This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment 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 This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group. Denmark Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women artists This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women artists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women artists 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.Women artistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women artistsTemplate:WikiProject Women artistsWomen artists Women in Business Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business 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.Women in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women in Red: Fashion designers (2018) This article was created or improved during the Fashion designers edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Red project in January 2018. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red

I am a VRTS agent communicating with the subject, who has informed me that the magazine Alt for Damerne agreed that most of the information in the article was wrong, and the editor-in-chief has retracted it and removed it from their website. Accordingly, I have removed the assertions cited to that article.

The citation to Not Just a Label has also been removed, and it is not archived anywhere, so I have removed that citation and associated sentences from this article as well. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:44, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist

A retraction is a public announcement from a media source taking back what they previously have published.

If the subject has provided you with a link or some other verification of the publisher's stance, could you provide it for posterity?

RCSCott91 (talk) 19:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No publisher is required to announce removal of something they publish on their own server. The statement for posterity is my statement above as a VRTS agent, in which case I conveyed a message (from a very long chain of emails) from the subject based on her communication with the publisher. She contacted the publisher after I advised her that the way to correct an error cited to a source is to get the source to correct it. I am honestly surprised she followed up and actually succeeded. Rather than publicly calling attention to their errors about a living person, the publisher chose to remove the content. Sorry I cannot give more details. This is a case where you need to assume good faith. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist Thank you. RCSCott91 (talk) 23:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• What I think should be changed:classic aliens with big eyes and long, thin necks,[14]
• Why it should be changed:Refference 14 has been removed from the magazines pages because it was incorrect:
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):Refference 14 has been removed from the magazines pages because it was incorrect: "Anne Sofie Madsen: Dansk couture med et strejf af McQueen". alt. (in Danish). Oct 8, 2012. Archived from the original on 14 January 2025. Retrieved 17 January 2025.

2001:6C8:FED0:9493:6422:8EA0:1769:AF03 (talk) 20:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you rephrase "What I think should be changed" to include both the existing text you want to be changed as well as what you want it changed to? I don't understand what change is requested here. Asparagusstar (talk) 20:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed both the "classic aliens with big eyes and long, thin necks" description as well as something about "the Nike Air Force One shoe" in this edit. These were both sourced to a web page that is no longer online, that is discussed above as having been "incorrect" and as likely removed from their site as a "retraction." I believe this completes the requested edit. Asparagusstar (talk) 23:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RCSCott91 in this edit has restored the phrases about the "classic aliens with big eyes and long, thin necks" as well as "the Nike Air Force One shoe." As I've previously said here on the talk page and in my edit summary, the source used for these statements is described above as wrong and retracted. But this source has been reastored to the article by RCSCott91, so I am I am changing this section back to "unanswered" so people can discuss whether these seemingly wrong and retracted statements are so important that they belong in encyclopedia article about a living person. Asparagusstar (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RCScott91, here's the ping. I'm still closing the edit request. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:22, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK @AlphaBetaGamma: I will also ping @Anachronist: so they can more easily find this ongoing conversation since the edit request has been closed and marked as "answered." Anachronist had also previously removed the same source as being wrong and "retracted by the publisher" in this edit and so may have some further opinions on using seemingly wrong and retracted statements in an encyclopedia article about a living person. Thanks everyone. Asparagusstar (talk) 14:46, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am a VRTS agent who has been communicating with the subject of this article. She or a representative is making these edit requests at my suggestion. See the section #Two sources removed above where I explained my actions.

Wikipedia has no business citing erroneous sources, especially for a BLP. The subject of the article contacted publishers to discuss errors they published about her specifically, and the publishers agreed to retract. Therefore, the statements citing this source should be removed, because the retraction pertained directly to the subject of this article. I am removing them again. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:16, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]