User talk:Testales/Sarah Louise Young

Vandalism

Somebody deleted "She became sexually active at age 13, but was ashamed of her rapidly developing body and frequently wore clothing which hid her figure." along with one of the external links. No reason was given, and I can't imagine any reason for these alterations, so I have reverted to the previous revision. Anybody wanting to make deletions should please discuss it here first, or at least give a reason in the edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pirate2000 (talk • contribs) 10:22, 17 August 2005

Change of Sarah Young's measurments

I have changed Sarah Young's measurements to a more creditable figure. I have taken the new measurements from a page on her official web site - http://sarahyoung.com/rankpages/featured.html. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabal (talk • contribs) 10:32, 5 October 2005

Removal of film title

I have removed the film "Even Hitler Had A Girlfriend" from the filmography. This is due to this Sarah Young not being in this film. I have a copy of the film, and although there is an actress in the film credited as Sarah Young, she is a totally different person to the Sarah Young detailed here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabal (talk • contribs) 10:38, 5 October 2005

Well, that's good to know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePeg20:46, 10 August 2006 (talk • contribs) 22:14, 28 June 2006

Source Material

The source material for the 09:44, 27 April 2006 revision are articles/interviews that were published in Cosmopolitan Magazine, Issue 2/96, February 1996 and LOADED Magazine (UK), Issue 10, February 1995. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabal (talk • contribs) 09:52, 27 April 2006

Reason for reversion of breast development age

I have reverted the age at which Sarah Young's breast began to develop back to 10 in reference to an interview she gave to Cosmopolitan Magazine, February 1996, issue 2/96 where she says –

I was ten and still at junior school when my breasts developed,” she says. “It became a real problem back then, because boys and girls changed for gym in the same room. I didn’t want to wear a bra because I would have been the only one. But I got teased mercilessly. I was so ashamed of my bust, I’d wear big jumpers to cover it up. In the end, arrangements were made for me to dress separately.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabal (talk • contribs) 22:14, 28 June 2006

$1,000,000 for a single film

I'd be interested to see a source for this claim. I have a good idea of the economic realities of porn, and even back in the higher-budget days this would have been a ridiculous figure. If true, I suspect it was her husband paying her this sum (and therefore having no net impact on their joint assets), just for publicity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.115.126 (talk) 11:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion & move

I looked at the 'Articles for deletion' page for this page. You must be kidding! Sarah Young was the number one porn star in 1990-1995 at least, maybe even longer time. She may not be notable per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pornbio#Pornographic_actors, but if not, that has to have something to do with that, the AVN awards & hall of fame are American recognitions. As the article states she did won many awards but not any which are required. But this fact in article: became one of the most recognised and popular pornstars of the era., should alone be enough to include her page in wikipedia. Unless this is the American wikipedia... 85.217.50.66 (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

As the person who authored the original article on Sarah, I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately it's my experience of wikipedia that when those with power make a decision, it will happen pretty much no matter what. I had one page where it was put up for deletion, I voted to keep it - the only vote cast - and then the next day he deleted it. Views to the contrary are simply ignored by wikipedia, and I've long ago stopped trying to argue against the powers that be. Nowdays I just make edits and let them delete whatever they want. BobThePirate (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

She was known before the web was what it is now therefore it appears to impossible to verify even a single award using "reliable" online sources. It least I was not successfull so far. And even if you take offline sources like books it's hard especially if these books are also only used mainly "not reliable" sources like it seems in her case. Here is some of what I dug out so far in my initial userfication request. As of now I'm currently rather busy with my job so I can't do much more on that in the next time. But feel free to contact me via email. By the way, her "predecessor" was also rather known but as she also was active long before the internet developed, it's probably only a matter of time until "they" decide that her article is also not worth of beeing kept as part of "the collective knowledge of mankind". It's really a good thing that there are snapshots of older wikipedia versions, just saying. ;) Testales (talk) 18:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)