Talk:Daniel Küblböck

Untitled

Someone recently added "Daniel is now dating Bill Kaulitz after they met through a mutual friend.". This is hard for me to believe, so could the one who added this (or anybody else) please provide sources to back up this claim? 82.135.84.135 13:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Daniel Küblböck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121102183001/http://austriancharts.at/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Daniel+K. to http://austriancharts.at/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Daniel+K%2E
• Added archive {newarchive} to http://swisscharts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Daniel+K%FCblb%F6ck

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:25, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Dana's new name

Hey, so, can we please change the name of the article and start redirecting in other articles where Kublbock is mentioned? Thanks. 67.167.97.60 (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Not to mention, if she called herself Dana, dresses as a woman, and called herself a woman, then what is she? A woman. Personally, I would err on the side of caution. I'd rather be respectful and potentially wrong than disrespectful and completely wrong. An actual biological woman (talk) 15:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I refer to my arguments given on your talk page. No need to relive the conversation again. Also, don't edit other editors talk page comments as you did with mine here. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 15:19, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

If by "editing other editors' talk page comments," you mean correcting your use of pronouns and redacting another editor's transphobic comment, I dunno if I'm so enthusiastic about the idea. An actual biological woman (talk) 15:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Not to mention, this conversation absolutely belongs on the talk page for the article as well, for purposes of WP:CONSENSUS et al. After all, it is about the article. An actual biological woman (talk) 15:35, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Do we have a reliable source for this? GiantSnowman 15:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

check reflist 7, 16, and 17. also her instagram page https://www.instagram.com/rosa_luxem/ An actual biological woman (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

These sources are tabloid style pieces, simply repeating the claims of the "cabin neighbor" without any sign of fact-checking. They still refer to the individual as "Daniel" and "he". BLP statements should be supported by high-quality sources that have actually verified the claims and, even if they are true, the article should not be updated until better sources are available. –dlthewave ☎ 16:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Gender identity it seems the entire article should be rewritten to reflect her name and pronouns. I don't think this was MOS in 2018 when the above debate happened. The 2 citations both seem reliable (non-tabloid, despite what was written above), though I don't speak German. http://web.archive.org/web/20220814220614/https://www.rtl.de/cms/daniel-kueblboeck-eine-freundin-behauptet-er-wollte-als-frau-leben-4220764.html https://www.kreiszeitung-wochenblatt.de/tostedt/c-panorama/schiffspassagierin-aus-tostedt-traf-daniel-kueblboeck-er-war-eine-traurige-figur_a122443 Anonymous-232 (talk) 06:51, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree. It's odd to declare this individual as a "transsexual woman" but refer to them as a man throughout the article. Nophunintended0 (talk) 15:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Confusing sentences

The 2018 disappearance section currently contains the following: "Küblböck has been missing since 9 September 2018. He was on a private trip from Hamburg to New York City on the cruise ship AIDAluna off the coast of Newfoundland. On one with "Artist. Actress. Transexual" [sic] unverified Instagram account, he had published selfies in women's clothing during the voyage."

The final sentence is confusing and I can't work out what is meant by "On one with "Artist. Actress. Transexual" [sic] unverified Instagram account".

Later on in the section there is: "In the weeks before the cruise, according to his father, his environment had noticed a sudden change of character and psychological problems at Küblböck and heavily tried to prevent him from making the journey."

This looks like poorly translated material that I think is trying to say that "In the weeks before the cruise, his father noted a sudden change of character and psychological problems, and actively tried to prevent him from taking the trip.". I'm not certain enough about this to change it (even if the article wasn't protected), particularly as it doesn't include "environment" so I might be missing something. Thryduulf (talk) 11:10, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

It is indeed poorly translated. According to the source for the 1st sentence in question, the Instagram account belonged to "rosa_luxem" (referring to Rosa Luxemburg?) which contained the description "Künstlerin. Schauspielerin. Transsexuell" (female artist, actress, transsexual). The source for the 2nd sentence says, "habe sein Umfeld zuletzt eine beunruhigende Wesensveränderung wahrgenommen ... aber er hatte seit Kurzem psychische Probleme" (the people around him noticed a disturbing change of character ... but he had recently psychological problems) and later, "so habe ich alles daran gesetzt, diese Reise zu verhindern" (so I tried everything to prevent this trip).

PS: As usual, the restored version is m:The Wrong Version; it should be this one. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Pronouns

Maybe I don't know the Wikipedia policy well enough, but to me it seems blindingly obvious that this person is/was a trans woman. Given that, would it not make sense to use she/her pronouns throughout? As it is right now they're already being used inconsistently and sporadically throughout. IMO it also makes no sense to explicitly say that she identified as a trans woman at the end of the lead paragraph and then proceed to repeatedly contradict this by misgendering her over and over. Stavd3 (talk) 06:10, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Per MOS:GENDERID, you are correct in theory. However, given the circumstances around the subject's disappearance before any formal coming out happened, I think we should follow the example of SOPHIE here. After SOPHIE's untimely death, a statement was released that pronouns should not be used for SOPHIE and SOPHIE's article was updated accordingly. People on the talk page for SOPHIE brought up the very good point that this approach does not make assumptions and, to quote @Bilorv: "it cannot be inaccurate to refer to somebody by their name". Bizarre Bizarre^{Talk modern to me} 09:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm quite dubious that this is the same situation as SOPHIE, but I can't access the relevant source. It seems to me that Küblböck came out as a transgender woman. A person close to SOPHIE specifically said that the subject did not like any "gendered or nonbinary pronouns". However, no pronouns would be better than male pronouns, which should absolutely not be used per MOS:GENDERID. I'm also interested in the language here: we say "transsexual" because Küblböck said "transexuelle", but is this the German word most closely corresponding to the English "transgender"? Or is it clear that Küblböck does not identify with the term "transgender", only "transsexual" (which is possible but rare)? — Bilorv (talk) 09:21, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely. I wasn't saying it was a 1:1 parallel with SOPHIE, just that the way SOPHIE's article is written could be applied here to solve the fact that pronouns are applied inconsistently throughout this article. I think we're all trying to find a balance between avoiding speculation and respecting the subject, who is very unlikely to ever give us an answer as to what should be done; the father still referred to the subject as male when it was decided (against the family's wishes) to legally declare the subject as dead, but not all families are supportive. Regarding language, "transsexuell" is still the term that's used in German law but its use is debated amongst German-speaking trans people and the English word "transgender" was imported into the German language. I personally believe that we should either use the subject's own words or simply say "trans" to, again, avoid assumptions; an Instagram account by a missing person who was declared legally dead is only going to give us so much information. Bizarre Bizarre^{Talk modern to me} 14:33, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the info. For the time being, I've changed the article to use "she/her" pronouns throughout, and reworded the lead so we use the name Lana but explain the confusion clearly in the first sentence. This is without prejudice against removing pronouns altogether, because it's quick and easy to find+replace gendered words but harder to rewrite eloquently without pronouns altogether. I have done this because I can see the only two acceptable options according to MOS:GENDERID are using "she/her" or using no pronouns. — Bilorv (talk) 21:44, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

This is completely misleading. Küblböck was exclusively known as a male throughout their career. The pronouns should be he/him or removed altogether FMSky (talk) 10:48, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Why should it matter what they were "known as... throughout their career" when the article is about them as a person, not their public persona? 2603:8080:1404:BAD:E05D:7D2A:4D37:F578 (talk) 19:28, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Its irrelevant anyway. He never switched genders or pronouns and even his family always referred to him as their "son". Idk why someone even changed it to begin with --FMSky (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

I feel like HRT, assuming a new identity, and describing oneself as a "female artist, actress, and transsexual" is enough evidence that this individual is trans. It doesn't really matter what they were "known as" or what their family called them. Nophunintended0 (talk) 16:00, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Requested move 22 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. !Voting is roughly split, and with uncertainty over the sourcing it doesn't seem that we have enough evidence to assert the primacy of MOS:GENDERID here after two listing periods. If someone can come back with cast-iron sourced evidence that the individual definitively transitioned and was known by the new name, then a fresh RM can be used to argue that.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Daniel Küblböck → Lana Kaiser – It appears that this person changed their identity from Daniel Küblböck to Lana Kaiser shortly before their disappearance. Per MOS:GENDERID, we should refer to people by their latest expressed gender self-identification. The one caveat is that I'm having trouble finding great sourcing about their transition; I'm not 100% sure whether they had actually changed their name or were just considering it. Philipp Gufler made a short film and a zine both titled Lana Kaiser, and the synopses I linked both suggest that Lana is the correct name. I also found this Wunderweib article, though I am slightly confused by it; per Google Translate, it says "He also only wanted to be his female first name “Lana” addressed by" but it also says "he was considering converting to a woman" (emphasis mine), which seems contradictory (bad translation?). We need better sources (I'm struggling to find them since I don't speak German), but it's clear to me that something needs to change. If no more sources can be found, then the article should at least switch from "he" to "they" to indicate the uncertainty. However, I think the evidence tends to point towards Lana Kaiser being the correct name (and she/her being the correct pronouns). IagoQnsi (talk) 03:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:53, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Oppose -- WP:COMMONNAME --FMSky (talk) 07:13, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@FMSky: MOS:GENDERID specifically says to use a person's chosen gender identity "even if it does not match what is most common in sources". Gender identity changes seem to be an exception to WP:COMMONNAME. –IagoQnsi (talk) 10:55, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support. MOS:GID. Also support the use of they/them pronouns instead of he/him or she/her. Showiecz (talk) 08:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. I understand the general Wikipedia policy of going with a person's chosen gender identity and name, but this is an unusual case in that they went missing shortly after announcing their intentions to transition and change their name. As such, they did not live under their new identity long enough for that name to become commonly known before they disappeared. As such, I think this case warrants an exception, as they are likely still to be more commonly known by the name that they lived under for most of their life before they disappeared. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak support, I think MOS:GENDERID just barely trumps WP:COMMONNAME here since she did have some fame in her new identity, although I'm not necessarily opposed to it staying where it is. Certainly a complicated one.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

"since she did have some fame in her new identity" ehm no? the name was basically only used for like a week before the disappearance--FMSky (talk) 16:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

On the page, it says "In 2020, the artist Philipp Gufler created a 13-minute short film and a magazine about Lana Kaiser.[19] The film was shown among others at the 67th Short Film Festival in Oberhausen[20] and in the group exhibition Sweat in the Haus der Kunst, Munich." That should be enough, no?--Ortizesp (talk) 16:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Per the nominators post, "We need better sources". It appears that Kaiser-Küblböck was not known publicly by the proposed name and it would take a change in reliable sources before we can move forward.LM2000 (talk) 06:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose the sourcing doesn't actually demonstrate that there was an intent to transition name or gender, as opposed to a few ideologues over-promoting one of a series of erratic statements before an unusual suicide. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 23:35, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

deadnaming and pronouns

Lana Kaiser is the name she decided to go by, as well as the female identity. Why are all pronouns in this article he/him? And why is her deadname used instead of Lana Kaiser? Scarscarin (talk) 09:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)