Jump to content

Talk:Riley Reid/Archive 1

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

Lead images

Let's come to a consensus on the lead image before making further edits to it. Choosing the image is not a vote either and objections should be soundly based on policy/guidelines. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:43, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Full protection

I have fully-protected the article for 24 hours to stop the edit warring, and hopefully to avoid the need to block anyone. @Rebecca1990 and Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: You guys know better. Work it out here at the talk page instead of shouting at each other in edit summaries. --MelanieN (talk) 01:08, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

First scene

Reposted from 3RRN

Why the statement is false: Because the article subject, under her original stage name, Paige Riley, had been performing in porn videos for six months to a year before she performed in "Brand New Faces". Riley said so, both in a source remaining in the article [1] and the source Rebecca1990 removed from the article in September [2] (a page on the subject's official website). (Warning: these links, like most of those I need to mention in this discussion, are very, very NSFW and often quite sexually explicit.) Because of what are usually referred to as 2257 regulations, it is often possible to identify the exact date of production in each scene in a pornographic release. Riley Reid's scene in "Brand New Faces" was recorded/produced on August 8, 2011.([3], extremely NSFW) Based on Riley's account of her career, it is rather easy to find earlier performances. Two examples will suffice. These links go to online trailers for porn videos, and are extremely sexually explicit. Good Golly Molly, placed online April 12, 2011; production date February 8, 2011. Perfect Mix!, placed online March 22, 2011; production date March 19, 2011. There's also a release called "Real Slut Party" released June 14, 2011; while I don't have a production date, it was obviously produced before it was released. Reid said her first appearance in a lead role was in a web series called "College Rules" which doesn't seem to be online right now, but which showed up on a porn message board in March 2011, so it was obviously released by then. There are nearly 20 2011 releases listed for Riley at IAFD, which doesn't provide production dates, but some of those are also likely to predate her faux "debut".

I don't see how anyone could give credence to the AVN.com source after reviewing the pages I cite. The subject herself said her first on-screen intercourse occurred in a "College Rules" web scene. There are multiple online videos posted and carrying legally mandated production dates, showing the subject having "on-screen sexual intercourse" months before the supposed first scene. Do I really need to post explicit images from the video sites showing unmistakable penetration?

It's very clear that this is a simple case of a publicist trying to inflate their client's market value by trying to hide their track record in cheap, low-budget, low quality porn. It's hardly unusual. Porn publicists lie (there's certainly no punishment for it). But Wikipedia shouldn't be repeating their lies, just because they appear in trade publications. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by admins since 2006. (talk) 01:44, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Riley Reid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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 05:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Categories

@DannyS712: Actually the two categories could be removed "immediately" per BLP policy, there's no reference for bisexual on the page. I have no clue if it's only unsourced, or false. –84.46.52.110 (talk) 06:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

She won both Best Boy/Girl Sex Scene and Best Girl/Girl Sex Scene, both of which are referenced. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
That's acting, IIRC 9 to 5: Days in Porn explains that starting with Girl/Girl is perfectly normal in this business, and doesn't necessarily express real sexual preferences. –84.46.52.110 (talk) 06:53, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I have reverted myself. If there are any sources that say she truly is bisexual, it can be added. You're right. Thank you for your diligence, and I'd encourage you to create an account so that you can in the future, you aren't forced to wait for someone (like me) to approve changes to pages like this. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:56, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
^.^b It was only an observation, because the same contributor added this category on Sasha Grey without explaining their plan (maybe related to a talk page section, or maybe not), and removed the cat here also without explaining their plan. –84.46.52.110 (talk) 07:02, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2019

his fist name his Ashley

from : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jO9MbcmvGo at 17:08

no idea for de last name thanks a lot :) Alextrentin19891 (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — IVORK Talk 07:03, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

BLP noticeboard

Content from this page is being discussed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Riley_Reid Any comments regarding the matter under discussion should be made at the Noticeboard above, not here. This is only an advisory. Thank you. Mercy11 (talk) 00:43, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Revert of Cat edits

The recent edit here by Trillfendi was reverted as this WP:OR matter is currently under an active discussing at this BLP location. While the discussion is still active, any comments --whether in favor or against keeping the information in the article-- should be made at the BLP discussion page. Please do not respond here; any comments related to this the matter under consideration or about this revert should be made at the BLP Discussion page above. Editor Trillfendi has also been notified at his talk page as well. Thank you. Mercy11 (talk) 22:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Recent edit, birth name

in my edit summ, I meant to say that the citations are NOT self publications. skakEL 04:00, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

The podcast by Eric Weinstein is self-published by Weinstein himself. We don't actually know what kind of "identity verification" he did, and in any case the test for inclusion of full names is that they are "widely published in reliable sources". Neither condition is satisfied here. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
see youtube video of the interview. around 5:19, the subject appears on camera not disputing that her name is correct. by 5:45 we see that she explicitly nods her head after Weinstein does an explanation of her stage name/ identity vs. her real name. this is done in the same manner that any "mainstream media" production would, with the consent & participation of the subject. skakEL 10:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
How are we to know that? Weinstein's YouTube channel is just as much a self-published source as his podcast. And "not disputing"/"nods her head" is not the same as explicitly stating something. To infer otherwise would be original research. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2020

Please add Riley's real name to be Ashley/Ashleigh (spelling unconfirmed) because she states it to be so on an Impulsive podcast with Logan Paul.

Logan Paul: "What is your real name?" Riley: "My name is Ashley"

Quoted at 17:06 in the podcast. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv3goXtGgPc MikemcsRobinson (talk) 18:03, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. Impaulsive is a self-published source. Please provide a more reliable source for this information. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
@Sangdeboeuf: Ashley Mathwews is shown to be the owner of the 'Riley Reid' trademark here: https://www.trademarkia.com/correspondent-mathews-ashley-1-1829799. MikemcsRobinson (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, trademark registrations and other public records should not be used for biographical information; see WP:BLPPRIMARY. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 19:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Also surely the 'Impulsive' podcast can be used despite being a self-published source as it complies with the 5 criteria for a self-published source to be used. Being a self-published source alone is not enough of a reason for a source not to be used. MikemcsRobinson (talk) 19:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Those 5 criteria apply to material published by the subject themselves. The publisher in this case is not "Riley Reid", so we can't use it. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Awards and nominations

Due to her extensive and lengthy award and nomination list I created a separate page (see List of awards and nominations received by Riley Reid). I suggest getting rid of all that is in the current Awards and nominations section in favor of a Template:See Also template routing to the new awards and nominations article. I just wanted to see what everybody thought.

Also; I recently saw this page and saw it as extremely raw and was going to revamp it. I started editing it today and plan on continue to do so throughout the week. If you have an suggestions on what I add or dislike how I'm editing the page leave your thoughts here or on my user talk page. —Loicdacreature (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

I recommend against using tabloid sources like the Daily Star. It would likely be removed. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Prevalence in online culture

Good morning Wikipedia Editors! I visited Riley Reid's wikipedia page, as I felt that her prevalence in memes has risen to the level that would satisfy Wikipedia's general notoriety guidelines. While I've heretofore been very satisfied with the up-to-date and relevant information provided by Wikipedia, I could not leave this glaring omission uncommented. I created an account specifically to address this oversight. It would be fantastic if an experienced editor wants to update and include such information, however if none are willing or available to do so, I'd be happy to figure out how to do so. I'm certain that I've done something incorrectly here (I thought my original comment went up on the actual article, panicked and edited it, just to give you an idea), but I'm willing to learn to help increase access to information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nwilkinsonlaw (talk • contribs) 13:36, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

While her fame was initially due to her success and notoriety as an adult film actress, she has ventured into mainstream internet culture as the subject of recontextualized pornography memes. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/oh-fuck-yeah-spread-it

"According to a Redditor ChristopherWhite69, the still comes from the Reid film entitled BLACKED Petite Riley Reid tries Huge Black Cock in Her Ass[1]. On August 12th, 2018, Redditor Shivam091 posted[6] the first known captioned screenshot to DankMemes The post gained 7,500 points (94% upvoted) in the first month."

Nwilkinsonlaw (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

"List of awards and nominations received by Riley Reid" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect List of awards and nominations received by Riley Reid. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 2#List of awards and nominations received by Riley Reid until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Deletion Explanation?

Why was this section of the article deleted? https://9gag.com/gag/arGAP4d I could potentially understand if it were just heresay, but Riley herself said it. Poemisaglock (talk) 22:03, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

  • @Gene93k: My point was that the tweet itself was from Riley and she left very little room for "interpretation" of what she meant. It's plausible that the tweet may have been a joke, but it would take some high-level mental gymnastics to think the topic wasn't rape. I didn't intend the 9gag page to be a source used for her Wikipedia article, but rather to document that her Wikipedia article did previously cover the tweet. Based on the screenshot, there were four sources in that section of the original article. Unless all of those sources didn't meet Wikipedia standards,it sure looks like the story got swept under the rug. Poemisaglock (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @Poemisaglock: Not a lawyer, but sex between two minors of close age does not necessarily constitute rape (Romeo and Juliet exception). Age difference was specifically codified in Florida law in 2007, defining statutory rape as expressly applying to persons 18 and older who have sex with minors. Rape is a WP:REDFLAG assertion that needs support from multiple reliable sources. Finally, Twitter is still a self-published and user-generated source. Even if authenticated, it can't be used for exceptional claims. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @Gene93k: The rape assertion has nothing to do with age. Riley's own words in the tweet: "I raped a kid in a movie theater cause I wanted to fuck and he kept saying no." I understand your point regarding needing multiple reliable sources. The "self-published and user-generated source" restriction for Twitter seems patently absurd considering the identity of the person making the tweet is not in question, but I get that you didn't make the rule. So I accept your explanation and thank you for it, even though I think this example shows a flaw in the way Wikipedia currently evaluates sources. Over and out. Poemisaglock (talk) 18:37, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @Poemisaglock: The 9gag post is a screen capture of an old version of the Wikipedia page. That Wikipedia edit cites Reddit and naughtynews.network, unreliable sources which themselves use screen captures of the alleged tweets. No trace of an original Twitter links in sight. Wikipedia has firm rules about self-published sources. Those include that the must be no reasonable doubt to its authenticity. Without WP:RELIABLE source support, this is a gross BLP violation. • Gene93k (talk) 20:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Recent edit

I removed the excessive list of awards and nominations; I'm preserving the material here: link. Most of the linked individual awards have been deleted or redirected to the main award page. With WP:PORNBIO deprecated, the awards no longer serve to establish notability and become excessive intricate detail cited exclusively to PR based sources. --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 September 2021

IN the infobox, change height (=empty) to 1.63m Optional source: https://babesdirectory.online/profile/riley-reid LuukH87 (talk) 18:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Babesdirectory is not a reliable source. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:42, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request, March 15, 2022

The category Category:American atheists has been added to this article without any sourcing whatsoever. This is clearly a contentious addition and should either be removed or reliably cited. 156.57.0.55 (talk) 19:59, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Riley *redacted*

The question is, is there a way to cite it? I have one source that seems legit. However, I would like to know how to proceed. If nobody has any objections, I'll just add it. Tiggy The Terrible (talk) 18:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

No, those are not appropriate sources and will be reverted. Please read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:35, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
I reverted the addition. The International Business Times is considered as generally unreliable per WP:IBTIMES. In addition, the article cites an alleged capture by self-published Twitter user. Use of WP:SELFPUB sources is highly restricted in Wikipedia, especially concerning contentious BLP content. Most glaring failure: authenticity of authorship must by proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If serious mainstream sources won't buy into it, Wikipedia should not post it. • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

whats in a name?

do we treat pornstars like their real names are classified? its very easy to google a pornstars birth name. and there are tons of interviews and articles about her husband and child, is her personal life not as important as other peoples? do we only care about her stripper days and how many awards shes won as an actress in adult movies? are we really that shallow?? just wondering? Snarevox (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

It's very easy to google lots of indiscriminate information that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. People's real names present real privacy concerns, and so require support from published, reliable sources. See WP:BLPNAME. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:51, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Riley_Reid/Archive_1&oldid=1188083713"