Talk:Chelsea Charms/Archive 1

Comment

Considering the source for most of this information is probably porno sites or those porno videos where the creepy guy behind the camera who asks her questions like "so when did your breasts start to grow" and she tells him about her 4th grade experiences how she was ostracized from the other girls, which is all complete fabricated because it's a FAKE FANTASY PORNO MOVIE. I'm surprised "Busty American Sweethearts #12" and "Bosoms Bigger than Banjos" aren't listed as citations. 69.76.20.62 20:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

OHHH MYYYYY!!!! THAT IS INSANE! 172.196.153.4 16:12, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Well if it makes money anything goes in today's world, right? Maybe there souuldnt be links to the commercial 3rd parties at all but only to her own site?

Something which may interest editors of this page

Any help which could be provided would be greatly appreciated. -Godfearing Parent.

Blood group

Can some please go change the blood group to her actual blood group? Right now it says blood group = red. I am juts going to remove that entry and someone can put it in there when he/she finds her blood group.

question about growth

It says she grows 25 millimeters per month. Is this supposed to be milliliters? If not, what dimension is the growth in? Girth?

Due to the nature of her breast implants, Chelsea's breasts are continuously, steadily growing. The rate of growth in her case is fairly constant at about 25 mm (1 inch) a month. The rate of growth is dependent upon her menstrual cycle, her intake of foods that encourage her body to retain fluid (e.g. salty foods), and whether and how much her breasts are manhandled. -- Jalabi99 13:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

questions about math

Some of the math on this doesn't add up. It says Charms' breasts weigh 31 lbs each. Later her doctor indicates they're around 7000cc. 7000cc = 7 liters ~= 14 lbs. The page on Maxi Mounds, the record holder, lists hers as weighing 20 lbs each. This suggests that the original statistic was 31 lbs TOTAL and was misquoted here.

Next, what is the source of what Jalabi99 cites above? He says her breasts are growing at a constant rate, while the article says the rate is slowing down. And a growth rate of 25mm/month is insane. That is 12" a year. Mounds is listed as meauring 60" around which is an M cup. There's a picture of Charms holding a tape measure that shows about the same. So you're saying that next year she's going to be wearing a Y cup and the year after that a ZZZZZZZZZZZZ? And if we extrapolate backwards to 2001, the last year polypropylene was legal, her chest measured 12" around? She's got the biggest fucking boobs on this planet and I want to fuck her!! 25 ml would be much more reasonable-- you would expect the volume to scale linearly, not the circumference. That would be 300ml = cc a year. The article says her breasts have increased 5000cc since implanted. That would make sense if the rate of increase is down to say a third of what it was initially.

However, this would make the recent jump to 10,000cc unlikely. Given that Mounds just got a Guinness Record for being that size (20lbs ~= 10,000cc), perhaps Charms felt she had to declare she was keeping up?

What fun! A pursuit that combines sex and mathematics. -paul 2/28/06

The source of what I cited? That would be the lady herself, as she has purported on numerous occasions on the forum at her website, and on various other fora.

I also understand your skepticism vis-a-vis the fact that Maxi Mounds has recently gotten "official" confirmation that she has the largest implanted breasts, and so maybe Chelsea is trying to one-up her...and personally, I am annoyed that Chelsea herself never went for the official Guinness record, since she is more than qualified to do so. If you go to YouTube and search for "chelsea charms" there is a video of her displaying her 10,000 cc bosom.

As for the growth rate, there was a time when indeed the growth was constant, but that was in the early part of the implantation process. Again, by her own testimony, (see her site's FAQ for instance), the growth has slowed down in the interim. She also routinely goes in for draining of the breast pocket serum that has built up. On the whole, though, my assertions are correct.

And I agree with you, Paul: it is fun to have a pursuit that allows one to combine sex and mathematics...just think of the possibilities for homework! :) -- Jalabi99 02:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Pix

Can we get some pix on this page PLEASE?? -CrazKiddyNewbie 03:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Photo added

everything is all legal as far as i can tell. see the image page. Stevewk 02:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Someone has gone and deleted the photo Danball1976 01:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Undeleted

On 2006-10-04, User:JDoorjam deleted this article under WP:CSD A7 and some other users were involved in re-tagging it for speedy after it was recreated. The article does have assertions of notability, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelsea Charms (2005-08-20) had strong consensus to keep. Since no rationale was given for deletion beyond "A7", I assume this was a mistake and have undeleted. If deletion was intentional, please comment. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-10-05 08:47Z

• Aliyah Yi - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aliyah Yi [1]
• Amber Rain - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber Rain (2nd nomination) [2]
• Amber Rose (porn star) - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber Rose (porn star) [3]
• Annie Swanson - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Swanson [4]
• Audree Jaymes - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audree Jaymes [5]
• Barbie Griffin - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbie Griffin [6]
• Betty (porn star) - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Betty (actress) [7]

Several others have been speedy deleted within the past 48 hours, despite the outcomes of various AFD discussions. It looks as if JDoorjam is going through and deleting certain adult-related articles in serial, starting with the letter A? [8] Many of these appear to meet WP:PORN BIO and should go to AFD rather than speedy deleted if notability is being disputed. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this as well and undeleted a few myself. It seems that he has since re-deleted some of them. I agree with CSCWEM's suggestion that, if notability is questioned, these should be (re)listed on AfD. --Myles Long 14:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I've looked at the list and there's a couple more which I don't think should be deleted either... Ebony Ayes, Jada Fire, Diana Devoe and Marie Luv all show as having at least 100 films on IAFD which means they meet at least one of the WP:PORN BIO notability criteria. If they're to be deleted, they should go through the normal vote and not be speedied. Tabercil 20:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Moved to User talk:JDoorjam