Talk:IMG Models

Alphabetical order

Please add new names in alphabetical order and follow the column format. If you don't know how to do that add the names here and someone will put them in order. They were in perfect order in April, now they're a mess again. I'll put them back in order later if it hasn't been done, but please maintain it. Doc 16:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• Please once again this list was a shambles. If you are alphabetically challenged, put the name on a list here on the talk page and someone else will add the name, don't put it out of order on the namespace page. Thanks. Doc 22:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Info

Shouldnt the page be about the agency itself rather than a list of models, I came here to find out if IMG repersents male and female models, it would seem not but the page doesnt say this, and this is one of the most important things to say --89.101.188.42 (talk) 03:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You're totally right! Thanks for the suggestion! --Catgut (talk) 10:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on IMG Models. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151117033050/http://img.com/news/news/2012/september/img-models-launches-men%E2%80%99s-division.aspx to http://img.com/news/news/2012/september/img-models-launches-men%E2%80%99s-division.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Maddie Ziegler

Maddie Ziegler belongs on the list of IMG models. She signed with IMG in 2017 See this. She continues to be represented by the agency Maddie Ziegler's profile at IMG. She was a speaker at the IMG Academy Fashion Camp in 2018. video. Somambulant1 (talk) 04:31, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

She’s represented in the Talent department, not the Women or even Women Development. Trillfendi (talk) 04:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Somnambulant. Ziegler joined IMG two years ago, as mentioned in numerous articles, including this one, which mention her as a model, not in any other capacity. This is clearly Ziegler's IMG modelling portfolio. What you say, Trillfendi, appears to be WP:OR. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:44, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Show me where you see her on this board. Where the models are. I’ll wait. And it’s not the one with Millie Bobby Brown, the Sprouse twins, Gal Gadot, Ciara, Sienna Milelr, Wiz Khalifa, and Paris Jackson which can be found here. (Oh look) All public too. Just takes the muscular ability to type imgmodels.com then click Talent. Trillfendi (talk) 23:08, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

And since 2014, she’s only done 6 modeling related jobs. You call that a modeling career? She’s not even on the development board ffs. Trillfendi (talk) 23:11, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

I also agree with User:Somambulant1 and User:Ssilvers. Miss Ziegler's IMG modelling portfolio that Ssilvers mentioned shows that she is an IMG fashion model, and the Hollywood Reporter article so treats her. Of even greater importance, however, is that you do not revert, as you are currently involved in this content dispute. That is called edit warring, and it is prohibited on Wikipedia. Unless you are successful on this Talk page in building a new consensus for your preferred content, then I am afraid that you must leave the status quo alone. Otherwise, you will be in jeopardy of losing your editing privileges. For more information about this, please read WP:EDIT WAR. UWS Guy (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2019 (UTC)