Talk:Chanel Iman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Fair use rationale for Image:Chanel4.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Chanel4.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 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 14:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


The birthday's in the article and the infobox don't agree. (talk) 15:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

She was born in 1989, not 1990. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

The 1990 claim is sourced to what appears to be her official site.  Mbinebri  talk ← 14:13, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but any person that has followed her career since the mid-2000's will tell you that her birthday was ALWAYS reported as 1989 (this had to have been confirmed in the Ford Supermodel of the World contest, her debut in fashion), also her height was ALWAYS reported as 5'9. It is my guess that due to an increase in rival models slightly younger, her team is shaving off a year to make her more competitive to other young black models, and also adding an inch to her height makes her more desirable. If from 2006-2010 her year of birth has been reported as 1989, and just this year (in which she is turning 22) has been lowered to not even 21, it's pretty obvious it is a lie. Just because it's sourced doesn't make it accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:29, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

As it says in WP:V (at least for now), The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. Can you back up the 1989 claim with sources?  Mbinebri  talk ← 04:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Even in FRENCH "VOGUE" (THE NUMBER ONE FASHION MAG IN THE WORLD!) it states her birth year as 1989:

It has ALWAYS been reported that she was born in 1989 (even here on wikipedia!) up until very, very recently. She will be 22 in just a few weeks, thus already in her peak modeling years. There are countless sources, both in print and online, to support these facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, let's keep it to reliable sources, and the only one that looks good to me is the Vogue article. However, it states she was born on November 30, 1989 as opposed to December 1, 1989. Why the minor day/month change if this is only about faking a younger age? Shaving off an extra two days would be pointless and might indicate it was all a mistake to begin with. That said, a 3rd party source might in fact be more reliable. It's hazy.  Mbinebri  talk ← 19:07, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

And what reliable sources do you have? Other than some girl decides to take off a year of her age for career motives, and changes her age on her personal website... if that's what you consider reliable. She could just have easily changed the date slightly as well, to make it appear like it was all an error to begin with (as you strongly seem to believe, contradictory to all that's been reported the last 5 years about this young lady.) It's no wonder why wikipedia is filled with so much misinformation...

If anything, like many other people's who ages can not be confirmed, it should state in the article that sources state both years. It's incredibly easy for people to lie about their age and heights and virtually any personal information when open sources believe anything information given to them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:56, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

You should probably check the page's recent edit history before you start ranting next time.  Mbinebri  talk ← 14:11, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

And you should use logic. If there is an age discrepancy, do your research. No wonder wikipedia is so incorrect with facts! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Wow, is there any reason for further debate with someone who says something can be "incorrect with facts"?  Mbinebri  talk ← 22:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Wikipedia happens to be the #1 internet encyclopedia resource in the world is it not? It's very important to have factual information as accurate as possible, and if it is not accurate, to have discrepancies be noted. The facts being debated are not serious issues at all, however in the case of serious issues represented on a site such as this, spreading false information can be rather dangerous. And incredibly irresponsible, not to mention unethical. Credibility is key. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

weight / height[edit]

source for weight? she's probably grown to 5'10 now too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

who changed her weight to 100 lbs? source? she'd probably be dead if she was really that light. (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen her? She's a twig. Plus that weight for her height give her a BMI of about 16. Yes, that's very underweight, but certainly not dead. ( (talk) 21:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC))

Image proposed for deletion[edit]

The infobox image is being discussed for deletion on Commons; see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chanel Iman.jpg.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


Per WP:SURNAME, "after the initial mention of any name, the person should be referred to by surname only". This is the convention. Chanel Iman is also not a pseudonym; it's her actual first and middle name. The subject's real last name is Robinson, so that is what should be indicated. Middayexpress (talk) 14:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

"Chanel Iman", as opposed to "Chanel Iman Robinson", is the name she specifically chooses to use for her career, hence it is a stage name/pseudonym. And as WP:SURNAME states, "People who are best known by a pseudonym should be subsequently referred to by their pseudonymous surnames." Not only is "Iman" her pseudonymous surname, but it is also how she is best-known. The policy you cite defeats your own argument.  Mbinebri  talk ← 16:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
And let's be careful about an edit war now. You've reverted both myself and another editor.  Mbinebri  talk ← 16:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Actually, she is best known as "Chanel Iman", not Iman. "Chanel Iman" is also her real given name, not a pseudonym. That is her actual orthonym. A pseudonym is "a name that a person or group assumes for a particular purpose, which differs from his or her original or true name (orthonym)." Since Robinson is her real surname, that's what should be indicated per that policy. Middayexpress (talk) 16:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I meant "Iman" is the surname of how she is best known, not that people call her "Iman." My apologies. Anyway, we obviously have a different way of looking at this, so I requested a 3rd party to help us out.  Mbinebri  talk ← 16:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
She has no pseudonymous surname because "Chanel Iman" is not a pseudonym to begin with. That's her real birth name i.e. it's an orthonym. "Robinson", her actual surname, should therefore be used per convention. Middayexpress (talk) 16:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, third opinion here. It seems to me that the stage name is considered a pseudonym even if it's actually just part of the person's real name. For example, both Ricky Martin and Henry Jerome are stage names consisting of the person's real first and middle name, but the articles refer to them as "Martin" and "Jerome." Chanel Iman may not be a pseudonym under the strictest definition, but it is a stage name, and therefore "Iman" should be used in the article. Howicus (talk) 18:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the input!  Mbinebri  talk ← 19:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I agree, which is why I made the change. Calwatch (talk) 05:33, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
"Chanel Iman" is not a stage name. That's her real name. A stage name is "a pseudonym used by performers and entertainers such as actors, wrestlers, comedians, and musicians[...] a performer will often take a stage name because his/her real name is considered unattractive, dull, unintentionally amusing or difficult to pronounce or spell, or because it has been used by another notable individual or because it projects an undesired image." Ricky Martin and Henry Jerome are not good examples because they too aren't using pseudonyms. Those are their actual names as well. That is why it is not indicated in their respective wiki pages that "Ricky Martin" and "Henry Jerome" are their stage names. Unlike the present situation, there are also no famous mononymous pop musicians or big band leaders named "Martin" or "Jerome" that the two artists might be confused with in subsequent usage. Middayexpress (talk) 12:27, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Also note that the two-part "Chanel Iman" was her given name at birth. Per Robinson, the "Chanel" came from Coco Chanel, and "Iman" came from a male cousin of hers [1]. Middayexpress (talk) 12:27, 2 July 2013 (UTC)