Talk:Nicole, Erica and Jaclyn Dahm

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 20:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: This article is imported from Everything2.
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=669790
"but twins appeared three times:
*Mary and Madeleine Collinson (October 1970) 
*Karin and Mirjam van Breeschooten a.k.a. Dutch Twins (September 1989) 
*Darlene and Carol Bernaola (January 2000)
*Daisy and Sarah Teles (December 2003)
It must be noted, that triplets are quite well represented in Playboy, since they have appeared in 1 out of 672 issues (0.15%), compared with 0.18% triplet birth rate. Twins, on the other hand, have appeared only in four issues (0.6%), five times less than the 2.9% rate of twin births."
Cut because it doesn't have to be noted: one appearance has no statistical significance. The info on twins is irrelevant to this article; it could go in a "Twins in Playboy" article if anyone's bored. Markalexander100 13:44, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: ...if you include international editions of Playboy. The Brazilian edition featured a set of Brazilian triplets named Marilise, Lilian and Renata Porto on the October 1992 issue. The photographer was Pedro Martinelli. Apparently the pictorial was published in the American November 1993 issue -- not as Playmates to be sure, BUT they were featured on the cover. MCBastos 06:04, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not actually the only or even the first... 

message: Is this picture in the article really necessary?Surely someone can find a non-pornographical picture of Erica Dahn.
: ??? If it isn't a hardcore video...is it even really "porn" in the modern era? They're just nude models.
:: It's more that it depicts what they're famous for; and doesn't display frontal nudity. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 13:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If he thinks that's porn, he needs to get out more often. Besides, it serves an educational purpose, as it allows scientific study comparing the attributes of triplets. :) Wahkeenah 13:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

text: First, where's your evidence that they are "porn models"? Centerfolds in Playboy do not qualify as porn. And nude posing, by itself, is not porn, no matter who's doing the posing. Wahkeenah 00:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: There are lots of commercial pictures, a number of personal ones, but they're neither free nor would qualify as Wikipedia:Fair use, so we can't put them in our article. We will obviously never get a release for commercial photos. But in the interests of compromise, I'll write a couple of people who put up personal photos and will ask them if they'll release them under full creative commons.     I've had a moderate amount of success with that - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If they release, we'll put up one of those. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 13:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The second one I linked seems the best candidate, since it doesn't include anyone else and is already under CC-with-no-derivative license, so at least the photographer knows what CC means, so hopefully won't be too averse to reducing to solely CC. I wrote there, and will wait a few days before trying the others. Fair warning about the boys, though - in 10-15 years, they'll have plenty of Playboy images, the only question is will they be taped up on their walls or hidden in their sock drawers... :-) --AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: In my experience, people who say "I'm not a prude", usually are. Nudity does not equate to pornography. Playboy is not pornographic. Penthouse and Hustler are. However, if someone can find a free photo, then this fair-use photo could be replaced as per wiki guidelines. As far as your kids go, wikipedia is relatively uncensored, and any foul-mouthed fool can edit it, so your kids shouldn't be using it. Wahkeenah 23:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Excellent. Although I almost didn't recognize them with their clothes on. >:) Wahkeenah 23:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Nobody called you any names. And I said that if a free image could be found, that would be fine, and there was one found, and that's fine. Wahkeenah 20:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necessary?