This article was nominated for deletion on 28 April 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
I deleted the Supermodel tag. While there is an ongoing debate about the definition of a "supermodel", whether the term has any real meaning, and who qualifies as one, I don't think there's any realistic possibility the term applies to Rickter. MK2 22:44, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough. Although in my opinion she is more beautiful than some supermodels! Jester2001 17:28, 27 March 2005
While the picture from her video was nice, the inclusion of nude pictures has always been a controversial subject in Wikipedia. The general consensus has been that nude pictures should be avoided in most cases. I don't see any need for this article to be one of the exceptions. MK2 20:23, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I don't see the problem. She's largely famous for here appearance in Playboy, and I don't see any consensus that nude pictures should be avoided, and the picture here is relevant. Yabby04:54, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There's a problem when people are reading the Wikipedia at work and all of a sudden they are looking at someone's breasts without the title of the article being "breast" or something of the ilk. Having had this experience at work this A.M., I can tell you, my mouse couldn't move to the back button fast enough. We put nudity warnings on external links, why not use the same system for pictures on the wikipedia? I would expect to see illustrations or even pictures on the pages for breast or clitoris but not really on a biographical article. Are the links that I provided a suitable compromise? Dismas13:11, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I sympathize, but where do we draw the line? You / your workplace may find this particular image inappropriate, while other may be far more liberal (countries such as Norway), or far more conservative (Saudi Arabia). Should we hide all potentially inappropriate image behind links? If so, then we wouldn't have any images left at all, I'm afraid. As to the expectations of what this page contains, I will reiterate that she is predominately famous for being a PlayboyPlaymate, and we all know what that means.
Also, when linking pictures, it is better to use [[:Image:imagename|description]] rather than a plain link as otherwise the "What links here" for the image does not contain the linking page, and the image may be incorrectly identified as an orphan. Regards Yabby21:29, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, if you want to drag this out into an discussion over semantics, I'm probably not going to respond after this. The number of readers of a wiki in English in either Norway or Saudi Arabia is more than likely so small a number as to be negligible. Having an argument over semantics is like the old phrase about mud wrestling with a pig. It's a good time for the pig but you just get dirty.
As far as what to expect when going to a page... I clicked on the link from my watchlist. All that is given in such an instance is a person's name. "Alicia Rickter" doesn't exactly give you an idea of why she's in the wiki. Now if the name of the page were "Playboy Playmate Alicia Rickter" I could see your argument and possibly agree with it. And let's face it, she's no Jenny McCarthy or Pamela Anderson. She's not that famous as to be immediately recognizable as a nude model.
.svg){kind=small}
