Talk:Brigette Lundy-Paine
Latest comment: 9 months ago by Andra1ex in topic 'They' doesn't belong in an encylopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brigette Lundy-Paine article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 180 days  |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
| This article should adhere to the gender identity guideline because it contains material about one or more non-binary people. Precedence should be given to self-designation as reported in the most up-to-date reliable sources, anywhere in article space, even when it doesn't match what's most common in reliable sources. Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman") that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. Many, but not all, non-binary people go by singular they pronouns, which are acceptable for use in articles. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life, unless the subject has indicated a preference otherwise. Former, pre-transition names may only be included if the person was notable while using the name; outside of the main biographical article, such names should only appear once, in a footnote or parentheses.If material violating this guideline is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other related issues, please report the issue to the LGBTQ+ WikiProject, or, in the case of living people, to the BLP noticeboard. |
Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2021
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
They were born in 1994:) 77.124.110.134 (talk) 20:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 20:11, 13 July 2021 (UTC)- "They" were not born. SHE was born. Correct pronoun use can hardly be ignored. 2600:4040:3105:E200:10D6:80B7:CD61:1581 (talk) 03:12, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- MOS:GENDERID is very clear on this subject. Why keep bringing it up? ArtemisFolly (talk) 03:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
'They' doesn't belong in an encylopedia
editI understand the issues involved but the use of singular 'they' is ridiculous in an encyclopedic article. Stick with he or she. If you really want to avoid such pronouns then use the person's actual name. --XANIA - ЗAНИAWikipedia talk | Wikibooks talk 13:55, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- BRAVO!!! 2600:4040:3105:E200:10D6:80B7:CD61:1581 (talk) 02:09, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that all encyclopedias should re-edit all of their entries to remove all pronouns referring to all persons and instead incessantly repeat the names of all concerned? The correct pronouns for everyone to refer to you are the ones you identify with. Lundy-Paine has a human right to be referred to by their chosen pronouns too. 2601:19A:C000:600:51A5:3402:EBE5:2DCF (talk) 02:42, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- MOS:SINGULARTHEY —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:44, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hi,
- 1. The initial request is, of course, correct. Encyclopedia should be grammatically correct, and according to both British and American English grammar, he/she/it is used with singular entities, while they/them is used with plural. We all learned it in schools as native speakers or as a foreign language class.
- 2. Obviously, to be referred to by chosen pronouns is not a human right. This is just incorrect.
- 3. The original suggestion was a vary delicate formulation of a somple concept described above in (1). Delicate, because the author even gave an alternative, i.e. a way to avoid doing grammar mistakes if someone for some reason does not want to use pronouns compatible with the number of people referred. Most encyclopedias do not need to edit anything, because they are written correctly. Only mistakes need to be corrected.
- 4. "The correct pronouns for everyone to refer to you are the ones you identify with" - this is also incorrect, it is like insisting to address and treat me like I am an emperor if I am actually not. Andra1ex (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Please see MOS:SINGULARTHEY. —Joeyconnick (talk) 10:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- 1. I wrote 4 facts. If you have to say anything please do.
- 2. There are no "neopronouns" and "ze/hir" are not even English words. World do not recognize these things. It is some niche/esoteric language. Encyclopedia is a source of knowledge - not a toy for a group of kids. Andra1ex (talk) 21:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Please see MOS:SINGULARTHEY. —Joeyconnick (talk) 10:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
have requested indefinite page protection over multiple violations of MOS:GENDERID
editI've requested indefinite page protection of this article given the multiple violations of MOS:GENDERID that fly-by-night IP editors seem to love perpetrating in this article. —Joeyconnick (talk) 08:40, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
image
edit"These should still be decided on a case-by-case basis, based on an actual analysis rather than simply "they're bad"." you do not have a broad consensus, or policy basis, to remove images. please discuss before unilaterally removing reliable sourced content. Turktimex3 (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)