Talk:Aria Giovanni/Archive 2

Hardcore clips?
i've seen a few clips/photos of a girl who looked very much like her using a dildo on herself. doesnt that count as hardcore? could be a lookalike but...--Ghazer 20:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * well, its obviously false. fixed now.--Ghazer 07:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Pachis says: Look at this, there are hardocore videos of her. "To date, Giovanni has not appeared in a hardcore pornographic movie" -> it's false: (ed2k link removed) &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.60.61.236 (talk &bull; contribs) 2006-02-03 00:14:09 (UTC)


 * Please do not add ed2k links on Wikipedia. Since the legality of the link you provided is dubious at best, we don't want to incur any legal issues due to links to illegally distributed content.  Thank you. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 03:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, "Giovanni has not appeared in a hardcore pornographic movie"... is that a play on words ? Is solo stuff not counted as having full-featured "porn movie" status ? Is some kind of public representation agent for Aria Giovanni keeping that text there for commercial purposes ? :-)

Paranoïa aside, I'm (erm...) glad *cough* to report that Aria Giovanni has in fact done some pretty hardcore stuff... Granted, there's a lot "worse" than self vaginal fisting out there, but I really think the sentence in the article is just plain false.

Here are some stills (taken from (and linked on) other sites, not produced by myself) from a movie that I own (no, seriously -- Guba ain't free) ; such doubts as may arise concerning her identity on the photos are dispelled by the film : (warning ! nudity, hardcore), [2].

Hope those links are OK for the purposes of this discussion. If not, my apologies, and feel absolutely free to delete them.

82.66.85.51 16:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Meh, not much to say about it except this. Check the tags, it says hardcore. Period. --88.149.247.96 (talk) 00:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

IMDB is not a reliable source for such matters. see Citing IMDb. Kingturtle (talk) 13:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Real name
Is there any reputable reference for her real name? If there is, I think it should be added to the article. tregoweth 00:12, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * A google search shows a few sites that agree that this is the case ( (nudity), (nudity), ). I don't know about reputability, though. -Ethan (talk) 10:25, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

found this link : http://groups.msn.com/ [redacted] &mdash;preceding unsigned comment by 144.133.211.190 (talk &bull; contribs) 2005-12-12 01:41:16 (UTC)


 * That's not necessarily reliable. Also, Jimbo has requested that her real name not be posted. In an email to me (which I hope he won't mind me quoting), he said, "The main thing is, as it seems you would agree, there's just no good reason for us to publish this woman's real name." tregoweth 04:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Agreed, wikipedia is not suppose to be a tabloid publishing gossips. But what we are about is facts. And the real name of a person is a fact the we write about in case of just about every other person (if it's known). So is Jimbo suggesting that we have no good reason to publish info about Marilyn Monroe's real name too? Maybe i misinterpreted the quoted sentence, but it seems that Jimbo is requesting that the actress's name not be published even if we could verify it with the reliable source. In my opinion this is against the very idea of wikipedia. --filu 21:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Filu, her real name should be in the article if it can be verified. -- Borb 01:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I am also in agreement. If we can find a verifiable source that publishers Ms. Giovanni's real name, then we should use it. (After all, we have real names to Jenna Jameson, Linda Lovelace, et al.) -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 02:23, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I also do not understand the problem with publishing [redacted] real name. It looks like there are scores of pornographic models/actresses with their real names published by wikipedia.

[Redacted] is a US citizen and by legal definition in the US has made herself a public figure thereby making the assertion that publishing her real name is a violation of privacy legally meaningless.

As far as "Jimbo's" request, it would need to be published here specifically to be seen as genuine, and even so it is without meaning in that there is already a standard in publishing the correct names throughout wikipedia for models/actors/actresses in this genre (and other genres as well).72.75.42.6 19:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting that Jimbo requested her real name and that she appeared on the Bomis website - seems like more than a coincidence.-h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 22:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Her real name redirects here.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 15:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You mean, it used to redirect here. :)  Tabercil 01:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I might arrive a little late here, but I really don't get this "hide unproven(?) real name" issue... Is IMDB no longer a source of trust (see http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1020082/bio) or is no longer possible to browse talk pages history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAria_Giovanni&diff=165954929&oldid=165942361 ? --Vlad|-> 15:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * IMDB is not a reliable resource. Users there are not compelled to submit any sourcing for their submissions. Editors there do not identify which user is submitting the data, making it impossible to evaluate the reliability of a user's submissions. The mechanism of editorial oversight and fact-checking is unclear. Kingturtle (talk) 16:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * "This proposal has been rejected by the community." Ok though for not citing IMDB part, but what's with all this [redacted] stuff, the info can be restored from the history and potentially it might degenerate into a edit war. --Vlad|-> 16:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Real name, John5 edit wars?
It looks like there is an edit war going on about her birth name. The removing is done by : The restoring of the name is done by 144.133.211.190 (t, c). It looks like the name is correct (going by quick googling); I'm going to Test2a the two most recent.
 * 67.92.152.98 (t, c) (primarily)
 * 69.22.108.52 (t, c)
 * 68.20.7.68 (t, c)

Also, her marriage to John5 (John Lowery) has been removed by 200.222.117.122 (t, c) and 201.8.38.164 (t, c), this also being restored by 144.133.211.190.

-Ethan (talk) 09:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I also just noticed that the preceding section of this talk page (Real name) was removed by 144.133.211.190; I have restored it. -Ethan (talk) 10:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

So what is her real name? You have the real name of everyone else, not her. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.173.0.195 (talk &bull; contribs) 2005-12-30 18:37:00 (UTC)

Then publish the real name here &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.165.45.59 (talk &bull; contribs) 2006-01-01 21:41:18 (UTC)


 * Anyone who really wants to know the unsubstantiated "real name" can go google it, or look at the history of this page. Until some sick stalker-wikipedian cites her high-school yearbook, it's probably better to leave it out. --Slashme 13:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Again, it's unsubstantiated and the argument still stands, if we print the "real name" of everyone else, why not her? Are you her press agent or just an obsessed fan yourself who feels that it's your job to protect her? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.173.0.195 (talk &bull; contribs) 2006-01-06 13:23:23 (UTC)


 * I see you're not giving us your real name, Mr 63.173.0.195 (or is that Ms?) ;-) But seriously.  If you want to assert that her real name is (whatever it is, I forget), please cite a verifiable source.  Otherwise it's just gossip.  --Slashme 13:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I am not a Wikipedia topic. I am not famous, infamous, or known. Perhaps Slashme is [redacted]? ;) Lighten up, sparkypants. Besides, the argument still stands. They publish everyone else's name. Why is she so special? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.173.0.195 (talk &bull; contribs) 2006-01-06 19:34:30 (UTC)

Her real name is Cindy Renee Volk, she's a friend of mine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dopey2708 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

removal of filmography
It took me me several hours to collate her filmography which is easily the most comprehensive one could find on the internet. The links which the censor provided for her filmography are not half as comprehensive. To have it completely removed is like deciding to remove the list of books say Ernest Hemingway wrote.

Her real name is [redacted]
and it is posted in the IMDB website...so what is the freaking drama about!?

You nerds really love to get in the dumbest fights..

Rumors
"In 2006, a rumor broke out that she had sex when she was a minor. and it's true she did." I removed this as it is both negative and unsourced in addition to being incorrect grammar. Naerhu 05:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * What's so special about having sex as a minor?Slipzen 23:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Complete WP:BLP violation that. We really don't need these kinds of statements.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 17:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Sexuality (not my business, I know)
I wonder if she's totally lesbian or not, as I've never heard of her starring in any straight-sex scene.--Koilo

[Redacted] is a German surname
[Redacted] is clearly a German surname, not an Italian one. So she is rather German-American than Italian-American.

I have read that she is infact not even Italian at all, she is French, Irish and German. Though I lost the source. Lord of nothing 11:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Picture
Yeah, we need a better picture This one doesn't do her justice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.42.21.54 (talk • contribs) 2007-05-09 19:20:17 (UTC)


 * I agree. this is better, I think. That and the current one are both from here (and all images from there are usable per User:Tabercil/Luke Ford permission). Barring objection, I will change it soon. -Ethan (talk) • 2007-06-11 08:52 (UTC)

Image:Aria.jpg was uploaded by a user with only very few edits, the image information does not specify on what occasion it was made. Even if we assume that the uploader really is Holly Randall, we would still need an OTRS permission, as it is to be assumed that this image has been published elsewhere too.

Since the photos from lukeisback.com are of good quality and there is not reason to doubt their licensing status, I see no justification for the risk of using Image:Aria.jpg in the article.

Regards, High on a tree 04:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if there is a problem with this...but I mentioned in the Real Name topic that she attended the same high school as I did. I have a yearbook photo of her. Is this something that is "postable"? --Edward2332 (talk) 08:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That would probably violate the wikipedia prohibition against original research on posting items based on personal knowledge and also has copyright concerns. Vinh1313 (talk) 15:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 10:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Surname
[Redacted] in slavic languages, so it is possible that she is not German, but Yugoslavian like it is written.

--212.200.34.94 17:55, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

List of stage names
That article is one of the Google hits for "Aria Giovanni" + "[name redacted]". Shouldn't that information be censored appropriately removed from there as well? Dorftrottel (bait) 06:22, March 7, 2008