BeautifulPeople.com
online dating service
BeautifulPeople.com is an online dating service where applicants to the website are voted in or out by existing members of the opposite sex over a 48-hour period.
BeautifulPeople.com was launched in Denmark in 2002. The site was launched in the United States and the United Kingdom in 2005 and went global in 2009. The website has attracted considerable controversy in the media and much criticism since its inception due to its exclusive business model of only allowing perceived attractive men and women to join the dating community. The website's managing director Greg Hodge claimed that it is "based on a fundamental principle of human nature".
About 20 percent of applications to the site make it into the community.
In 2012, BeautifulPeople launched an exclusively gay version of BeautifulPeople.com. BeautifulPeople launched a satirical campaign in support of same-sex marriage in the United States in June 2012.
In January 2010, BeautifulPeople removed 5,000 members from the site for gaining weight.
In June 2011, it was attacked by a virus which allowed users to join without going through the mandatory 48 hour voting process.
The public source identifies “BeautifulPeople.com” as online dating service. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around BeautifulPeople, online and dating.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “BeautifulPeople.com”, the useful work is to connect “online dating service” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3302783. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2002, 2005, 2009 and 2012.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “BeautifulPeople.com”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow BeautifulPeople.com primary sources, BeautifulPeople.com archive and BeautifulPeople research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “BeautifulPeople.com”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “BeautifulPeople.com” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.