Talk:Tera Wray

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 July 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

Pornography Low‑importance

	Erotica and pornography portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Kentucky / Louisville

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as Low-importance).
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisville (assessed as Low-importance).

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Tera Wray was born on April 14th 1982![edit]

The Adult Film Database confirms this information as well as other sites on the net.

It states it, but that can hardly be called "confirmation".

What other sites? Are they reliable sources? Do they provide actual confirmation?

I think that no further dispute should be raised about this issue.

Well, that's your Point-Of-View, but I'd rather have some hard verifiable evidence, thank you.

besides what is the purpose of citing a partial birthdate ? Cowmadness (talk • contribs) 02:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are at least half-a-dozen answers to that question. Perhaps you'd like to ask a more specific question? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the point is , that you're trusting this article from "qlimax.com" which says that she is born on april 14th Now I'm wondering , why you're considering this information from this particular site as valid while rejecting the info from afdb ?! and btw , what is qlimax.com ? I've never heard of it before.

Against common belief , the afdb entries and pages can't be edited by anybody as some have said here. they are tightly regulated and all user submissions only get posted after they get approved and confirmed by the site runners. so the conclusion is that afdb is more credible than this "qlimax.com". You think i'm wrong ? well i'm curious to see how ! Cowmadness (talk • contribs) 15:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm having trouble following you.

I thought the point is that you're wanting to rely on a statement from a web page that is of undetermined reliability?

However, you say Well the point is , that you're trusting this article from "qlimax.com".

It seems to me that those two points are unrelated, but perhaps I'm missing something?

(And in any case, it's not me that's trusting qlimax.com; it wasn't me who originally quoted that link.)

My point is: "you're wanting to rely on a statement from a web page that is of undetermined reliability."

I am not sure, (please correct me if I'm wrong), but I think your point is: "Why is qlimax.com any more reliable than than afdb?"

I'm afraid my answer to that question is of no use to you.

(In case you are wondering, my answer is: "I don't know. It may be. It may not be. I don't know." Consequently, my answer/response to your subsequent question/statement: Now I'm wondering , why you're considering this information from this particular site as valid while rejecting the info from afdb ?!, which is: "I'm not." is similarly of no use to you either.)

and btw , what is qlimax.com ? I've never heard of it before. I don't know. There are millions of websites I know nothing about and have never heard of. However, when Google points me at one that says something I find interesting and/or useful, I explore it's reliability.

as some have said here. Sorry? I'm not aware of anyone saying that here. I'm confused.

so the conclusion is that afdb is more credible than this "qlimax.com". Sorry? Given that you imply that you know nothing about qlimax.com, I don't understand how you can come to that conclusion. Surely you'd have to know something about it, and compare that knowledge with your knowledge of afdb, before you could come to any comparitive conclusions about the two?

From my point-of-view, in this situation, any discussion of qlimax.com is somewhat irrelevant.

From my point-of-view, the issue is: "Is afdb a reliable source?"

You believe, and assert, that it is.

However, there are other people (not me) who believe that "IAFD, AFDB, IMDB etc. aren't reliable sources", and they are the people who are doing the reversions. (Not me.) If you want to stop the reversions, is them you need to convice. (Not me.)

By-the-way: "Please ... remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~)." Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay , let me clarify something first.

by asking: why you trust this site more than the other one , i didn't mean you in particular it was meant in plural (if you know what i mean)

Yes, strangely, I know exactly what you mean! Sorry for my mis-understanding.

anyways , As i said before this qlimax.com is pretty unheard to me , and I personally judge reliability as a relative thing. in other words , i measure which of 2 sources is more credible than the other , in theory you can never determine the reliability of a source unless you have a counterpart to compare against , that's how i view things at least.

Agreed - that's sort of what I was trying to say.

so to get back to the pratical , when you hear something from somebody you know like the afdb for example which contradicts something said by a total no-heard , the question would be , whom to trust?

Also agreed.

btw , just to narrow this particular case down qlimax actually doesn't contradict afdb , it's just that afdb also cites the year where the first doesn't .

Agreed, again.

Speaking , about convincing those ppl who are actually kinda "responsible" here , who think that imdb and co are "un-reliable" sources.

well from my point of view , this is pretty weird , it's apparent that i'm new here and i don't know how business is being handled on wikipedia regarding who is credible and not .

You are not alone, and the phenomonum you describe is not restricted to new users! (And even in those personal cases where I do know, I don't always agree.)

But i strongly disagree with that opinion about IAFD, AFDB, IMDB.

Yes, you've made that quite clear previously.

Finally , it seems to me that there is some sort of an "authorative doctrine" about who has the last word ...etc

Yes and no - Yes there is "doctrine", but I'd dispute that it's "authorative". The way I understand it, things on WP are decided "by consensus". However, my take on the situation is that things are decided "by consensus of those still hanging around at the end of the discussion" and they tend to be a combination of the most patient and/or the most stubborn.

I'm not interested in "convincing" those whom you referred to as "they".

I understand. It would seem that, like me, you are neither patient enough, nor stubborn enough.

if those "they" say that imdb for example is bad just because they say so well then let it be that way

It's not quite as black & white as that; it's not just "because they say so", it's because there are more people that are prepared to uphold that opinion than there are people who are prepared to oppose that opinion. (And my take is that both of those groups are minorities; the vast majority are those in between who may or may not have an opinion, but they don't hold their opinion strongly enough to be prepared to expend the time and effort to uphold that opinion.)

As i said i don't care to convince , i said what i wanted to say .....It's not my profile after all LOL

Thanks--Cowmadness (talk) 13:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:42, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead?[edit]

Wikipedia is reporting that she is dead based on one article from Blabbermouth... are the reputable? I haven't seen anything else online mentioning the death. Wardrich86 (talk) 05:33, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Other news sources have reported on the death know although they may still source it to Blabbermouth. [1][2][3][4] Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:51, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NY Daily News reports it but gives credit to Blabbermouth. DailyMail reports that she has died, only crediting the cause of drug overdose to Blabbermouth. If you hop over to her lawyer's Twitter, he confirms she killed herself. Here is one of the confirmation Tweets. Spilia4 (talk) 03:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tera Wray. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tera Wray. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:48, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cause of Death?[edit]

How did Tera Wray die? I have yet find an article that says more than "Suicide" and/or refutes drugs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:130A:A06F:ECC2:DB6A:489:7555 (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]