Jump to content

Talk:Sunny Leone/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Concerning the removal of an unreferenced comment

I have removed the following due to its lack of a verifiable reference:

She would like to do Hardcore but is conservative at this time. Though publicly bisexual, she has declared that she would love to settle down one day with a Pakistani guy. Something that has intrigued her parents for quite sometime, who're from an Indian descent.

Please provide a reference so that it can be evaluated independently. Thank you! -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 08:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Picture?

Is there a reason that particular picture is being used? Neither the Jenna Jameson nor Tera Patrick article have such a 'sexy' softcore picture.--Dead men's bells 22:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Because Wikipedia has a built-in bias that prefers pictures that are licensed either through the GFDL or Creative Commons over those that simply carry a "fair-use" tag. The pic on the Sunny Leone page is GFDL'd, while the ones on the Tera Patrick and Jenna Jameson are licensed via the Creative Commons. In fact, if you check the recent history, you'll see that the pic on the Tera Patrick page was deliberately reverted back from a sexy "fair-use" one which someone posted to the current creative commons one because of this bias. As well, the underlying purpose behind the pic differs. The Sunny pic was deliberately shot as cheesecake, the Tera and Jenna are both pics of them on a semi-casual basis. We'd love to get "better" pics of Tera and Jenna (as well as any other porn star) that have wiki-friendly licensing. Tabercil 23:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


Sikh Heritage

Just to note that Sunny Leone comes from a Sikh background, i can understand that there are some who might not be happy with this association but it is an established and interesting fact and should be included in her wiki page. Please stop deleting the reference as it gets tiresome reverting the entry.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.103.105.94 (talk • contribs) 00:59, August 16, 2007 (UTC)

Contacting Jimbo Wales

The Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee which is the parliment of the Sikhs, the governing body of the Sikhs and is a equivalent of the Vatican. Has defined no such thing as a "Sikh background". Under the the governing body of Sikhism there is no such thing as a Sikh background. What you seem to not understand in the west is you cannot be born a Sikh. You only become a Sikh and have voting rights in Sikhism and at the Golden temple when you are baptised Sikh Khalsa. If you are not a baptized Sikh then you have no official status or recognition in Sikhism. Neither of her parent were baptized Sikhs or her so how on earth can you claim she comes from a Sikh background. If this isn't recitified quickly I am officially going to contact User:Jimbo Wales and get the Akal Takht at the Golden temple [1] to contact Jimbo Wales to sort this out.--Sikh historian (talk) 20:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Slow up folks... no need to escalate things that fast. You're saying that the statement in the article regarding her being Sikh is incorrect. I'm inclined to take you at your word but there's a clear reference to an news article on the Net which call her Sikh; from the referenced news article: " Sunny Leone - the adopted name of the Sikh girl...". Now obviously I'm not Sikh, so I don't know the ins and outs of the religion, but I'm willing to learn. Can you point me to authoritative statements on the Net to back up your contentions? The most glaring statement from you would be that neither of her parents were baptised Sikhs, since Wikipedia's living people biography policy would directly relate to that. As well, your first attempt at editing the article also removed the statement that she was of an Indian Punjabi background as you said then: "The citation has be removed because it is incorrect." One of the cited sources is the Toronto Star, which is the newspaper with the highest circulation in Canada; from that source: "Sunny Leone didn't grow up dreaming of being a porn star. It was the allure of financial independence and the surging popularity of South Asian culture in North America that drew the Punjabi princess to adult entertainment." (emphasis mine) How was the Toronto Star article in error?? Tabercil (talk) 23:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Just checked and did a search on the Toronto Star article [2] the work "Sikh" is NOT mentioned EVEN once.--79.77.180.227 (talk) 04:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have been a baptized Khalsa Sikh for 30 years I have full-voting rights in the Sikh SGPC & Akal Takht in India so does my wife she is a full-baptized Sikh. I have two children one is 17 years old, the other is 25 years even though they have been to born to FULL baptized Khalsa Sikh they are not officially recognised in Sikhism, if they went to the Golden temple, they would not be allowed vote to elect anyone to any governing organ of Sikh religion, not allowed in certain holy sanctum of the temples and etc because they are not OFFICIALLY recognized because they are not BAPTIZED Sikh (a.k.a Khalsa). Once you become a baptized Khalsa Sikh (Pure) you have to live by the codes of conduct of Sikh Sikhism.

You could call yourself a Sikh tomorrow but that would NOT mean you are:

  • 1. You would have to become baptized Khalsa
  • 2. You would to live by the code of conduct for the rest of you life (in order to meet the obligations you agreed to when you were baptized)


  • Sikhism is a very complex religion, the most not understood and one of the MOST unknown religion.

Most family's children who are immigrants in the west don't even know about Baptism in Sikhism (Khalsa) or have read any of the scripture. Indeed most can't even read Punjabi the script the holy scripture are written in and most are beginning to lose the ability to even be able to speak Punjabi.

Its not on her personal site. That fact of the matter is this is a third-rate unreliable western reporter who knows nothing about deep complexities of Sikhism and has just put whatever in to make the article appear exotic and eye catching. My friend most of the Sikh websites are massively incorrect including wikipedia. The ONLY website that I would class as OK is www.sikhs.org (There is a lot of things it does not cover, but the BASICS it does cover are mostly correct). You can keep Punjabi there and Indian but Sikh is incorrect. You have to read a least 3-5 GOOD BOOKS to JUST to begin to understand Sikhism.--Sikh historian (talk) 00:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

  • As you point out, the reference to her being Sikh isn't that good so I'll let the removal stand. I will give a heads-up though that if a better source comes along (e.g., she gives an interview where she clearly self-identifies herself as Sikh), then the issue will have to be reopened. Until then, I'll let sleeping dogs lie. Tabercil (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I've put a good reading book list on your page.--Sikh historian (talk) 01:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Tabercil , You should then also mention that majority of american pornstars are christians. i don't need to point you towards the links. Google and you can find them wearing cross while doing their stuff on camera. you have major case for doing that. Don't you?Ajjay (talk) 08:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Also she won't be considered a sikh, even if she declares that. To associate someone with a religion , it has to be judged by her work, lifestyle and social behaviour. She will never be able to live up to it. All pornstars are mentally disturbed, i don't have to refer it, it is understood. It is stated in Holy Quran that all persons are born Muslims. But that doesn't make every one a Muslim. I hope you get my point fella!Ajjay (talk) 08:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

I have added this link: [3]

This link is not new. It has been on this page for a long time now, but someone deleted it, and I have added it once again, but someone deleted it again, and I have again added it. The page features an extensive gallery of Leone's gallery. --Jo (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality tags

Do we need these, now? They date from June. I think they were related to her claims of being Sikh, while her lifestyle differs from that expected of/by mainstream Sikhs. Since the RS carry the bit about her being Sikh, I don't see how this would merit a neutrality tag.- Sinneed 22:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

These can be easily restored, but please explain here if so. I see a religious edit war, but I don't see neutrality issues... just content dispute.- Sinneed 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Career

Hi, I just made my first Wikipedia page edit and I saw that it was instantly removed, and I am hoping to learn why so that I will not repeat the same mistake.

In Sunny Leone's Career section, there is the following sentence:

Leone has also built a sizable online presence with her official website, sunnyleone.com, along with affiliate sites sunnysmoney.com and sunnysfriends.com. She has managed to leverage her online popularity by striking deals with firms like PPPcard, AdultPokerParty.com, Brickhouse, Flirt4Free, Totemcash and Imlive to sell and distribute her content over the internet and other media.

The sentence lists a number of websites where Sunny Leone performs online. I included MyFreeCams.com on that list where she made an appearence a few days ago, and cited it as: http://wiki.myfreecams.com/wiki/Celebrities_on_MyFreeCams#Sunny_Leone

Was my citation bad or why was my addition removed?

Albert10109 (talk) 04:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

If you click on the "history" tab of an article, you can see who made edits to the article and when they made them. In this case, you can see that I was the person who removed your edit. I did so for a couple reasons. First, you were using another wiki as your source. It's not what I would consider a reliable source (<-- click on that to read the policy) especially since it's published/posted by the same company. It wasn't reported on by anyone, so it smells a bit too much like advertising. Secondly, I don't feel that the site, MyFreeCams, is notable enough to have an article. So I don't see why we should point it out. For instance, if a model signs with Vivid Entertainment then that would be able to be referenced by a reliable source since something like that would likely show up in AVN or a similar publication and, since Vivid is notable, it's noteworthy to mention in a model's career bio. Basically, we don't list every appearance or else the encyclopedic article starts looking a lot like a resume (see WP:RESUME). Any questions, I'm all ears... Dismas|(talk) 06:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sunny Leone/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Canadian Paul 02:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Alrighty, here we go:

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Some comments: 1. The lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD. Specifically, it must touch upon each of the major sections of the article and (briefly) summarize them.

2. Your images should have alt text, per Wikipedia:Alternative text for images

Fixed for the images in the body. Infobox template doesn't support alt text though... Tabercil (talk) 03:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

3. There are links in the article that go to redirects that need to be fixed. In the first section I found Sirmaur, Catholic School, Bisexual, and United States Permanent Resident Card. Please fix these and any others in the article either by using piped links, or reformatting.

Fixed for the links in the body. Dismas|(talk) 04:55, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

4. There's quite a few two-sentence paragraphs here; try to expand or combine them so that they're at least three sentences long, as one or two sentence paragraphs really tend to chop up the flow and make it difficult to read.

5. The captions on the non-infobox images are a little... wanting. Is there any way to make them more interesting/detailed (Leone at event X doing Y in Z in 2009 or whatever) like the one in the infobox?

Fixed. Tabercil (talk) 03:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

6. Per WP:ELPOINTS, "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article", so the link to "Naked Ambition: An R-rated Look at an X-rated Industry" should be moved to the external links section and Italicized per MOS:TITLE

Fixed by pointing to the Wiki article for the book. Tabercil (talk) 03:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

7. Per Wikipedia:External links, four "official" sites are probably a bit much. I would suggest at least removing the Facebook page.

Dunno about that, but I can move some of them out of the external links by using the {{Web presence}} infobox. Tabercil (talk) 03:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

8. I couldn't see where the citation for her shoe size mentions that fact. In addition, the "number of films" count is out of date in the infobox for both links.

Both items fixed. Tabercil (talk) 10:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

9. Citations #6 and #8 are identical.

Fixed. Tabercil (talk) 03:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

10. In "Early life", "When she was 15, her family received their green card" doesn't appear to be cited by the reference.

Fixed. Pulled out the green card reference and changed it to state when she moved to the US, using Toronto Star as a cite.

11. "She graduated from high school in 1999 and enrolled in college" in that same section is unreferenced.

12. Moving on to "Career", "She posed for Penthouse magazine, and was named Penthouse Pet of the Month for the March 2001 issue, followed by a feature in the Holiday 2001 edition of Hustler magazine as a Hustler Honey" is uncited (or at least, not cited in the surrounding refs). The sourcing for this section is sporadic overall - there are references for some of the publications, but not others. From there on it gets spotty and, with an article about a porn star, there is very little that can be taken for granted and unsourced.

13. The further I go in this article, the more the prose breaks into little one-or-two sentences factoids, which makes the article difficult to read overall as it lacks a proper flow. These facts should be integrated into some sort of structured paragraphs or removed if they are not important to the overall article.

Unfortunately, the article does not meet the criteria right now and, as it is unlikely to do so without a significant revision of referencing and prose, I am going to fail the article for now, rather than place it on hold, which will also give another editor a chance to look it over if you decide to renominate it. Thank you for your work thus far. Once these concerns have been addressed, the article may be renominated. If you feel that this assessment was in error, you may take it to WP:GAR. Canadian Paul 02:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Totally wrong facts

1 POINT

She is not from a Sikh family... Her parents are proper Hindus who maybe respect Sikhs like many others do#

Like everything on wikipedia, you need to cite sources to show that. If this article makes claims which aren't referenced, however, you can immediately remove them due to BLP concerns. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 08:20, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

2 Point


SunLust production company films info

The reason I reverted the inclusion of these films is not because I don't believe she was in them. My reasons are:

  1. She is in LOTS of films and I see no reason to single these two out. They aren't notable for anything.
  2. The "sources" are commercial sites. A much better source would be some sort of industry news talking about these films since that would help support argument #1, their notability.
  3. SunLust is a red link and likely a non-notable film production company. I have nothing against red links per se but it doesn't help support the idea of notability.

Any questions? Dismas|(talk) 20:44, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

To address each of your concerns:
  • I have to agree that more appropriate sources should be found if possible, but as I said before, since there is no advertising in what was added, they're not inappropriately used, and there's no reason to believe they're not reliable. I will try to find some more appropriate sources for this information if I get time.
  • I believe the reason that they were singled out is that she is director of these films; I don't know enough about the subject to be able to say whether she has directed more than these two, but the information which was added suggested that these are the first two films of which she has been director. I believe that makes them worthy of mention.
  • Since the article isn't about SunLust or these films, I don't think the film production company not being notable means that information and sources potentially beneficial to the article should be ruled out.

GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 21:31, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I re-added them, corrected the typo, and found a reference that is a review of the films with details supporting the text. Hopefully that will help. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 23:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
We have purposefully established a policy on what movies should and should not be mentioned in the articles due to the sheer amount of movies a pornographic actor or director might be involved in. You can see this at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Pornography#Filmographies. Individual notabilty is needed for content, and right now WP:STATUSQUO should rule until this is settled. Nymf hideliho! 23:44, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I see. First time anyone has mentioned these standards (that I have seen.) Perhaps that should be more evident somewhere. I'll revert my work and back out slowly... --| Uncle Milty | talk | 23:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Note that at least the first of the two movies mentioned meets the criteria at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Pornography#Filmographies, as it is the first movie for which Sunny Leone was director; i.e. it passes criterion 1 of this section. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 23:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately, in the references I found they felt is was unlikely that Sunny had actually directed the films. If there are better references that prove she did (other than the marketing department of an online porn seller) then the notability might improve. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 00:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
This link is a review which lists Sunny Leone as the director. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:05, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
The IMDb page also lists her as director; IMDb is undoubtedly a reliable source. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:06, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, that was for Pussy Eating Club 3. Same goes for 1 and 2 though. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:10, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Finally, IMDb also gives evidence that Pussy Eating Club was the first film she directed, which therefore qualifies as notable per the guideline mentioned above. See this. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
It isn't my intent to try to convince anyone to change their minds in terms of whether or not she actually directed something, or whether or not that's notable. I would humbly suggest two things however:
  1. IMDB isn't an ideal source of information. I realize that it's used very often as a source, but considering how frequently they're outright wrong, it's not ideal for controversial proofs. That isn't to say that it's bad; merely that it might be preferable to find supplementary sourcing. (I notice that you also use xcritic. This is good if xcritic is a reliable source. I'll admit that I don't really know anything about them)
  2. Nymf, projects (the pornography project, and indeed all projects) have different 'policies' enacted, but they are by no means binding. There is a grave distinction between a 'project policy' and a 'wikipedia policy'. I don't mean to imply that you don't know the difference; but rather than you should recognize and acknowledge that adhering to project policies is really more of a courtesy in the spirit of collaboration than a binding rule. More importantly, WP:STATUSQUO, being an essay, cannot possibly "rule". What you're looking for is to have the "correct" version of the page retained until everyone agrees. This is what everyone always wants (with everyone considering their own version to be that "correct" version). Clearly this is impossible. The inclusion of a couple pieces of work that might not be strictly necessary is hardly damaging. And certainly not as damaging as edit-warring. 209.90.133.213 (talk) 00:33, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. I agree that IMDb alone isn't ideal to ensure reliability in a controversial discussion such as this, but note I did also mention this as another source that she is the director here, and a third is formed by the original references, which are valid sources regardless of whether or not it's a store. A quick google search will most likely yield several more sources of this. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Take down her religous background since she is not Sikh, the source that backs the claim is clearly false.

She is not from a Sikh family... Her parents are proper Hindus who maybe respect Sikhs like many others do and further more Malhotra is a HINDU surname, not Sikh. Users are on a dispute as to which background she is from. Active contributors keep claiming their source from a website article that has no proof that she is Sikh. It does not come directly from herself wether she is a Sikh or not. What Sikh on earth Is called Malhotra who's Dad comes from Tibet and mother comes from Himachal Pradesh with the surname Malhotra.

All in all, I feel that users should just take her religious background down, since it is not of any use anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pritsindhar (talk • contribs) 20:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Nope, she is not Hindu. The Eye Weekly article is clear in that is says she is Sikh. Additionally, if you look at her YouTube channel (found here), which does seem authentic given that there are clearly videos by her, it says "You know me. I was Penthouse Pet of the Year 2003. I am 100% Sikh, but I went to a Catholic school growing up.". Lastly there is a refutation of the Hindu bit - she did an appearance on the Howard Stern show back in 2002. According the Marks Friggin summary of the show "She said she's not Hindu so she's not into that." Tabercil (talk) 20:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
She definitely claims she is from a Sikh family and is of Sikh origin. Now whether she is a practising Sikh is a different issue (which is outside the scope of this article) Thanks--Sikh-History 14:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. <G> Tabercil (talk) 15:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Debates on whether She is a Sikh or not?

I think any views on whether she is a Sikh or not should be taaken to this forum here which is being debated by Sikhs, and should be kept off here. I think the arguments are rather circular. Maybe we need to add a link to the article of this debate, that Sikh groups are divided as to whether she caan be considered a Sikh or not. That should end this needless vandalism.--82.46.199.25 (talk) 16:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry that's not how Wikipedia works, we seek consensus here among our users, not on some other forum. This issue has been discussed at length here and the consensus here is that she should be described in the article here as Sikh. – ukexpat (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


Edit request from Sunny089, 14 May 2011

This message is from Sam, Canada.

I need to append some info. about Sunny Leone which I gained from Book written by my close friend Richard on Sunny...

kindly grant me permission.

Sunny089 (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

User has been blocked for vandalism--Jac16888 Talk 19:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request

I ask that the last edits made please be undone. I may also have to ask the assistance of other editors for oversight and dispute resolution as it appears PornstarGlobal.com 5 Star Awards are not being recognized for some reason. I can verify first hand that although relatively new, it is in fact a recognized Online Award. Viewers vote, a Winner is chosen, Prize is awarded. This Online Award has more Sponsors than some of the 'trophy' awards I have seen & been to. Solidcontrib (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

At this point, no. Notability has not been established for the award. Tabercil (talk) 17:35, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I definately don't want to argue with anyone about anything. I did find it odd that the PornstarGlobal 5 Star Awards have been recognized and visible on Sunny Leone's page since December of 2010, but when I added the same info to Kagney's page, both were removed 1 minute apart from eachother, instantly. As shown here: Award "An award may also simply be a public acknowledgment of excellence, without any tangible token or prize." Am I missing something? Solidcontrib (talk) 23:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI, pornstarglobal is blacklisted from wikipedia from past spamming issues. See [4][5]. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:19, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, this I did not know, which is why I couldn't just link to their site straight away I'm assuming. At the risk of sounding nip-picky though, I still think we should recognize the Award aspect as it is a valid Award no matter which way you look at it as per: Award. If this is personal, I can understand that as well, but don't think it serves the concept of Wikipedia. Solidcontrib (talk) 23:33, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It's blacklisted, and hence not welcome. I suggest you leave it alone, unless there is a WP:COI going on. Nymf hideliho! 23:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Now see it's that obvious anger that keeps me thinking this may be a case of personal issue, rather than what's best for Wikipedia. Whether it's welcomed by you or not, it is still an Award no matter how you cut it. I am now somewhat confused about the actual objective here. Is it about accuracy where deserved, or welcome mats? No disrespect. Also, have they vandalized since 2009? Solidcontrib (talk) 23:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It is not a personal issue for me. What I see is a single-purpose account, trying to push a website that was blacklisted due to spamming issues. There is obviously a conflict of interest here on your part, and possibly socking going on. Prove me wrong. Nymf hideliho! 00:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

No no please don't take it that way. I do not push anything, this just happened to be my first real edit and I did my homework before posting. It also seemed to be the only Award that had not been listed so I thought I was lucky to have added it, because I am interested in making some contributions to the Porn Industry related pages (which is why I am a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality. I'm not sure that I understand socking. When I added the link, I did not know it would turn out to be like this. I hate to keep saying it but according to this: Award I am correct. Again, no disrespect and I will be glad to prove anything you need, just let me know how. Solidcontrib (talk) 00:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Award is an article, not a policy or guideline. Nymf hideliho! 00:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I was referring to the comment "SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! An announcement that you're promoting a porn performer on your website isn't an award, even when you call it one to hype the promotion. It's just spam" made by User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz in the Revision history of Sunny Leone, June 1st 13:13. It is an Award according to: Award. I also see that the 5 Star Award link (which looks to be a sub-directory of the domain) was never part of that previous issue. Solidcontrib (talk) 00:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

You don't seem to have caught what was said above. Award is an article about awards. It's not a Wikipedia policy or guideline page. (emphasis simply being used to draw your attention to the differences, not yelling) For instance, many web sites declare some model every month to be their favorite of the month (Twisty's and Freeones are just two off the top of my head that do this). We don't list all those. If we did, each porn star's article would be several pages long. Notable awards only are what are listed.
If you're looking for guidelines about porn stars, start with WP:P* which is the Pornography WikiProject. That page has some helpful links to various guidelines and policies. Dismas|(talk) 01:16, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I did catch it, but I was referring to the comment made by User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz. If he is correct, why has the article itself not been edited accordingly? If what he says is true, the Wikipedia Award Article is incorrect. Can I be allowed to edit that Article please? I think it's just once a year Pornstarglobal does the Award and it meets all requirements of Wikipedia:Notability. Solidcontrib (talk) 01:34, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Being born as a Sikh

SIKH MEANS STUDENT OF OUR HOLY BOOK. SO IF YOU DO NOT STUDY THE SIKH SCRIPTURE ND GAIN SPIRITUAL WISDOM U ARE NOT A SIKH

PLEASE CHANGE THAT WRONG FACTS!!!!

Since that is not what the article says, it is not possible to change it.- Sinneed 19:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Exactly. It does not say she was born Sikh, rather she was raised Sikh. And the phrasing comes from an article on her done by Eye Weekly, which is owned by the Toronto Star: "She was a nursing student who got into nude modeling, not exactly a common profession for someone raised Sikh." (emphasis mine) Tabercil (talk) 04:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
If she calls herself sikh she is. Wether she wants to fully practice the religion or not is up to her. Her parents are sikh, and yes you can be born into sikh family as your parents have that identity. The sikh religion does not judge on ones doings many uneducated hypocrites identity as being knowledgeable.I believe she knows the God more than many of you. Her concept is much more Deeper and advanced,due in part to what she does.Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.127.3 (talk • contribs)
Mike I am afraid you are in error here. Sikhism is very specific about Kaam or sexual obsession. Kaam is seen as a barrier to understanding God or becoming a Gurmukh. It is one of the 5 thieves that steals your senses, along with Krodh, Moh, Lobh and Hankaar. From what I can see about Sunny, because of her Krodh she went against her parents, to persue Moh. The way she thought she would do this is through Kaam. If there is one industry a Sikh is expressly forbidden from working in, it is the sex industry. Maybe she does know God, I am not sure, but it is definitely not God as Sikhs understand it, and 99% of the worlds Sikhs has a reputation for being respectable and not persuing such depraved lifestyles. But hey hum, its a free country, I can call myself a Martian if I wish.
Assuming her job is "sexual obsession" is a leap and original research because it is an intrepretive deduction on your part. Taking your martian example if you wanted to dispute someone's claim to martianhood it would require an article about that person with specicifity disputing that fact.Jgeddis (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I think why many Sikhs are getting upset and spamming this article is because, in Sikhism, there are very strong female charachters who display virtues, of kindness like Bebe Nanki, and bravery like Mai Bhago (she fought in battles from the fron), virtue like Rani (Queen) Jindian as well as others who have been Presidents of the Sikh institutions. Sikhs have had women taking religious ceremonies and heading congregations for some 300 years, long before Christianity had women priests. Now to have a figure like Sunny Leone who basically gets paid to be exploited, carry out depraved male fantasies and be "f*cked" is a bit hard for many Sikhs to take. So try and understand it from their point of view.

Thanks--Sikh-History 11:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

And just to point out something I found last night: a recap of a Howard Stern show back in 2002 where she was clear she's not Hindu:

"Howard asked her if cows are like Jesus to her. She said she's not Hindu so she's not into that."

So those who are changing it to Hindu are wrong. Tabercil (talk) 12:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

  • In reply to Sikh-history above: it's irrelevant whether she follows all of the Sikh teachings or if one or more Sikh communities consider her a Sikh; she has stated that she is a Sikh, and in particular, she was raised a Sikh, so she is a Sikh. Whether or not other Sikhs would consider her a "good" Sikh, or to be following the Sikh beliefs as they see them, is irrelevant to whether or not she considers herself a Sikh, and whether or not she was raised a Sikh. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 12:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi GiftigerWunsch [TALK], I do not really care whether she calls herself a Sikh or not. Like I said, I can call myself a Martian if I so wish. Mike said The sikh religion does not judge on ones doings many uneducated hypocrites identity as being knowledgeable.I believe she knows the God more than many of you. Her concept is much more Deeper and advanced,due in part to what she does. I was correcting him on this point. Sikhism does judge on the concept of the 5 thieves. It states one cannot get close to God if one is obsessed with the 5 thieves or one of the 5 thieves. Obsession with the 5 thieves makes one restless and not able to tune into God inside. One of the 5 thieves is Kam i.e. obsession with sex. I pointed out Sunny is in an industry that promotes Kam as well as indulging in what some may say "depraved" acts of Kam. So in terms of Sikh philosophy, she can never be close to God. She maybe close to God in her mind, but it is definitely not the Sikh concept, because she will never be at peace enough to tune into God that dwells inside her (you and me). She will never be a Gurmukh.
Another concept in Sikhism is "Higher than Truth is Truthful living", in other words don't just talk the talk, walk the walk. Mike claims The sikh religion does not judge on ones doings, again he is wrong. I would say ones actions are far more important than talking about actions.
Saying that she can still turn her back on this "sordid" industry, and she will be welcomed by the Sikh fraternity. I am sure she would have no problem finding a Sikh husband either. Daya (Kindness) is also a central tenet of Sikhism. What you probably find is that most of the people actually spamming this article are probably Sikh wome, because they take any demeaning of Sikh womanhood very seriously. From what I can see on the "twittersphere", Sunny Leone is seen a a blot not only on Sikhism, but Sikh womanhood and emancipation. So I would keep the protection for some time to come. Thanks--Sikh-History 13:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Interestingly Tabercil (talk) many Sikhs will not eat beef for respect of their Hindu neighbours, respect for the cow as it ploughs the field, gives milk and fuel. Thanks--Sikh-History 13:14, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Understandable - there's a lot of Hindu neighbours there you'd be pissing off with your beef meals. <G> If anything I think I lifted from the Howard Stern recap a lil' too late in the paragraph. Backing up a couple of sentences in the recap from it provides better context:
Howard pointed out that Sunny is Indian, but not the woo, woo, woo kind, she's India Indian. Howard spent a short time talking to her about that and how her father is from India and used to wear a turban until he was turned down jobs because of it. Howard asked her if cows are like Jesus to her. She said she's not Hindu so she's not into that.
As for using the recap in the article, I don't see how it would fit in... the turban mentioned is not a Sikh-specific item of clothing, correct? And thanks for the heads-up on the twitter-sphere status. If they ever get pending changes back up and rolling, I'll definitely get this article placed in that category. Tabercil (talk) 22:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
No probs, if she is claiming to be a Sikh then that is what should stay in the article regardless of vanadalism, and yes " there's a lot of Hindu neighbours there you'd be pissing off with your beef meals.", lol that would be a a problem! Thanks--Sikh-History 09:47, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Danzig

She was recently seen in a few pictures with Glen Danzig advertizing the band's new box set. This can mean she is a fan of theirs but more research would have to take place first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylorhindman (talk • contribs) 18:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 17 November 2011

The real name of Sunny Leone is not "Karen Malhotra" but "Karenjit Kaur Vohra". Please correct that. "Karen Malhotra" was a fake name that she said was her in order to prevent her real name to be disclosed but her real name was later leaked by many sites including IMDB.

Soure : http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1293381/bio 

       http://beauty-sw.blogspot.com/2011/07/10-sunny-leone.html
       http://annferriday.info/115-1017_Karrenjit-Kaur_01-55-49.html
       http://beautysbank.blogspot.com/2011/10/sunny-leone.html

Raftaar (talk) 12:46, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. IMDb is user conetent, and none of the others appear reliable. CTJF83 12:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. Two of the sources that you have are unreliable blogs and the one in the middle doesn't work (for me at least). See WP:RS. Dismas|(talk) 12:55, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

sunny leone appears on BIG BOSS season 5 indian edition

sunny leone appears in big boss season 5,indian edition.is being met with a lot of criticism amongst general indian public and conservatives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hariomji (talk • contribs) 13:27, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 21 November 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} sunny leone is a hindu not sikh why you wrote she is sikh she is a hindu from himachal india

Rajalondonukk (talk) 07:33, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The article says she was raised as a Sikh, with this reference - which seems valid.
Can you please explain why you think anything should be changed, and give a reference. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  07:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

SUNNY LEONE IS A HINDU FROM HIMACHAL INDIA WHY WIKIPEDIA GIVING WRONG INFORMATION

SHE IS A HINDU RAISED AS A HINDU HER DAD IS HINDU RAMDAS MALHOTRA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajalondonukk (talk • contribs) 07:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As it was stated above, we have a source that clearly states she was raised Sikh. If you have a reliable source that says otherwise, please provide it. Tabercil (talk) 23:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 December 2011

Request to add a link under External Links. The link is to Sunny Leone's AskMen.com profile page: http://www.askmen.com/celebs/women/models_300/336_sunny_leone.html AskMen has updated the profile with her most recent accolades while also publishing an article from Sunny Leone herself: http://www.askmen.com/top_10/dating/top-5-lessons-women-should-learn-from-sunny-leone.html AskMen is the leading men's entertainment portal online boasting 20 Million readers monthly and Leone's profile has been very popular as of late, it would be great to see it linked on her Wikipedia page. Thanks. JayTest (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

 Not done Only links to official websites and few others are allowed. See WP:EL for more information. —Commander (Ping me) 21:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 December 2011

sunny leone

You765756 (talk) 00:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC) sunny leone

No request--Jac16888 Talk 00:55, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sunny_Leone/Archive_1&oldid=1144183374"