Mariia Derevianko
aka Марія Дерев'янко 
- Age: 28 years young
- Born: Monday 15th of July 1996
- Birthplace: Kiev/Kyiv, Ukraine
- Ethnicity: Caucasian
- Sexuality: Straight
- Profession: Internet Personality, Supermodel
- Hair color: Brown
- Eye color: Brown
- Height: 5'10" (or 177 cm)
- Weight: 135 lbs (or 61 kg)
- Body type: Slim
- Measurements: 33-23-36
- Bra/cup size: 32B show conversions
- Boobs: Real/Natural
- Instagram follower count: 92k (as of April 2025)
Mariia Derevianko Links
Leave a comment
Commenting is disabled for non-registered users. Please register and login if you want to leave comments.
User comments
Same dude who gave Desire Inglander a 1 star rating also gave this one a 1 star rating. This is obvious manipulation.
2025-04-05 03:07 🛈 ⚠
How can you know it's the same user? It maybe happened at the same time, but I doubt you can know it's the same user.
My guess is the admins of Babepedia just "move" some girls down when these girls get a score which is "too high". So, you might be right, the same "admin user", but it's just a guess.
2025-04-05 16:57 🛈 ⚠
I think I can see more information because of my contributions. I can see a list of all votes, username and timestamp on each page.
No, the admins don't change the rankings. But the problem is that they are already very busy with other stuff, so they don't have time to check for manipulation on every page. They need a manipulation detection algorithm. My guess is that the ranking list will look very, very different when removing all manipulation votes.
Also, it is again the same users who gave the current newcomers in the top 25 list 1 star ratings today.
2025-04-06 17:28 (edited 2025-04-06 17:29) 🛈 ⚠
The algorithm actually has a feature to avoid that few dozen of 10 fired by half a dozen of Minkiettas could push too high profiles not deserving it.
It's something that goes with the logaritm of the total number of votes.
There is no manipulation.
Only a lack of basic math knowledge.
2025-04-06 17:47 (edited 2025-04-06 17:49) 🛈 ⚠
There is certainly manipulation by users going on and there is nothing running in the background to guarantee it from not happening. It's easy to verify, just go ahead and give a random profile a 1 star rating and then see how the rating changes. It's exactly (n_votes*rating_current + 1)/(n_votes + 1).
2025-04-06 20:17 🛈 ⚠
Obviously a new vote is taken into account and the result promptly recalculated.
But I was talking about another issue.
In this moment Lucy Pinder is 9.08 with 1391 votes.
But she stands above Claire Andrisani who is 9.15.
Why ?
Because the second babe has 88 votes only.
From a larger amount of data it can be inferred a math model like:
Real_rating = Current_rating + alpha*log(N_votes)
where alpha could be something around 0.1
(difficult to say better because we know only two digits after the dot)
( and we don't know if the result has been roughly trimmed or properly rounded up/down)
2025-04-06 20:44 (edited 2025-04-06 20:50) 🛈 ⚠
I see what you mean. That feature was introduced not so long ago and it was commented on somewhere. In my opinion it comes with more drawbacks than advantages and it doesn't help in cases where a small group of users try to systematically downvote anything new that makes it into top 25. There are much better solutions using robust statistical methods, like even just weighting any votes by the inverse of their distance from the median vote, normalized by the standard deviation, i.e. x*std(x)/(x-u(x)), x being the random variable for the votes and u(x) and std(x) being median/mean and standard deviation or any other preferred first order moment and second order moment.
2025-04-06 21:55 🛈 ⚠
Very good in a mathematical perspective.
Maybe not always in the skills of a even talented "raw" programmer.
This makes me remember a thing of 20 yr ago.
A guy who had to set PLC of an industrial device in the factory where I used to work, lost half a day for a malfunction.
He continued to forget the 3.14 in the code lines related to a rotating part.
2025-04-06 23:13 🛈 ⚠