This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Webcam model article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
It appeared that the deleted article was about the camgirl website, not the term "camgirl". Since multiple pages have redlinked "camgirl", I thought it was best to have the article discuss the term and not the website. -- kainaw ™ 05:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
If it's just a definition of the term, would it be better suited to Wiktionary instead though? Raine ( talk) 14:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Resources to improve the article on google books > [1] Willy turner ( talk) 18:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. The following is a published article that I wrote. I'll let others decide it if is worth using as a reference: [2] -- kainaw ™ 19:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I am proposing to merge camgirl and camwhore as camwhore is a derogatory term and it is difficult if not impossible to write a NPOV. article.My full reasons are:
Pornhistorian ( talk) 09:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Merger complete. --
DarkCrow
Caw
16:22, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
> He eventually started his own paysite, was molested for money,
He prostituted himself, knowingly, and went running to the police to secure immunity the second his cunning ruse was up. Molested implies that he was unwilling or unknowing, this kid was a pimp who sold other children and ran--what could be without exageration called--an empire of child pornography. I certainly couldn't see someone with as much forethought to manage such a corporate venture in a vile trade such as child prostitution as being an innocent victim of circumstance.
I understand that critics of my point of view would argue that this draws into question whether someone under legal age can consent, et cetera, but it's been long fought over in the courts and is now quite commonly accepted that those below legal age who 'lack the mental faculty to understand the implications of their actions' sexually most certainly seem to have the mental faculty to conduct illicit, illegal, and nefariously criminal acts. Whilst it appears for consent it errs on the side of caution, for criminality it errs on the side of guilty until proven innocent.
But I do ask that for the sake of neutrality in this instance we call a spade a spade, this kid was a child prostitute and a pimp, he wasn't a victim, if anything it could be argued the kids he operated his pedo ring with were HIS victims, so 'molested' has too weak an implication along with it.
Could we please get some discussion going on this so we can reflect the reality and gravity of his crimes--regardless of his immunity from prosecution--that he has cashed in on through the media at large? I know it's a morally and ethical mine field, and I understand that there will be a lot of hot headed folks screaming to the heavens that a child cannot prostitute themselves, or consent, et cetera, but as I said, the courts have thoroughly gone over such matters in every civilized nation, and the cold hard facts are that this kid wasn't molested, but whored himself and other children out for a buck, and we really must push on regardless of moral or ad hominem criticism saying so draws and stick with the facts.
tl;dr: creepy child pimp runs porn empire, gets absolved of criminality by nanny staters saying he was a molestation victim and not a prostitute, you decide BaSH PR0MPT ( talk) 02:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
The resulution used at webcam sites is no more than 640x480, sometimes even just 320x240. [1] 2A02:A03F:1285:C600:213:20FF:FE3B:A79E ( talk) 17:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
References
Can the following revert be undone: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Camgirl&oldid=648483351
I don't see the issue why the text added was deleted. Having a list of websites allows people to compare the sites (similar to as "comparison of" website) and pick the best one (least controversial, ...). It isn't/can't be seen as spam as we don't promote a particular site, but mention a lot of sites instead, hence promoting objective comparison and keep competition between sites up (which is a democratic approach).
2A02:A03F:1285:C600:213:20FF:FE3B:A79E ( talk) 14:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Let's wait for other Editors to comment - in order to reach a WP:CONSENSUS - to me atm, you seem to be WP:Promoting / WP:Spamming the view - which is also not appropriate on Wikipedia - per - WP:NOTSOAPBOX and/or WP:NOTAFORUM - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 17:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. It appears we have consensus that the proposed title is preferable. This should not preclude another move discussion if a better title is identified. Cúchullain t/ c 13:43, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Camgirl →
Webcam model – Those working in this occupation are more commonly referred to as "webcam models" than "camgirls" (see amount of Google search results for each name). "Webcam model" is also gender-neutral, unlike "camgirl", since women aren't the only ones who do this job. Also, the only people who can legally work as webcam models are adults, and it does not seem very encyclopedic to me to be calling adult women "girls".
Rebecca1990 (
talk) 17:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC) Relisted.
Jenks24 (
talk)
16:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Some editors have added the name of the Oregon State student who filmed herself in the library. I had removed this in the past per WP:BLP1E, WP:BLPCRIME, and WP:BLPNAME, but it looks like there has been additional coverage making this moot. I've expanded with some of the higher-quality sources to contextualize why her name is mentioned. Grayfell ( talk) 23:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Redundant
|
---|
![]() |
How about this image for the article? What does everyone think? 2601:46:C801:5300:75FB:2FB9:E850:3B65 ( talk) 15:51, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
This image is more neutral and perhaps ok here or as an illustration to some related article? But the other one is also possible I guess. -- Mats33 ( talk) 00:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
This photo seems like a good fit for the article because it contains all the essential elements of camming: a video camera, a computer, a model, broadband connection, and a hosting website (MyFreeCams.com). The photo was taken at the 2010 Exxxotica Expo in NJ, which only admits people who are over 18 years. The model appears to be a member of the MyFreeCams team for a number of reasons: She is wearing a company tee-shirt, she has a plastic wrist band which likely identifies her as part of MyFreeCam's presenters, and beneath her bra it seems like she is wearing two red pasties. If you carefully look at the enlarged image, you'll notice upon her left breast is a piece of red plastic which is protruding from underneath the bra. And if you look closely at her right breast, you'll see patches of red that are showing through the open parts of the see-through bra. On the same Flickr photo album as this shot is another photo of a MyFreeCams booth girl who is topless except for green plastic pasties. The photo is from Flickr and it seems to pass all of Wikipedia's licensing requirements. Please weigh with your comments so that we can get the necessary consensus to enable its inclusion, and make this article more engaging for first time readers. James Carroll ( talk) 01:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Though I have added many photos to other articles, this is the first time that I have seen so much controversy about the initial addition of a single harmless photo. In all other instances I have merely added a photo that I deemed appropriate. The bizarre template of censorship that appears at the top of the Edit Page for the article seems to be the source of the problem. I cannot find that template on any other articles, including related articles like stripper or even pornography. I think we should challenge the words of that template -- by removal, alteration, or non-consideration -- so that we can return to the usual way of photo submission. And it may well be that we can still add photos the usual way, and not have any repercussions from admins or bots. James Carroll ( talk) 18:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
The competencies section of the infobox seems unverifiable and subjective. As a reference, other pages of sex workers that contain occupation infobox (e.g. stripper, prostitution, porn actor) either doesn't include competencies or list specific skills (e.g. pole dancing). Especially since webcam models are not limited to sex worker, I recommend the current competencies section to be removed.
Akira YL ( talk) 22:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
*Support. This is demeaning. No sources. I removed.--
KasiaNL (
talk) 06:25, 7 May 2020 (UTC) (banned sock puppet-
[3])
GizzyCatBella
🍁
19:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Webcam model article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
It appeared that the deleted article was about the camgirl website, not the term "camgirl". Since multiple pages have redlinked "camgirl", I thought it was best to have the article discuss the term and not the website. -- kainaw ™ 05:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
If it's just a definition of the term, would it be better suited to Wiktionary instead though? Raine ( talk) 14:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Resources to improve the article on google books > [1] Willy turner ( talk) 18:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. The following is a published article that I wrote. I'll let others decide it if is worth using as a reference: [2] -- kainaw ™ 19:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I am proposing to merge camgirl and camwhore as camwhore is a derogatory term and it is difficult if not impossible to write a NPOV. article.My full reasons are:
Pornhistorian ( talk) 09:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Merger complete. --
DarkCrow
Caw
16:22, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
> He eventually started his own paysite, was molested for money,
He prostituted himself, knowingly, and went running to the police to secure immunity the second his cunning ruse was up. Molested implies that he was unwilling or unknowing, this kid was a pimp who sold other children and ran--what could be without exageration called--an empire of child pornography. I certainly couldn't see someone with as much forethought to manage such a corporate venture in a vile trade such as child prostitution as being an innocent victim of circumstance.
I understand that critics of my point of view would argue that this draws into question whether someone under legal age can consent, et cetera, but it's been long fought over in the courts and is now quite commonly accepted that those below legal age who 'lack the mental faculty to understand the implications of their actions' sexually most certainly seem to have the mental faculty to conduct illicit, illegal, and nefariously criminal acts. Whilst it appears for consent it errs on the side of caution, for criminality it errs on the side of guilty until proven innocent.
But I do ask that for the sake of neutrality in this instance we call a spade a spade, this kid was a child prostitute and a pimp, he wasn't a victim, if anything it could be argued the kids he operated his pedo ring with were HIS victims, so 'molested' has too weak an implication along with it.
Could we please get some discussion going on this so we can reflect the reality and gravity of his crimes--regardless of his immunity from prosecution--that he has cashed in on through the media at large? I know it's a morally and ethical mine field, and I understand that there will be a lot of hot headed folks screaming to the heavens that a child cannot prostitute themselves, or consent, et cetera, but as I said, the courts have thoroughly gone over such matters in every civilized nation, and the cold hard facts are that this kid wasn't molested, but whored himself and other children out for a buck, and we really must push on regardless of moral or ad hominem criticism saying so draws and stick with the facts.
tl;dr: creepy child pimp runs porn empire, gets absolved of criminality by nanny staters saying he was a molestation victim and not a prostitute, you decide BaSH PR0MPT ( talk) 02:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
The resulution used at webcam sites is no more than 640x480, sometimes even just 320x240. [1] 2A02:A03F:1285:C600:213:20FF:FE3B:A79E ( talk) 17:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
References
Can the following revert be undone: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Camgirl&oldid=648483351
I don't see the issue why the text added was deleted. Having a list of websites allows people to compare the sites (similar to as "comparison of" website) and pick the best one (least controversial, ...). It isn't/can't be seen as spam as we don't promote a particular site, but mention a lot of sites instead, hence promoting objective comparison and keep competition between sites up (which is a democratic approach).
2A02:A03F:1285:C600:213:20FF:FE3B:A79E ( talk) 14:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Let's wait for other Editors to comment - in order to reach a WP:CONSENSUS - to me atm, you seem to be WP:Promoting / WP:Spamming the view - which is also not appropriate on Wikipedia - per - WP:NOTSOAPBOX and/or WP:NOTAFORUM - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 17:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. It appears we have consensus that the proposed title is preferable. This should not preclude another move discussion if a better title is identified. Cúchullain t/ c 13:43, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Camgirl →
Webcam model – Those working in this occupation are more commonly referred to as "webcam models" than "camgirls" (see amount of Google search results for each name). "Webcam model" is also gender-neutral, unlike "camgirl", since women aren't the only ones who do this job. Also, the only people who can legally work as webcam models are adults, and it does not seem very encyclopedic to me to be calling adult women "girls".
Rebecca1990 (
talk) 17:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC) Relisted.
Jenks24 (
talk)
16:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Some editors have added the name of the Oregon State student who filmed herself in the library. I had removed this in the past per WP:BLP1E, WP:BLPCRIME, and WP:BLPNAME, but it looks like there has been additional coverage making this moot. I've expanded with some of the higher-quality sources to contextualize why her name is mentioned. Grayfell ( talk) 23:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Redundant
|
---|
![]() |
How about this image for the article? What does everyone think? 2601:46:C801:5300:75FB:2FB9:E850:3B65 ( talk) 15:51, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
This image is more neutral and perhaps ok here or as an illustration to some related article? But the other one is also possible I guess. -- Mats33 ( talk) 00:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
This photo seems like a good fit for the article because it contains all the essential elements of camming: a video camera, a computer, a model, broadband connection, and a hosting website (MyFreeCams.com). The photo was taken at the 2010 Exxxotica Expo in NJ, which only admits people who are over 18 years. The model appears to be a member of the MyFreeCams team for a number of reasons: She is wearing a company tee-shirt, she has a plastic wrist band which likely identifies her as part of MyFreeCam's presenters, and beneath her bra it seems like she is wearing two red pasties. If you carefully look at the enlarged image, you'll notice upon her left breast is a piece of red plastic which is protruding from underneath the bra. And if you look closely at her right breast, you'll see patches of red that are showing through the open parts of the see-through bra. On the same Flickr photo album as this shot is another photo of a MyFreeCams booth girl who is topless except for green plastic pasties. The photo is from Flickr and it seems to pass all of Wikipedia's licensing requirements. Please weigh with your comments so that we can get the necessary consensus to enable its inclusion, and make this article more engaging for first time readers. James Carroll ( talk) 01:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Though I have added many photos to other articles, this is the first time that I have seen so much controversy about the initial addition of a single harmless photo. In all other instances I have merely added a photo that I deemed appropriate. The bizarre template of censorship that appears at the top of the Edit Page for the article seems to be the source of the problem. I cannot find that template on any other articles, including related articles like stripper or even pornography. I think we should challenge the words of that template -- by removal, alteration, or non-consideration -- so that we can return to the usual way of photo submission. And it may well be that we can still add photos the usual way, and not have any repercussions from admins or bots. James Carroll ( talk) 18:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
The competencies section of the infobox seems unverifiable and subjective. As a reference, other pages of sex workers that contain occupation infobox (e.g. stripper, prostitution, porn actor) either doesn't include competencies or list specific skills (e.g. pole dancing). Especially since webcam models are not limited to sex worker, I recommend the current competencies section to be removed.
Akira YL ( talk) 22:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
*Support. This is demeaning. No sources. I removed.--
KasiaNL (
talk) 06:25, 7 May 2020 (UTC) (banned sock puppet-
[3])
GizzyCatBella
🍁
19:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)