User talk:Bluegroper

Image tagging for Image:Nikki_vice_shame.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nikki_vice_shame.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 11:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:Sonja 079.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Sonja 079.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Nikki Grahame
I have undid your removal of content about her being an escort. she was the one revealing it to the tabloid, and I have not been shown anything to say she denies it. I have changed the reference to an off line one. The publisher should be referenced and it is acceptable to give an offline citation without an online link.  GunGagdin Moan 14:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The story to the News of the World about Nikki being a High Class Escort was a result of unscrupulous people selling their stories to the News of the World for profit and reporters bailing Nikki up for answers. In no way did Nikki raise this story but she has defended herself on numerous TV shows and of cause her book where she states what really happened, Nikki is entitled to a defense on this story. If you want I will give you a list of TV shows where she did this also scan the relevant pages of her book. But before I do that I want to know am I wasting my time as its seems the career section has been written to give the impression Nikki was a career Escort which is totally untrue.--Bluegroper (talk) 12:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Also the part about numerous jobs, Nikki did keep down a job with Clarins for two years as a shop assistant in the perfume counter. Also she was a promotions model at Harrods before going on to Big Brother. The references being TV shows Richard and Judy in 2006 and a TV show called This Morning, videos are available and I don't mind updating her career sectionto bring it up to date, but I do have a problem with the inaccurate story from News of the World. --Bluegroper (talk) 12:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Removed the Blind date reference from a 3rd party which I think the editor did mean to embarrass her by using a contestants opinion which makes her look foolish but on the other hand Nikki as the picker had the first say about what she thought of her date, but there is no mention of this? I think there is no need to mention anything other then she was on blind date in a career section! --Bluegroper (talk) 16:17, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah brilliant. If you have sources to update then great, go for it. We go on sources and that was the only source that we had, and nobody who'd read her autobio had bothered to update the article, until now. You can add something like this, "Grahame was accudsed of being an escort by the NOTW. However, in Grahame's account in her autobio ......" Thing is, she was interviewed in that article and there are quotes from her, so we cant deny that she worked as some sort of escort. She probably gave them an exclusive at the time as they had threatened to blow the story anyway unless she did. we dont exclude info just because it may make Nikki look bad in some way, that would be censorship and propaganda. it's not a fan page, but equally it's not there to make jibes at her either, we just need to ensure it's neutral.  GunGagdin Moan 19:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that, I think her best defense is what she wrote in her autobiography and will use that. I have been following Nikki since her appearance on BB in 2006 and do have quite a lot of information. Will update some more stuff in the next couple of days. And will keep this talk up to date on my reasonings. Also on the NOTW article Nikki did talk to a lot of people but never gave that story to the NOTW but was cornered by them to respond to the accusations, people made a lot of money on Nikki selling their stories which were totally untrue and thats why I have a problem with it. --Bluegroper (talk) 12:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * In this case neither source is all that reliable. When caught in a "tough" situation the first reaction is for someone to deny, deny, and further deny any negative allegations in order to save face. However Bluegroper does raise a valid point that certain people will sell a story to the tabloids just to make some quick money whether or not a story is true. I think in the interest of being balanced it might be best to simply tell both sides of the story. I would however say that when we make edits to articles we should make them based on the interests of the "Article" NOT the necessarily the interests of a particular person or topic as it is very easy for an article to become very one sided. I don't think information should ever be removed on the grounds they might "embarrass" someone. An Autobiography is still a questionable source to be using. I'm not saying Nikki would intentionally recount situations differently than they actually happened but that there is a possibility she has. Due to your personal feelings towards Nikki and relationship with her I think it would be best Bluegroper if you discussed edits with everyone before you make them to avoid bias. 142.110.227.247 (talk) 14:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

In any case the section should be removed as it is totally untrue from News of The World who have lost all credibility not only does the article not exist anymore but now News of The World no longer exist by unscrupulous practices. Nikki has defended herself on numerous TV shows, I know her history, know her personally and her family and know the truth. Wiki should be about true information and not digging up dirt when a source is missing and has been discredited, references and argument should be removed. Wiki should be about reporting on a celebrity with credible information and not referencing missing stories from sources that have been discredited!--Bluegroper (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Sonja 200x250.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Sonja 200x250.jpg, which you've attributed to Sonja Goernitz. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add permission pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 14:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC)