Talk:Page 3

Lucy Pinder

Removed her from list of Page 3 girls - If a "Page 3 girl" is defined as someone who appears in the Sun Newspaper - Lucy Pinder is not, according to her website, she had a contract with the Daily Star - Therefore, I doubt she has ever appeared in the Sun on Page 3. --Rrose Selavy 14:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Although the term 'Page 3 Girl' originated with the The Sun, the article itself appears to be more generic and hence could include those who have posed for the Daily Star. Did Linsey Dawn McKenzie ever pose for The Sun, or even the Daily Star for that matter? She is listed here.Silver Barnet (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

For Wikipedia

Would someone be so kind as to institute a policy of posting a daily "Wikipedia Page 3 Girl" and "Wikipedia Page 3 Boy" for our viewing entertainment? -º¡º

OK, which is Page 3 of Wikipedia? - Lee M 16:20, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Erm, wouldn't 3 be a good guess? :p --Kiand 00:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm still waiting.... ;p Mathmo 19:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Start a new page. It is a great idea.

FWIW, Wikipedia's newspaper is Wikipedia:Signpost. --Gronky 15:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

I've removed the NPOV tag from this article for the time being as (a) no-one's put a justification for it here (b) the article is well balanced as far as I can see. Smallbone10 23:23, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Removal of image

I removed the image Image:Keeley.jpg because in my opinion it doesn't add anything useful to the article. Apparently some others disagree. I'd like to discuss this matter here, so if you agree or otherwise please say so. chowells 15:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with chowells. If an image that does add something useful can be found, I'm all for it. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-10-23 T 16:03:07 Z

A photograph of the paper opened on the page would be good. I'll let someone else buy the Sun and take the photo :p chowells 00:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Probably wouldn't have removed it myself based on what I saw, however....... although there is no way I'd add it back in after somebody has removed it. I would do that if only there was more evidence of it being a page3 girl. Such as the actual newspaper around it??? Although the current one I guess is good from a historical point of view? Mathmo 19:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd like a warning that the page contains nudity. Personally, I don't object, but pulling up this page in North American offices could get you fired. --Navstar 23:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

By the time someone would see the warning, they would already be on the page. And what are they doing looking up this kind of stuff on company time, anyway? Wahkeenah 23:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Not a lot of Americans would know what a Page Three girl is. You never know where a Wikilink will take you! :) --Navstar 15:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Image

The current image (Image:Rahn240.jpg)) doesn't look anything like a modern "Page 3", in style or in content, and as such is more than a little misleading. Assuming it doesn't represent a copyright problem, wouldn't a photo of the paper be better? PeteVerdon 17:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Have you no sense of history?! Pcb21 Pete 19:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Simple request

I'd like to request we get a few more pictures on this page. I don't think they'll improve the article, I just want to see some naked birds. More Pictures.--Crestville 00:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

An extra picture or two could be helpful, because certainly the current picture is nothing like modern page 3 girls. Perhaps there is a famous example whcih could be here as well? Mathmo 02:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Whoa

How the hell can there be nudity in a newspaper... that's crazy.

• I'm not being racist, just curious - is the above comment by an American? I seem to come across many people on Wikipedia who find topless pictures (not even full-on nudity) deeply shocking and offensive, and 9/10 times they are american. Is nudity seen as much more taboo in America or something? Saccerzd 21:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

That is strange as the US produces nearly all of the worlds online porn, or so I've been told.

--I know--- tell me about it, I despise the Sun and all tabloids like it. Nothing but cheap and trashy and a totally biased paper.

Crap paper, but I'd buy it for page 3. God bless this country.--Crestville 19:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The Sun's page 3 is totally insulting and degrading to women. The whole thing is plain tacky. But don't American newspapers have nudity? Nukleoptra 19:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

--To answer the above question about Americans: yes, some are deeply offended by toplessness. Most, however, are simply surprised by it because it is so rare in "casual" newpapers or magazines. In the USA, magazines with topless photos usually have to be covered in a paper bag. I think it's great how so many other countries are beyond this Puritanical crap, yet I myself am a bit shocked by toplessness (definately not offended by it) because you see so little of it in the USA, outside of the "proper" mediums (pornography, late-night premium TV, etc.). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.203.252 (talk) 09:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a shame some people have the views of Nukleoptra Nats365 (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Opinions on whether certain people find Page 3 style pin-ups 'degrading', 'offensive' etc are well covered (if you'll pardon the pun) under the 'Controversies' section in the main article. My own POV is that amongst most women as well as men, the mainstream view is that such pin-ups are neither degrading nor offensive and that most women are indifferent to them. Silver Barnet (talk) 17:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

This article has no example images

I request that we add one or four. It would give a good idea to the readers how obscene it actually is. The reading content could give the reader the implication that the pictures are pornography. Ghost109 (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Given all the articles on sex on Wikipedia have explicit photographs this should have some sort of image as well. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:36, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Diane West

"Diane West" links to the page for "Dianne Wiest", an American actress. I'm not sure whether she would be appalled by, indifferent to, or elated by this association, but I am sure it is incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artemus123 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sun Page 3 Idol Competition and ambiguity over dates

At the risk of stating the obvious it might be worth clarifying that the Sun's Page 3 Idol contest takes place towards the end of the previous year, especially with reference to this sentence 'The 2008 winner, 19-year-old university student Jenny Grant, committed suicide in the early hours of 13 September 2008'. It was precisely because of this suicide that no competition was held in late 2008 to choose a Page 3 Idol for 2009. With reference to this sentence 'The 2009 winner was Kelly Hall'; she won the competition in late 2009 to be Page 3 Idol for 2010.Silver Barnet (talk) 15:46, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Why would someone remove the link I posted?

I edited this article by including a link to a relevant article at the end. Why was it removed? The article is here: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/12025/

Why would this be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.203.132.209 (talk) 19:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 08:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

---

Page Three → Page 3

– Almost 1 billion results for Page 3, less than 3 million for Page Three. Seems that the majority of sources on this page feature the number as well, rather than the word. Unreal7 (talk) 16:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support Offical site is http://www.page3.com/. Bear In mind though that googling "page 3" and "page three" won't necessarily yield results for this topic. Zarcadia (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support; closer in line with actual usage. bobrayner (talk) 22:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
• Note Page 3 is a disambiguation page. {{Talkback}} will be appreciated --Tito Dutta (contact) 13:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support, sensible and logical proposal, — Cirt (talk) 18:49, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support: "Page 3" seems like the more common usage. - Aurorion (talk) 08:01, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Editing of 'US similar feature' to the Page 3 girl.

The list of US equivalents listed in that section included:

• The American supermarket tabloid Weekly World News regularly featured a bikini-clad "Page 5" girl.

There is some talk on forums about this, but there is no proper citation for it.

• Yes! Weekly, a local on-line and print publication in Greensboro, North Carolina, features Page 3 talent, sometimes featuring men as well as women.

This is a local talent feature and nothing to do with topless modelling.

I've taken those two out and added citations for the other two examples (a dressed Page 3 girl in FOCUS, and Jet Magazine's Beauty of the Week so I've provided citations for them and left them in, and removed the unreferenced section orange box.--The Vintage Feminist (talk) 08:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Topless modelling under 18

The statement "In 2003, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 raised the minimum legal age for topless modelling to 18." has been removed, as there is no reference to "topless" in that legislation. Indeed, topless photographs of children (under 16 until 2003, under 18 since then) have been specifically deemed "not indecent" in appropriate contexts. See the Sentencing Guidelines. 87.114.77.75 (talk) 05:12, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Someone must have reinstated that statement, as it was removed by an anonymous contributor from 173.177.6.182 on 22nd Jan 2022. Would page 3 of the gutter press count as an "appropriate context" under the law for teenage nudity? NRPanikker (talk)

International section

I removed this section because it was almost entirely uncited. Without a direct assertion linking the individual features to The Sun's Page 3, which is unlikely, it all counts as original research anyway. As topless or nude modelling was featured in other publications in the west before 1970, it is not the case that Page 3 was a first. Nor has a source, as far as I know, been bold enough to say that The Sun was the first newspaper in the world to feature a topless model.

Some of the examples, a passage in the Australia section for example, refer to clothed rather than topless models, which does not demonstrate a connection to Page 3 in its usual format. An article on the use and attitudes to nudity (concerning both sexes) in the international media, which is an issue not wholly related to censorship, would be a good idea, if it does not exist already. 18:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

The 'P' word slipped my mind. Wikipedia does have articles on this issue, see Pornography by region. Philip Cross (talk) 09:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Page 3 after 2015

The article says: As Caroline Lucas explained in an article for The Independent: "So long as The Sun reserves its right to print the odd topless shot, and reserve its infamous page for girls clad in bikinis, the conversation isn't over." Is it in fact the case that The Sun replaced the topless Page 3 models with models wearing bikinis? The article doesn't clearly indicate that that is the case.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Metropolitan90 (talk • contribs) 03:47, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

I've added a sentence about Jo Swinson's reaction which attempts to clarify this. Polly Tunnel (talk) 12:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

The Sydney Sun

This edit has been rather harshly ctiticised elsewhere... if you add unsourced content like this, expect it to get reverted until you do find sources. [1]

Now I have other questions about the edit in which this was raised, see User talk:Ritchie333#I am listening but maybe that is a bit harsh where I think these belong.

But I note that the edit in question has not yet been reverted. A well-deserved and constructive citation needed tag has been added.

And I also note that the information in question is easily verified by primary sources, as several Sydney libraries have collections of the newspaper in question either as fragile archives or microfilm. I looked at Trove but their scans end in 1954, and that was evidently before the page 3 girl was adopted. [2]

It seems to me a constructive edit, and I hope sources will in time be found, but other comments welcome. Andrewa (talk) 19:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

The Daily Telegraph

I heard some years ago that the Daily Telegraph usually published an account of a sexual offence, or court proceedings connected with one, on page 3, and was able to confirm that that was indeed the case. As surveys have shown its readership to be more educated than that of the Sun and Star, it may be that verbal input suffices for them where the others require visual stimulation. Having no military background I rarely look at the Telegraph, and so am unable to say whether that is a regular feature. Could a user confirm whether the paper still provides that service to its readers, and if so mention it on the main page? NRPanikker (talk) 00:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)