This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography Start‑class 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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

How can we get a photo of her on here without infringing on any copyrights? MDesigner 20:21, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Ahhh, I found a site that says that its photos are "believed to be from the public domain." That works for me. I'll dig up a nice face shot and post it up, as well as a link to the site which has a ton of photos of her (yum). MDesigner 06:08, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)

well, it doesn't seem like it is: it's clearly a VS pic. in fact, i wonder if that claim isn't just the site owners' way of covering their butts in case they're caught (after seeing that on several sites).Frencheigh 06:16, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

    I'm pretty sure that photo is of Alessandra Ambrosio, not Adriana Lima.

I believe that her official "comp card" falls in the official promotional picture category of fair use, and have uploaded that. Source [1] Calwatch 10:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This hand wringing about infringing on copyrights is silly. There are photos of her all over the internet that have been placed "Without Express Written Permission", and a quick click over the Wiki page on Victoria's Secret shows her on the magazine cover. That is the image that should be used here

Whether it's fair use actually depends which article it's used in. (That's the general agreement anyway.) See the text of Template:Magazinecover and the associated discussion page. Frencheigh 01:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the most famous thing about her is she has super eye, best looking eye in the world and it should be posted here

That's not what she is known for, besides it's not NPOV to state it as an encyclopedic fact. She is famous for being a VS model.

Wouldnt it be fair to describe her eye color as silver? Seems more shiny greyish than bluish to me

Wasn't she also in Aerosmith's 'Girls of Summer' video? PerlKnitter 21:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No i don't think so.

Hmm, I have seen several references to Jaime Pressley and Kim Smith as two of the three. I thought I had seen somewhere that Adriana was the third. If not her, then who is it? PerlKnitter 20:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no.. it doesn't really look like her. adriana has blue/green eyes not brown and her face is rounder. so i don't think its her.

Adriana is only of Native Indian, African, and Swiss descent. Wrong info. You can watch this video of her at youtube mentioning her ethnic background....No where does she says anything about French,Portguese,Japanese, or "Afro Brazilian"...BTW-Nor is she "Native American"...More like Native Brazilian Indian...Was she born in America? No, so how in the world is she half "Native American"?Cococanelle 05:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC) Youtube Interview[reply]

Yes, i realized something was wierd about it.. Japanese?!

Afro-Brazilian is the same thing as African, in this case. 24.186.192.247 16:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone keeps taking out her African heritage, although she herself has specifically said on numerous occasions that she IS of African descent. These racist revisions on certain people's pages are unfounded and need to stop.

I have reverted the edits from User:68.13.145.189 because it looked like sneaky vandalism, which was also a little apparent from the user contribution. I don't know of other contributions though. Others may look into the matter.-- Anupamsr|talk |contribs  15:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the imdb, her favourite musician is really Lenny Kravitz. So, I think it´s a correct information. User:Mistico

I don't know about the engagement line under her personal life section. I was just watching an interview on youtube and she states that she has never been engaged. It was a Craig Kilborn episode. Here's a link.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5xoLgx17A9k

I tend to believe the actual person rather than an EXTRA report as referenced on 13.

Wait a minute cause i'm confused is she or isn't she a virgin? i read an interview that she goes to church every sunday too.

She claims to be a virign during an intview with gq which i wrote and provided the link to prove it which I thought was enough, if someone disagree's, prove it. -j

--Thedigger 06:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Definitely NOT. She's the latest celebrity to have a leaked sex tape. Perhaps this should be added to the main text?[reply]

Definetly not Adriana's secret sex tape read this and everything will be clearer http://fleshbot.com/sex/celebrity/definitely-not-the-adriana-lima-sex-tape-241972.php and she is the only person (except maybe her ex boyfriends or current boyfriend) who knows the answer to the question "is Adriana Lima a virgin?" Ringwraith46 02:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please if you are going to write something like this - "However, in the June 2006 issue of the Italian GQ, Lima told reporters that she was in fact no longer a virgin, and that she had just been mistaken because her English is not the best. She went on to say that although it would never apply to her, she believes it is a good example for teenagers." Please provide a reliable source!

Funny how no one has proof of her stating her own ethnic background, But I listed the three (African, Indian, and Swiss) from her interview. I will state again she is not a mix of Portuguese, French, or Japanese. --Cococanelle

African is not an ethnicity. In actuality, neither is Amerindian. According to Ethnicity, ethnicity is defined as:

An ethnic group or ethnicity is a population of humans whose members identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or ancestry (Smith, 1986). Ethnic groups are also usually united by certain common cultural, behavioural, linguistic and ritualistic or religious traits.

There are too many variations in the cultural, behavioural, linguistic and ritualistic/religious traits of the different peoples of Africa to call Africa an ethnicity. Same goes for Amerindian. One cannot say the Inuit of Ellesemere Island are the same ethnic background as the Mapuche of Argentina.

Either her actual, specific ethnicities should be listed or the category be changed from "Ethnicity to something else. --Kmsiever 04:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The trivia section is too long, self-contradictory, and unverifiable. It requires major cleanup, with some information being incorporated into the main article text, and other info being removed outright. -Porlob 14:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I don't understand is why can't we keep her heritage to Swiss, African, and Native Indian? There has been no proof of her stating otherwise. She is a mixture of all three from the above stated youtube video.

yeah i dont know who keeps changing it.

Can we get a reference where Lima's father supposedly walked out on her?

Yes. I don't know who wrote that and were they got it from!

She was really offered roles in those two films ? Since she only had yet a role on cinema, I find hard to believe. User:Mistico

How could she have Iraqui heritage? her last name is "Lima" that can be a word of portuguese or spaniard origin.

Does she? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.119.45.169 (talk) 23:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No she doesn't have one. It was said on an official forum in which Lima is part of.[fashionmodeltalk] Same goes for Alessandra Ambrosio and Ana Beatriz Barros. They have their own site.

178 cm would make her 5'10, not 5'11.

no 179cm is 5'10.

isnt she 5ft 10 anyways???

5'11 = 180cm 5'10 is closer to 178cm. mirageinred 17:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i dont know some people say shes actually 5ft 7inches, as managers of models usually just add a few inches to their height making them look bigger.

Please do not put links to myspace profiles in the article or source information in articles with myspace links, please see WP:RS#Self-published_sources_as_secondary_sources. - Ocatecir 09:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. The page says myspace should be avoided "except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject." mirageinred 19:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is undisputed that myspace should NOT be used as a source. If the information is pertinent to an encyclopedia it will have a third-party reliable source about it. There is discussion, however, if myspace should be allowed in the external links. No consensus has been reached yet, so for the time being it should not be added. - Ocatecir 20:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not being used as a source. That was her own myspace and the WP:EL says it can be added. mirageinred 20:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The message you were responding to was added because people were adding information from myspace pages. Also, WP:EL does not say that anywhere on the page. #10 under "Links normally to be avoided" says "Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums or USENET." Read it yourself. - Ocatecir 20:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did read it. The reason why it says "links normally to be avoided" is because there is an exception. (..."Except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject"). The myspace in this case links to the subject (Adriana Lima) and it is only an external link, not a source. mirageinred 20:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quoting directly from WP:EL. 20:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Again, the myspace debate has not reached a consensus, read Wikipedia_talk:External_links#MySpace_Ban_revisited. Until it has, myspace links should not be added. Because what you quoted does not mention myspace, and #10 under "Links normally to be avoided" explicitly mentions myspace, that is the official policy. Should the debate prompt wiki admins to change the policy, then myspace links may start to be added. The point is that myspace is self-published. If they contain pertinent information for an encyclopedia, then that information would be published by a third party. - Ocatecir 20:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The debate is only taking place in the talk page, so it's not an official policy yet. Until then WP:EL states that Lima's myspace falls under "links normally to be avoided" "except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject." mirageinred 20:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page gives you an idea of where the debate currently is at. If you read it, you see that most still regard myspace as illegitimate. If myspaces were allowed, that debate would not be occuring. Also, if myspaces were allowed #10 would not exist to prohibit them. - Ocatecir 20:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know myspace is debatable. but the WP:EL (which is part of Manual of Style, which the talk page is not) currently says there is an exception in which the myspace can be listed as external link if it links to the subject of the page. mirageinred 20:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a connection you are making. The sentence does not mention myspace. If it considered myspace to be exempt, it would not mention it in #10. - Ocatecir 20:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it say "links normally to be avoided?" Before it lists the sites normally to be avoided (which includes myspace, USENET and such), it says "except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject" directly under "links normally to be avoided," which means that the list of sites mentioned are "links normally to be avoided" unless it links to the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject. Thus, Lima's myspace is an exception. mirageinred 20:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why revert? must have been a mistake. mirageinred 20:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it was. rv back.-Ocatecir 20:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've tried to add an external link to Adriana Lima's profile on the Internet Fashion Database to this article's External Links section, and twice it has been removed. I don't understand how the link violated the external links policy.

The Internet Fashion Database's purpose is to collect and catalog information about the fashion industry: models, agencies, clothing labels, designers, photographers, etc and show the relationships between them.

How is linking to Adriana Lima's profile not acceptable? Ifdb 00:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As all your contributions to Wikipedia consist of promoting this website, it was viewed with suspicion. --Abu badali ^(talk) 06:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And that is great that this link was viewed with suspicion, but why remove the link without investigating the link? If the link is valid, is related to the article, and the link can give additional valuable information to the reader of the article, then why remove the link? Why is the link "guilty" until proven "innocent" and not the other way around? Ifdb 14:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One user says that it's spam. mirageinred 17:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So can someone goto the profile Adriana Lima and tell me what specifically about the profile or site that is considered spam and what in the external links policy has this link violated? Ifdb 19:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a suitable link and does border on being outright spam. I assume you are talking about [2] (since the template was deleted I can't be 100% sure). But that "database" entry adds nothing to the subject matter (Adriana Lima). Firstly, the "biography" is a copy and paste job of this very Wiki article apart from the leading paragraph which has a couple of lines which doesn't appear here because of WP:NPOV. I have seen other model's entries on tifdb which are EXACT copy and pastes of their Wiki articles. Secondly, the fact and stats seem to be a copy and paste of Wiki facts and stats too. Which means the text has almost zero added value to someone already reading Adriana Lima. It just leaves the pictures which you do have a lot of but I'm sure there are many other dedicated photo sites out there and linking to a gallery is never really worthwhile doing. Also, by just adding links to (I persume but I could be wrong) your own site and adding no other worthwhile contributions to Wikipedia is not really the best way of getting your site on Wikipedia. --PTSE 19:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right on. mirageinred 19:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did not look at all of the content closely, you said everything was a blatant copy/paste from wikipedia and some items mentioned are not a neutral point of view - which is fine because like wikipedia, the information can be corrected and massaged to a more neutral point of view. For example, the weight listed in the wiki stats says that Adriana Lima weighs 51kg but on the Internet Fashion Database it says 59kg -- the 59kg stat is more accurate/up-to-date because of contributions made by readers that have submitted verifiable information, as a result the Internet Fashion Database is a good resource for readers of this wiki article since industry professionals and other people contribute to the site. The Internet Fashion Database site offers a user contribution system that allows most of the content to be editting/corrected/added so if anyone has any problem with any of the content then can submit a contribution with an amendment to the content and it will be taken up for review by the moderators. The profile page also offers a Quotes section and a Message Board for public discussion, both of which are not available on this article. All points considered, the profile page on the Internet Fashion Database can be and is a good place for a reader of this article.

Being in the fashion industry, I tend to look at many wiki articles related to fashion. And looking at many articles on models, I've noticed external links to supermodels.nl and fashionmodeldirectory.com ... how are those external links not considered spam and a link to the Internet Fashion Database is considered spam, those websites offer nothing new to the reader after reading the article, how did those links pass the moderators??? ... the Fashion Model Directory even has a template (the Internet Fashion Databse template was deleted!) ... how can the Fashion Model Directory be allowed to have a template but the Internet Fashion Database cannot? Please explain.

I've also noticed links on model articles to blogs, and I thought links to blogs violated policy?

Also, you make a strong statement by saying this link is spam. If it is "spam" then point to the exact section of whichever policy this link is violating. Simply stating that it violates policy (A) doesn't mean anything unless you specifically say WHAT in this policy it violates, simply tapping the policy does mean anything to me because I've read the policy and I cannot find a violation ... so that in the future I will know whether a link violates a policy or not. Because I've read the external links policy and don't see anything wrong with the link I posted. Ifdb 20:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, blogs to violate Wikipedia policy, but they are removed promptly. Or at least they should be. I don't see why you are so insistent on putting her profile up. Mirror sites of Wikipedia are not a reliable source and the fact that readers contribute the IFDB makes it even more unreliable. External links are for links that have information beyond what is already provided at this Wiki article. IFDB clearly doesn't. mirageinred 20:58, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User contributions to the Internet Fashion Database does not make it even more unreliable because contributions are only applied if their sources are verified. Random facts are not approved and existing inaccuracies have room for improvement. The Internet Fashion Database, in the near future, will eventually have a list of sources on their pages to give readers more information. When this will happen? I am not sure at the moment. Ifdb 22:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And the Internet Fashion Database does provide content beyond this article, "Appearances", "Quotes", "Message Board", and media ... to name a few.

Sorry for interrupting your comment, but "appearances" are already mentioned in the article and quotes and message board don't seem like relevant information. mirageinred 21:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm still waiting on a justification on allowing supermodels.nl and fashionmodeldirectory.com links. I do not see those links as being any more valuable than links to the Internet Fashion Database, in fact they appear to be less valuable upon close inspection. Ifdb 21:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you see them, remove them. mirageinred 21:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But are they considered "spam" ... and what metric are you using to consider them "spam" ... "spam" is a loose term.

... and still wondering how Fashion Model Directory was allowed a template and Internet Fashion Database was not ...

And how is the Internet Movie Database allowed, what additional value does that link provide? Ifdb 21:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that all unnecessary links that provide no new information beyond the wikipedia article should be removed not just from Adriana Lima artcile but all articles, rumors and videos also but it's not an easy job to do with so many people doing so many modifications to articles ! If some link shoud be added to the references or external links maybe it would be a good choice to add back the askmen.com link, which is absent in the newer look of the article since few days ago. There are some different stuff written there and also the voting for the most desirable woman of the year, by gradind each girl with a grade beetween 0 and 100. Or maybe that link should be added to all models articles? So that people can vote for their favorite model or actress, singer... Only a suggestion :D Ringwraith46 00:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Personal Life, it mentions rumours? I didn't know an encyclopedia was in the business of reporting rumours.

Also, reference #7 (Gawker Gossip) doesn't appear to be a reputable source of information. I've seen videos online of one of the women who runs Gawker and even she admitted that information on Gawker should not be taken seriously and is only there for entertainment value. If anyone is interested in seeing this interview of this woman then I'll gladly post the link.

Also, reference #8, some link to a video of Adriana Lima ... how is this link a reference? The link offers no textual content, only the video, and the video itself says nothing, it only has background music, no talking? Ifdb 21:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already removed them. mirageinred 21:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Life still mentions rumours. Ifdb 21:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not remove it yourself? mirageinred 22:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to, but so far all my contributions to wikipedia have been all removed... Ifdb 22:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

she herself clearly stated in a interview that she was dating a boy from argentina known as estevan and was a wannabe photographer, so why has it been deleted? im going to put it back up unless someone has a good reason not to. Also its also true that she HAS left Denny of Timberlada, this isnt a rumour.

• It doesn't matter. Wikipedia is not a tabloid gossip rag. The casual romances of celebrities have no place here. It's an encyclopedia, not Hello! magazine. --David Shankbone 13:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

than whats with all the bs about denny and all that crap. If you mention them, then you might as well mention the fact that they broke up.

reference #4, the youtube video has her talking about her heritage including African, Indian, and Swiss ... but admits herself that she doesn't speak english that well, and when she answers the question of her heritage/background she doesn't seem to take the question too seriously and answers in a comical way, I also believe that when she mentioned "Indian" she probably meant "Native South American" ... reference #5, the maybelline article is probably a better source for her heritage (which doesn't even mention Afican, Indian (from India), or Swiss) Ifdb 00:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

that maybelline article is not reliable. it mentions the same ethnicities that were thrown around in the begining. adriana lima is from fucking brazil. almost everyone is a mix of african, indian, and european. you should know better. She's from Salvadore Bahia anyway, with a large population of Africans who are decendants of slaves.

exactly, Brazil is a melting pot of many ethnicities, and so far from all the sources, the maybelline article is the best source, and just because there's a lot of africans in Salvadore Bahia doesn't make her part African Ifdb 21:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

She said out of her own damn mouth what her mixture is. Why is that so hard to understand? Are you saying she is wrong? If she was joking about her own heritage she would have said so. I don't what is sicker-the fact that you're trying to claim that she's wrong from what she said out of her own mouth, or the fact that you're trying to say she's not mixed. Also-Have you seen her mother? Those other ethnicities were always thrown around and made up and stated as her actual heritage just to make sound more exotic than she is. Even the guy in the video tried to make her more mixed than she is. "A mix of everything", But she shut him up and stated her mix. I have never heard her or read an interview from her claiming all those other things. Are you calling her a liar from what she said in the video? You need to stop. I'll give you a picture of her family-cousins from Bahia who is also of african/white/native mixture. If she's not mixed, what is she then? 100 European? Does it bother you that she is part African? Get a life. Tell her that to her face and watch her laugh at you. And you obviously don't have access to Adriana's Orkut account. She talks about her background and family on there also. I'll try to find the link. But her page is locked. http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c10/NinaNina19/Models/87d4130e5b074f1472acc0f26ae8a1.jpg—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.31.216.214 (talk) 07:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

adriana lima's page is constantly being vandalize. i was just wondering if we could request this page to be protected at least from anonymous users from editing the page.

If you can't read Korean, the Korean Wikipedia says there is no article in the name of "아드리야나 리마" and that's not the right way to spell her name to begin with. mirageinred 00:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, if you wish to make one, it's spelled "아드리아나 리마." mirageinred 00:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I see are squares :D lol as most of you will probably see here "Адриана Лима" Ringwraith46 00:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like Russian. What I typed was the Korean spelling of her name. I don't think your browser supports Korean, but I think you can changed that. mirageinred 16:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Close :) that's Adriana Lima written in Serbian. I know you typed her name in Korean up there and I don't have korean language support installed so I only saw squares :D I just felt like joking a little ;) Ringwraith46 19:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know that there is a reference for stating that her eyes are green and on some pictures and videos from specific angles it really looks like they are green, but I think it's pretty obvious that her eyes are mostly grey with a little blue/green essence (look at the pictures in the artcile). So maybe it should be written grey, grey/blue, grey/green, grey/blue/green or whatever no matter that it says otherwise on the dna website, because people who read the article will see her grey eyes themselves and think that the statement is wrong, which I think it is :) I didn't want to change it myself because I want to see other people's opinions Ringwraith46 01:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding a chart of "Honors and awards" to provide a concise ref of her past. I didn't want to include every conceivable list she's on, so I limited it to awards or lists that are wiki notable.. ie: the award has an article on wikipedia; by default that's notable or the article would have been afd. I may have missed some legit awards though... I'll keep checking. ~

The awards I listed are: Ford Supermodel of Brazil 1995 1st Place, Ford Supermodel of the World 1996 2nd Place, Maxim Magazine Hot 100 2003 #57, FHM 100 Sexiest Womem 2007 7th Place, People Magazine 100 Most Beautiful 2007, Spike TV Guys' Choice Awards 2007 Hottest Girl on the Planet.... Frog47 05:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed SpikeTV award since Lima's category was not mention during the show although she was listed as one of their awardees. Why put importance on a show that did not show importance to Miss Lima? (Number1spygirl 12:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I believe it should be mentioned for several reasons: 1. The awards are wiki notable & likely will increase in importance as the various Mtv awards have over the past few years. 2. The results show that Lima won an international fan vote competition. 3. The results are clearly displayed on the Spike Tv website, and in most articles that cover the results. Frog47 14:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed tables due to it's unencyclopedic nature. As stated by Five Pillars, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. (Number1spygirl 05:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Citation needed. (Number1spygirl 16:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

• I generally disagree with weight and measurements being included in the model articles. I don't understand their encyclopedic value, and these things are constantly changing. Wikipedia isn't here to describe a person's bust size, but to talk about their career and notability. Unless the weight, waist size, shoe size, etc. of a person is notable itself, perhaps in the case of Pamela Anderson, then I think these should be removed. They change too often, are often misrepresented by the person who gives it, and are difficult to verify. They also add nothing to an article but make a person seem like a piece of meat. --David Shankbone 14:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Lima is a fashion model. Measurements are important and related to her profession. As for weight, it was removed since it was unsourced. (Number1spygirl 14:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

How are they important as they relate to an encyclopedia article about her? We aren't here to report how big her breasts are, we are here to report that she is a model who is the fourth highest paid, and the physical characteristics are self-evident. If she gets pregnant, will we change her bust and waist size then? If she gains or loses weight? How will you know? --David Shankbone 14:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]