Talk:Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Fashion (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Photography  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 

Defending the issue[edit]

Is the "defense" of the issue really necessary? It certainly doesn't sound encyclopedic, nor NPOV. I'd like to consider removing it, and possibly replacing it with a more encyclopedic description of any such controversy. 4.243.115.109 09:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Page layout[edit]

I'm getting two strange "edit" links in the middle of the second section. Adding a blankspace fixed it in preview, but not in the actual article. I think it's the picture layout that is causing this, but I'm not sure. Perhaps someone with better wikiskill than me can do something to clean that up. Jfiling 23:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

German Version[edit]

Did you know there is a German version of SI?? This article should state that. Lil Flip246 22:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use overuse[edit]

This does not need so many covers illustrating it. The first one and one more recent one ought to be sufficient, in my opinion. Barring objections, I'm going to remove a bunch in a few days. --RobthTalk 21:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

comments[edit]

Isn't there some kind of curse or something with the cover thing? I am trying to get some more info on that.

The curse is related to the athletes only. That is on the main Sports Illustrated article. Maple Leaf 22:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

When Are New Issues Released?[edit]

Does anyone know the rule for when they release each year's issue? It seems to be sometime in middle or late February, but I'm not sure. Thanks. cal —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.80.74.2 (talk) 00:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

It comes out today, the 14 of February, for 2007. I dont know who's on the cover, but the big thing is that Beyonce is in it. 69.148.180.203 16:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Today is the 15th, yet my issue hasn't come. Any idea why?

Can we list when each issue was officially released? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talkcontribs) 20:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Global Warming controversy[edit]

On FNC's Red Eye, the host (Gutfeld) raised the topic of how this swimsuit edition is advertising the danger of global warming. -Amit, 03/10/07

Fair use rationale for Image:SI Swimsuit issue 2006.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:SI Swimsuit issue 2006.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

There article needs an image. just any low-res cover should cut it.--Dwarf Kirlston 20:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:First SI Swimsuit Issue.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:First SI Swimsuit Issue.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Sources for Templates[edit]

I have found the following web pages that seem difficult to find for doing templates from past years:


For 2004 the main index can't be found, but this link will get you to most pages: http://cgi.cnnsi.com/features/2004_swimsuit/gallery/melissa/
Before 1996, the swimsuit issue was not posted online in its entirety. 2000 and 2005 seem difficult to find.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 17:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I did them all myself. Still need help with non-internet years.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Template Issues[edit]

I have created most of the templates for the internet era of the Swimsuit franchise. The following issues need to be address:

  1. I can not find the 2000, 2004 & 2005 websites. I think they have been hacked beyond use.
  2. I have only included the online part of the franchise. Additional sections for the print edition, calendar, DVD, etc. parts of the franchise would be appropriate. I have noticed several names on the article that were not included in the online part of the franchise in a given year. I assume they were included in the print edition. I know this happens because one year about 5 years ago either Lujan Fernandez or one of the Fernandas (Fernanda Tavares or Fernanda Motta) had one of my favorite pictures in the print edition, but was not in the online edition (or maybe it was the other way). Also, I think Joanne Gair was in the print edition in 2000-2003, but was not in the online edition. I think adding the print edition lists is essential. Calendar would be good but there are 12 month calendars, 16 month calendars available on college campuses, and 52 week desk calendars in various years. I am not too familiar with the calendar part of the franchise and am not sure how to direct assistance. I am also not familiar with the DVD/VHS part of the franchise.
  3. I am going to correct the templates to make clear they are for the online part of the franchise.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. I have only included photographers who did the traditional supermodel bikini photoshoots. I did not include photographers of the celelebrities, or athletes and such unless they also did some of the traditional shoots. It seems that about 3/4 of the photographer links are currently redlinks, thus limiting it to the marginally more notable photographers may be the way to go. This excludes Ben Watts who photographed Danica Patrick.
  5. I think I have only included the locations of the primary supermodel shoots, which excludes the Beyonce location for example. I am not sure what belongs, but I am letting you know.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
    P.S. It may seem odd to only count photographers and locations of the traditional supermodel shoots, but it seems that the producers of Sports Illustrated have been using this convention (look at the locations tab in the 2007 issue).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 17:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

New Project[edit]

I am adding this article to the Porn project. Not necessarily because I think it counts as porn or even that some very conservative types might classify it as such, but because it serves as a gateway to porn, much like marijuana use can lead to more severe drug abuse. Please add your thoughts here; don't just delete the tag if you disagree.40four (talk) 15:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The SISE is no more a gateway to porn than modern advertisements, TV, or film, or any of a hundred things utilizing the phrase "sex sells." Based on the above rationale, numerous entire industries and certainly hundreds of non-porn-related articles would be within the scope of the project. Putting it here comes across more as slander than validity.  Mbinebri  talk ← 01:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Tv specials[edit]

There should be mention of the yearly tv special, and the release date of the issue too. The picture displayed on this page should also be the most current issue, or if possible have a picture of all covers(much like the wrestlemania page) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talkcontribs) 19:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Having all the covers is unnecessary, and the cover this article displays should be the most significant, not the simply the newest. It's appropriate to use the first Swimsuit Issue cover. But I do agree that the behind-the-scenes specials are worth mention.  Mbinebri  talk ← 00:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I think there should be a significant cover (i.e. first) photograph AND the most recent cover on the wiki page. This way it can be historical & current at the same time. Gutch220 (talk) 14:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The first cover depicts the issue. Additional covers lack WP:FUR justification.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Swimsuit Issue templates at WP:DRV[edit]

I have attempted to refine the yearly swimsuit templates and have listed them for discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_February_10#User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/SISwimsuit.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

End the sexism now - Swimsuit Issue[edit]

I have noticed that the top female fashion models of my generation (Cindy Crawford, Linda Evangelista, Christy Turlington and Kate Moss to name a few) have no templates on their pages. This is contrary to standard practice on wikipedia because in most fields, the elite leaders of the field are linked by templates about the things in that field that are considered significant. Model templates get deleted for some reason that does not make sense to me.

I have been through a failed debate at WP:TFD for yearly Swimsuit Issue templates last summer. They originally had so much information on them that they were said to have too much indiscriminate info. I have subsequently pared down the templates as seen at User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/SISwimsuit. The pared down version failed at WP:DRV. I could imagine that for models to have a bunch of swimsuit issue templates it might be excessive. I have now merged and redesigned the templates so that they cover a decade at a time as can be seen at User:TonyTheTiger/Template:2000-2009SISwimsuit. I am trying to start a discussion so that they don't get deleted if I take the template out of userspace.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

For my contribution to this discussion, see here. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I think the yearly templates are dead. I have lost an TFD debate and after accounting for feedback, I have lost a DRV on yearly templates. However, I actually think for reasons other than those argued at those location, yearly is no good. You will have models with 30 or 40 templates if we do that and then start adding other fashion modeling templates. Large blocks of years will get us the proper balance in the WP world. However, I concur that these are approved methods of linking articles.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I thought wikipedia was supposed to be a collection of the sum of human knowledge, therefore any additional information for any topic should be encouraged. If the Wikipedia users are going to nitpick what should and shouldn't be included into the human lexicon than wikipedia no longer stands for what it originally had in mind. If a person(s) is willing to put in the time and effort to add/organize any information, Wikipedia should welcome it. The addition of information far, FAR, exceeds the argument of clutter, importance, or necessity so long as the information is well organized & true. I fully support this idea. Gutch220 (talk) 20:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

End the sexism now - Magazine templates[edit]

(Discussion moved to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fashion#End_the_sexism_now_-_Magazine_templates)

How is it sexist? Nobody is holding a gun to their head to be in the magazine, and they are very generously compensated for their modeling in the issue. It also provides many opportunities for the models afterwards. 'Last time I checked, this is still America, no? Gutch220 (talk) 14:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I think you missed my point. For some reason every time a fashion model template is created, it is deleted. I need your support and advice to create a set of templates for the elite magazines. Follow the link.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm all for having each SI Swimsuit Issue have it's own page. Since there is only one per year, I think this is very reasonable. Info to be included could be; models, locations, photographers, distiguishing characteristics for that issue, controversies, associated stories/tid-bits of information, etc. I know this will be a massive undertaking since we are already 45 issues into its history but in time, they will become complete. Gutch220 (talk) 20:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Lending support for something that has been twice rejected and is not going to happen is somewhat counterproductive. How about the option that is still viable. Are you in support of a template for each decade for the Swimsuit models and bidecade templates for elite magazine covers. I will build a model Vogue template so you can see what it might look like.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not familiar enough with that magazine to be able to add any useful information. Why was that idea scrapped twice? I thought wikipedia was supposed to be a collection of the sum of human knowledge, therefore any additional information for any topic should be encouraged. If the wiki users are going to nitpick what should and shouldn't be included into the human lexicon than wikipedia no longer stands for what it originally had in mind. Gutch220 (talk) 00:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Anything on anything is not a very good summary. Round 1 was basically that there was too much indiscriminate info. Round 2 was more like I don't see why they need one of these for every year. Here is my start on what the vogue will look like User:TonyTheTiger/2000-2019BritishVogueCovers. I will finish it later. Are you for either of the proposals?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Yea, sure Gutch220 (talk) 13:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

For the record, your support for the User:TonyTheTiger/2000-2019BritishVogueCovers should be stated at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fashion#End_the_sexism_now_-_Magazine_templates and support for User:TonyTheTiger/Template:2000-2009SISwimsuit should be stated in the above discussion. If and when I create these in template space, I will note those discussions and not this one.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

1978[edit]

Why does Christie Brinkley appear as the cover girl in SISI in 1978 instead of Maria Joao? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.58.174.73 (talk) 23:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Is this list really necessary?[edit]

It seems way too long & detailed ... -- GateKeeper(X) @ 19:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I think a major part of the SISE is who is in it year to year, so including the list in the article is warranted, IMO, although I understand anyone thinking it's a bit excessive. Perhaps having a collapsible list like this in the article would work? But then again, there are already the templates at the bottom of the article. Another option could be turning the list into its own article a la List of Victoria's Secret fashion models (but organized by date) and linked to from the main article.  Mbinebri  talk ← 20:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Now that the templates seem to be accepted and they are on the bottom of the page, this is redundant. If the templates ever get TFDed, I would support this section being added back.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)