. No-one, I think, is suggesting a whitewash or removal of them. But a chronological list of every event is not very encyclopaedic. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 13:12, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
As a gentle reminder (or as info to new contributors here) a thread was especially opened to discuss this (amongst other things) on 4 October, which then produced some consensus, but ran out of steam and was subsequently archived at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive332#Katie Price. So it would have been visible if discussed here, but is now buried in the archives over there....It's unclear to me if the editor concerned is still interested or has "washed his hands" of the whole topic. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:41, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

The issue I have is that it is all in the eye of the beholder here, simply having lots of problems with the law does not diminish the importance of each one, that is madness, that would be like saying someone with multiple Oscars wins diminishes each individual win. The issue here is that there is significant coverage of these events, it is more that It is just true, and it is more than just filling. The whole point of prices' ongoing notability is her reality TV stuff, which is her getting married and divorced a lot of the time, her house being a total pigsty and her keeping on appearing in court over and over and over. These are her continuing notoriety and not including this smells a lot of just not liking the information. On the point of the BLP thread if you can link to it here it might be worth exploring what was said and where the discussion went, as it may be worth reviving as that may be a more fruitful location than an unnecessarily invested discussion by a small group of editors heavily involved in the page itself. Sparkle1 (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry I found the link to the previous discussion. It looks like one previous editor and their sockpuppet. I think a fresh look at this is needed, and I think an RfC is the most sensible proposal. Sparkle1 (talk) 18:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
I can assure you it wasn't "one previous editor and their sockpuppet". Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2022

Add to filmography

Jordan, living without fame 2001 where she starred as herself, Jordan.

Source British film institute website https://www2.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/4ce2b8725f559 82.12.152.19 (talk) 17:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done Aaron Liu (talk) 18:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2022

Someone has added that Katie price revealed she was raped at gunpoint by 6 men in South Africa. The original report which is freely available on the internet was that she was ROBBED, not raped, by THREE men, not 6, who beat the car windows with sticks, they were not armed with guns.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5565777/Katie-Price-two-children-lucky-alive-carjacking-attack-South-Africa.html?ito=social-facebook


https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/5946585/katie-price-and-two-of-her-kids-carjacked-in-south-africa-with-cash-jewellery-and-laptops-worth-tens-of-thousands-snatched/

She told the tabloids HERSELF it was THREE, now the story has changed. Please amend the wiki accordingly to state the truth.

TWO tabloids reported in 2018 it was THREE men.

82.20.42.125 (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: the Daily Mail is not a reliable source, see WP:RSP. Madeline (part of me) 08:04, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure the number of men actually matters to Wikipedia. And clearly if she was raped she did not report the whole story at the time, so the difference in number of men is an inconsequential detail. But I've updated the article to reflect the progress of the reported incident from 2018 to 2022. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Katie price

She was a author and business women as well.--2A02:C7C:A824:8200:6C76:E1C8:53F9:4FF3 (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, sort of. If you look closely, there has been epic use of ghostwriters in her books.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Filmography

In 2019 katie price was on the Jeremy vine show 2A02:C7C:A824:8200:F028:84D8:77D9:51D9 (talk) 20:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it was on 4 April 2019. It's here. In all its glory. 86.187.233.4 (talk) 21:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Adding to filmography

Who adds to the section where it says what shows Katie price has been on as in 2019 she was on the Jeremy vine show and this is not shown and in 2023 she was on gb news for two episodes so these need to added 2A02:C7C:A824:8200:B4BE:89E7:93C2:1A57 (talk) 22:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Not really, these are brief appearances and even by IMDb standards they are not notable enough for a mention.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:05, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Katie_Price/Archive_1&oldid=1211021844"