Talk:ContraPoints

ContraPoints' Birth Name

The article doesn't give ContraPoints' legal name or gender at birth. These are historical facts that should be included in the family life section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:7600:2b67:61f7:f48d:aa23:65a9 (talk) 12:57, August 24, 2022 (UTC)

Not done. See MOS:GENDERID and MOS:DEADNAME. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 17:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the channel has been called ContraPoints since birth and, being a YouTube channel, has no gender of its own. ;-) --DanielRigal (talk) 19:11, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense. The channel is clearly a woman, because it's never once been searching through a drawer for an hour trying to find something, only to have its wife, sister or mother walk over and retrieve that item from the very front of that drawer with an arch look.

Indeed, I once went looking through all of Wynn's videos for one particular skit I remembered, spending over an hour searching before the very first video I checked started playing on its own and played that very skit. Obviously, the channel is a woman. (I'm not being serious, as I don't believe this is a serious request from the IP. At least not one worth taking seriously.) Happy (Slap me) 20:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

It is a serious request. I agree that the article is about the YouTube channel, not the content creator but since there is no separate article for Wynn, this biographical info should be included somewhere. A person's history is very important for context. For example the Caitlyn Jenner article begins as "Caitlyn Marie Jenner (born William Bruce Jenner; October 28, 1949)..." 2603:7000:7600:2B67:B595:D30B:62E1:623E (talk) 14:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

A small, very small remark, RoxySaunders. MOS:GENDERID and MOS:DEADNAME are one and the same guideline. -The Gnome (talk) 13:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the pertinent and necessary correction. Roxy from 2022 will be pleased to learn this. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 15:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The Dead name policy is absurd. You can't wipe away history because of some socio-political agenda. You're not helping your cause this way. 2603:7000:7600:2B67:B595:D30B:62E1:623E (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Writing about people under their correct names while respecting their right to keep private matters private is not "some socio-political agenda", it is basic human decency. If you have a problem with the policy then you can discuss that on the policy's talk page. (I'm not saying that you should, only that you can. It certainly won't do you any good.) This conversation is off-topic and we will not be discussing it further here. DanielRigal (talk) 15:42, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

What history? We don't know Wynn's birth name because it's not public information. Wikipedia is a tertiary source and only publishes information that has already been published in reliable secondary sources. It's no more public than her Social Security number, nor is our omission of her Social Security number any more or less a censorship of history. — Bilorv (talk) 21:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Well if it's not public information then this is a moot point. 2603:7000:7600:2B67:F490:48AA:73CA:E9FB (talk) 22:56, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• The question arises: If, supposedly, Wynn's birth name, becomes public information, should it be included in an article about Wynn's YouTube channel? Methinks not, on account mainly of article focus. -The Gnome (talk) 13:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Agree! Likeanechointheforest (talk) 18:50, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2023

ContraPoints won the Peabody award for the year 2022. The ceromony was in 2023, but the submission year was 2022. https://peabodyawards.com/award-profile/contrapoints/ Blakevoyles (talk) 13:15, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done I've updated it to say 2022. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 March 2024

Updating month and Patreon subscriber count. Youwouldntdownloadacar (talk) 02:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 02:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Videos section

I'm not going to fight too hard to include this, but I do still believe that it has significant encyclopedic value. There's a reason why we have episode lists for almost all mainstream TV shows. Loki (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

(For future reference: this is about Special:Diff/1190428622 and Special:Diff/1215183675.) I think my opinion is the same as at Talk:ContraPoints/Archive 1#Episodes_table??. It's not typical to have an episode list for media not made by professional production companies. There's not much due weight for the individual episodes, in contrast to many TV programmes that receive episode-by-episode reviews. There's verifiability or historicity issues here in that there is not a complete list, as videos have been removed and not all of them have been transcribed and officially published—but sources and the article are at least somewhat about these old videos. — Bilorv (talk) 22:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 April 2024

change to her subscriber count to accurately reflect the current count as of April 13, 2024 which is 1.79 million compared the 1.73 million listed Reby 1929 (talk) 01:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 03:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Removing section about Twitter drama

Because it's not notable. See precedents in other YouTubers' Wiki pages. It takes up a really undue amount of space on the page, especially because the sources themselves basically seem to say that the controversy is undue. Transfeminine people are disproportionately scrutinized, and bigotry is not a reason to claim notability on Wikipedia. I think that if anyone wants to add this section back to the page, we should discuss it here first. Likeanechointheforest (talk) 18:48, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it merits inclusion, due to the coverage, but it is somewhat overblown. It was rather a storm in a teacup but it was a notable one. If we can slim it down a little then that would be good. Also it doesn't belong in the Personal Life section. I'll move it, without any change to the content, now. DanielRigal (talk) 21:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I believe that it warrants inclusion too and will add the rationale that her "Cancelling" video got significant of coverage, a lot more than most of her individual videos, and this resulted from the incident (twitter-drama though it was). I also agree that the section could be shortened though.--MattMauler (talk) 03:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)