Talk:Xenia Tchoumitcheva

message: The date of birth is wrong. Xenya was born on the 5th of august 1987, not in 1989 as you can see from many more reliable sources or the miss switzerland organization itself.
SunniK (talk) 07:18, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had implemented this based on the date found in some of the articles presented in the Press section of that official web site. I also wasn't able to find any mention of her birthyear on that site. That gets trumped by the OTRS document, though, so I have undone that change. Celestra (talk) 15:38, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  http://polepositionnews.wordpress.com/ Official PR agency blog, with a very recent entry that mentions 1989. -Andrew c [talk] 13:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

text:  http://www.ferrise.ch/?page=testimonials&id=6 And another, in what appears to be Italian. -Andrew c [talk] 01:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

text:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEhDZ8OJl3Y At 02.30 she says she is 19. This is 2006 footage, so there's no room for questioning. Sflowneppets (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Copyright infringing youtube videos cannot be used as sources directly (though I guess a citation to the program itself may be ok). But that said, what's your deal? It's clear that there are conflicting sources. The ones that are most recent and from official outlets (such as PR and model agencies) are clear about the date. Perhaps there was a reason the age was presented differently back then, or perhaps there is a reason why the age is being presented differently now. Unless we have a reliable source explaining, it isn't our place to speculate (or even point out the discrepancy). This article is governed by our strict WP:BLP rules, so I'd kindly request that you drop this date of birth business, please. Not sure why it is such a big deal to people. -Andrew c [talk] 22:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

text: WP:BLP specifically singles out birthdates: people increasingly regard their full names and dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth where these have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object. Where the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, or where the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year. I have stated above that we have an OTRS complaint concerning this. IMO, the privacy of the individual on this issue trumps sources from 2006. If you still disagree, I'd suggest seeking a third opinion, perhaps at WP:BLPN. I'm not sure what you propose doing anyway. We clearly have conflicting sources. How do you want the information presented in the article? Without a secondary source interpreting the discrepancy, any attempt to do so in the article would be original research, and I believe I've made a stronger argument for using the recent, officially approved year. Do you propose we ignore all of that in favor of 1987?-Andrew c [talk] 02:24, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from SunniK, 16 May 2010 

message: The birth date is false. Xenia (correctly spelled Ksenia) was born in 1987, as you can see from the certified website http://www.glanzundgloria.sf.tv/Promis/Xenia-Tchoumitcheva?WT.zugang=gg_promisuche
92.105.103.12 (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That website does give a different birth date.  What is a certified website?  I think it would be better to just delete this article.  I can find no independent third party sources containing significant coverage of the person.  It still feels like promotion.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  & .   Salvio ( Let's talk 'bout it!) 10:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

text: I don't know why you care so much about this. You in fact seem obsessed about this, almost to the point of being a stalker. I'd urge you to seriously reconsider how you can contribute to Wikipedia, and what really matters in this world. There clearly are better things to get worked up about. This just isn't worth it. As I have said, we have had a clear OTRS request on file regarding this BLP, and we have official sources stating the current age. Why try to dig up dirt or do original research on this matter. If an age discrepancy is really notable, then someone besides yourself, would have published something on that by now). Watch what you say on talk pages, BLP still applies. -Andrew c [talk] 04:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

text: I find Germanotta87 persuasive.  OTRS information is not on the public record.  Nothing on facebook or youtube is reliable (enough for us).  If the birthdate continues to be disputed, it should be removed.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be fine removing the birthdate information all together, except we have official representation tied directly to the subject which clearly states the age and height. Apparently, some random, anonymous people on the internet think it is a conspiracy or that she is lying. It isn't their place to put forth such theories. We can only support such theories if founded in reliable sources. Otherwise, it is clearly potentially libelous (claiming that there is dishonesty or lying going on).  I'm not denying that a few years ago, it was semi-widely reported that he birthdate was one age. But we've had a request via OTRS from an authorized party saying the information was incorrect, and that by itself, I recognize, is not enough to discount information, but we now have new official sources stating the basic facts. I don't see why it is necessary to repeat misinformation, or put forth novel theories on why there is the discrepancy. Can't we acknowledge that the subject does not want incorrect information in the article and move on? It's like, if a politician was misquoted in a source, and other media outlets picked up on the source, and then we received an e-mail complaint about the misquote, along side publicly available information about the correction of the misquote, would we fight the subject and try to force the allegedly misquoted information to stay in the article? Again, I really don't see what the big deal is. BLP states we should avoid potentially libelous information, and poorly sourced content. I don't see why this is a big deal to some. Apparently they are upset that the dates were reported wrong and/or changed, and it really really bothers them for some reason? -Andrew c [talk] 13:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: So what's the source then?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: From the top of this page: an official PR agency blog has year, but not the day and month, and then profile from another official marketing agency. I was also supplied with some recent articles from blick.ch, but they did not mention a year and only said "20-year old", and were not what I called "official". I thought this was settled back in May, but apparently it is really important to some, and I can't fathom why.-Andrew c [talk] 13:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That snippet "Our client Xenia Tchoumitcheva will be the star of this signature campaign…….Xenia  (born 1989) is Switzerlands new superstar with many high end campaigns and endorsement deals under her belt" does not carry much sense of reliability.  "an official PR agency blog" is far from impressive, and is not good enough given a rational challenge.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, what about the 2nd link? If that is also problematic, what would you consider reliable enough for your standards?-Andrew c [talk] 07:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.ferrise.ch/testimonial/xenia-tchoumitcheva (which is not the page you link to) says date of birth: 05.08.1989.  Normally, I would be happy enough with that.  However, I read a plausible challenge here on the talk page.  Admittedly, I haven't quite got my head around it all, it could just be mistakes, an underage entry, compounding confusions, and I could be persuaded that the challenge is refuted.  But given that there is a challenge, in the absence of an independent source with a reputation for fact checking, and given that independent third party sources don't discuss her age, it is better to not have information than to have unreliable information.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the valid challenge? That a few years ago, some older sources unrelated to the source published another date? We received an e-mail via OTRS from someone related to the subject pointing out that the older date was wrong. This is what we encourage subjects of articles to do when they read their article and see an error. Next, the BLP page specifically addresses birthdates and says it is OK to include the information if published by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object. Now, not including a date isn't the end of the world (as opposed to some people who have insisted on including information identified as inaccurate via OTRS), but I feel we are bending over backwards for them. I also feel like all this mess has been ignoring the processes we have set up for subjects of BLP to identify errors and correct their articles. And I don't think this is by any means an abuse of the process.-Andrew c [talk] 03:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Andrew.  I’d prefer to say “plausible” challenge, and plausible is enough.  Older sources have a different date.  She and her agents may be pushing a younger age.  Wikipedia should worry about accepting deliberate misinformation.  The OTRS information is more than enough to have the data removed altogether, but including a challenged date is a bigger hurdle.  Wikipedia:Verifiability is quite strong and explicit concerning challenged facts.  If we have a plausible challenge, and if there is a suggestion of deliberately false data, I think we need an independent source for it to be considered reliable.  A primary source supplied though OTRS would be OK to repudiate the challenge given that the DOB is on the agent’s website.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My point was, the plausible challenge and accusations of deliberate misinformation is coming from anonymous internet fans, not reliable sources. It's like, I received an e-mail from a college athlete's mother saying "my daughter's hometown is not X, which you have on your website. He is from town Y." I replied that we had some sources saying X, and did she have any new sources saying Y. She said it was listed on websites A, B, and C, two of which were officially associated with the athlete. So of course, I updated the information, even though some sources claimed he was from X, we had no reason to go all out and claim she was deliberately promoting misinformation. I honestly, do not see the difference in the situation here. It is only an issue because a couple anonymous internet people think they know better and want to borderline libel this individual. And even if they are, by chance, correct, does it really matter? Wikipedia is not about finding the truth, and only being factual. It is about summarizing published sources, while avoiding synthesis. It is 100% verifiable that her official bio on one of her agency websites states a certain birthdate. Verifiability established. Verifiability, not truth. So even if we were to assume that the model and her agency are trying to pull a fast one on the public, it only becomes an issue if another reliable source discusses the discrepancy in a non-trivial matter. It is not our job to analyze the discrepancy, or come up with our own pet theories, especially if we have received a complaint regarding inaccurate information in a BLP. -Andrew c [talk] 14:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

text: As I repeatedly said in the chronology, I ask the fouth time to the user Cioccolatina to stop her vandalism about the fake birthdate of the model and other stuff. Thanks. --Lucas (talk) 03:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 92.105.103.12, 17 July 2010 

message: The subject's birth year is disputed, so we would do best to leave it out.   is a WP:SPA with a history of promotion of the subject.  An email to OTRS is not meet verifiability enough to justify inclusion of disputed information.  A google search  turns up several independent sources with a different year to the year given by dependent sources.  It is not our job to resolve the discrepancy.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:41, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year is disputed, so leave it out 

message: 5. August 1987!
Confirmed by a Swiss newspaper article from today (in German). There is written (shortend and translated by myself):
"There was a change on the year of born on her website, so the Swiss Television asked Xenia personally, and she said she is 23 years old. Also told she, that her producing team changed the age because they wanted to attract more international jobs for her." --KurtR (talk) 21:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: So I entered into the article. In the infobox, I don't know how to do that, please help. Thanks and regards. --KurtR (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

text: There's no reason to hide 5 August 1987 as her birthday.  The lesson here is that information supplied via OTRS does not meet our requirement for independent sourcing.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  And the real birthdate is......... 

message: In recent days there has been an outbreak of attempts to change or hide her age.
This topic has been largely debated on here, and 1987 has become undisputable.
Some countermeasures are needed, in order to stop this. 
Is there any viable strategy?
78.159.102.109 (talk) 11:53, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: *Date of birth is a relevant biographical fact that belongs in a biography, and the subject doesn't get to pick and choose what's said about her.  On the other hand, where we have conflicting sources, it seems to me that it's wrong to report one or the other as if it were fact.  I think the answer here is to report both:  "Xenia Tchoumitcheva (born on date A according to source B, or on date C according to source D) is a Swiss model and actress with Russian origins."—S Marshall T/C 12:35, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  several recent attempts to hide her age 

message: Hi guys
I have read the articles and history
Xenia has never stated that her priority was to Dj nor that she quit finance for it
All interviews (like the one on the Romanian business magazine 2014) that she quit to build her own business and she even accuses magazine of stating differently (mainly speculative and gossip like the daily mail).  has always denied it and in fact nowadays she doesn't DJ. She gives business speeches in Switzerland has launched 2 online businesses 
Therefore I do agree with the latest version of the article as it is at its most accurate to her current activities.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladypeppermint (talk • contribs) 06:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: . I added in the references you stated here, and also removed the part where she turned down the offer to become a DJ and removed the section of her DJing as it isn't a profession but more of a hobby and something she just does. LADY LOTUS • TALK 13:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why she quit finance 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Xenia Tchoumitcheva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121128170243/http://tvmag.lefigaro.fr:80/programme-tv/article/people/72705/xenia-tchoumitcheva-plus-belle-femme-de-l-annee.html to http://tvmag.lefigaro.fr/programme-tv/article/people/72705/xenia-tchoumitcheva-plus-belle-femme-de-l-annee.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:02, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Xenia Tchoumitcheva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110715070413/http://www.persoenlich.com/news/show_news.cfm?newsid=88729 to http://www.persoenlich.com/news/show_news.cfm?newsid=88729
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110724160323/http://www.illustre.ch/je_ne_reve_pas_topmodele_47534_.html to http://www.illustre.ch/je_ne_reve_pas_topmodele_47534_.html
*Added  tag to http://www.gioconews.it/esteri/xenia-tchoumitcheva-nuova-testimonial-del-casino-di-lugano-8557.html
*Added  tag to http://www.persoenlich.com/news/show_news.cfm?newsid=101011
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111206073508/http://www.xecutives.net:80/component/content/article/461 to http://xecutives.net/component/content/article/461
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Xenia Tchoumitcheva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130131124418/http://www.persoenlich.com/news/show_news.cfm?newsid=101011 to http://www.persoenlich.com/news/show_news.cfm?newsid=101011
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is it really pertinent to mention internship experiences in this article? It sounds like banality and platitudes, singing praises to a certain emptiness...--JCL16 (talk) 09:02, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internship