Talk:Nikkie de Jager

Coming out video

Nikkie came out as transgender and this should be included in the personal life section, not the introduction. She also did not use any terms such as "male to female" or "assigned male at birth" so even if these seem like logical assumptions to you they are unsourced assumptions. We also do not need to summarize the entire video, just the key point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heretohelp1432 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

She mentioned in the video transitioning while on Youtube as well as prior to starting it. Please refrain from writing incorrect information. Heretohelp1432 (talk) 20:57, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Born Name Incorrect

The name stated in the born column (together with place and date of birth) is factually inaccurate. This person is now called Nikkie, but was born as [redacted]. Timmie1606 (talk) 22:23, 14 January 2020 (UTC) I can only find dutch sources for this, which doesn't seem to fit an english wikipedia, but alas: Timmie1606 (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

I can read Dutch but your source (gossip) is not reliable. Also it may not be relevant as Nikkie was never known to the public under that birth name. Not sure if Nikkie is the legal name, but it is the stage name for a fact. If you have sources that the legal name is not Nikkie than you should provide those. It's a gender neutral name by the way... 89.200.15.69 (talk) 15:23, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Nikkie was never known by her previous name, it is not needed in the lead or in the Infobox. Also, to the editor above me, Nikkie is a woman. Please use the correct pronouns, when discussing or editing this article. Alex (talk) 15:32, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

unhelpful

Actually the Wikipedia:Manual of Style was a good link but it should have been posted on the talk page rather than reverting the discussion Timmie1606 started. Seems that on the project page we are to refer to the person by the gender he/she/it identifies and not by the legal gender (which can be changed) or biological gender (which will always remain XY or XX). By reverting a discussion User_talk:Eurocave could actually start an edit war. The normal thing would have been to refer to the Manual of Style rather than making aggressive reverts. 89.200.15.69 (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2020 (UTC) (After edit conflict) This is a talk page. On here you can refer to people by their known legal gender rather than the gender they choose for themselves. The Manual of Style says you cannot do that on the project page, which I did not know earlier. 89.200.15.69 (talk) 15:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC) This discussion should be closed and the deadnaming and incorrect pronouns redacted. It's not the place of every LGBT BLP talk page for us to beg people to read Wikipedia's MOS and stop calling them names. cave (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2020 (UTC) You should still use the pronouns that are used on the article, both out of respect for the subject, and also to help pevent confusion. LakesideMinersCome Talk To Me! 16:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC) Nobody is calling anyone names here. If there was a reliable source for the birth name and if it was relevant then it should be considered. But it is simply not as long as we don't know if Nikkie is just a stage name or actually the legal name of this youtuber. Many other youtubers have their legal name mentioned on their project page. Some former teacher violating a persons privacy is nothing but gossip, it is not a reliable source (it is behind a paywall btw). If you want people to use a certain gender on the project page you can simply tell them about the Wikipedia:Manual of Style rather than approaching them with aggression. Asking them to read it is very different from accusing them of vandalism. Wikipedia is not the place for activism. You could ask a moderator to archive a section of a talk page, but you don't simple edit other peoples comments just because you don't agree with the pronouns they use. You don't correct grammar or typos on a talk page either, cause this is not a project page. 89.200.15.69 (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2020 (UTC) Please ask a moderator to look at this discussion if you feel that it should be closed or archived. Closing or reverting an active discussion without even given the editor who started it a change to respond is disruptive to Wikipedia. Being offended does not equal having reached consensus. 89.200.15.69 (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the birth name from the infobox as it was uncited an claimed here to be incorrect (per WP:BLP). Consensus regarding transgender people is that we should always refer to them using their current pronouns for all stages of their life unless they have expressed a clear desire otherwise. That applies everywhere on Wikipedia. Consensus regarding previous names of transgender people is that they should not normally be mentioned unless they were notable under that name or it is otherwise relevant to their notability. A quick reading of this article suggests that does not apply to this article, but I have not looked in detail. See Wikipedia:Non-English for details about policies regarding sources in other languages, but in a nutshell English sources are preferred where available and of equal or better quality to others but non-English ones are perfectly acceptable as long as they are reliable. Thryduulf (talk) 18:11, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

References

|}

Why are transgender people treated differently from all other? It is standard, that birth names are mentioned in the introduction, if known. --92.216.144.36 (talk) 10:46, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

It’s not just about what is known but also what is available in multiple, reliable, secondary sources. And there is precedent on Wikipedia for other WP:BLP articles excluding names, see WP:BLPNAME as well as WP:PORN’s policy “Real names of performers”. Umimmak (talk) 03:55, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

BLP violations and deadnaming

I consider reporting the alleged birthname to be a violation, and will revdelete any further attempts. The cited source is itself a reliable paper, and we can assume it reliably cites a schoolteacher who talks about a student from 16 years ago--but how reliable that teacher is, is another matter, and there is no indication that much research was done: this report is found verbatim in a number of papers owned by the same consortium, and they are not notable for being among the best or most reliable papers. That's not saying they're bad--it's saying they're not strong enough for this kind of information. There's a couple of IPs in the article history who were changing pronouns: such editors should be blocked on the spot, if they return after protection runs out. If my revdeletions are deemed too strong, challenge them but don't re-insert: this is a serious BLP matter, and I support blocking anyone who does this before a consensus is reached. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

• And more on sourcing: LABcrabs is one of many editors (just an example) who cites the Cosmopolitan article in order to establish various facts in this edit: every editor working on this article should look VERY CAREFULLY to see whether an article in an otherwise reliable source merely summarizes and repeats what was said in one of the subject's YouTube videos. Drmies (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Drmies: would this article from the BBC be an acceptable source for the information? Just want to check before I add it to the article. While it does summarise points of the video, it also mentions responses to the video.Alex (talk) 18:52, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Alex , it has the same problems that the others do--but the BBC rates more highly, in my opinion, than some of others I've seen. I wish there was some actual reporting. So no, I don't want to stand in the way of your adding it; it certainly is circulated widely enough. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2020

Categorie: On June 12, 2020 it was announced that Nikkie will be an ambassador to the Dutch United Nations Association (UNANL, www.nvvn.nl), not to the United Nations (despite some media outlets reporting this. . The Dutch Minister for Foreign Affairs confirmed this.

Please change: "On June 12, 2020, it was announced that De Jager is the new Dutch Ambassador at the United Nations"

to:

"On June 12, 2020, it was announced that De Jager is an ambassador to the Dutch United Nations Association"

 Not done for now: Thanks for being clear about what you want changed in your request. I’m declining implementing it for now because the sources you’ve provided do not appear to be sufficiently reliable. Please review Wikipedia’s policy on reliable sources. If you find better sources to support your edit, you may add them here and reopen your edit request by changing the “answered” parameter in the template from “yes” to “no.” — Tartan357  ^(Talk) 10:11, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Chantal Janzen en Nikkie de Jager.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Move to /Nikkie_de_Jager

Nikkie has recently participated in Wie is de Mol, where she was referred as "Nikkie". Maybe it's time to move this page from NikkieTutorials to Nikkie_de_Jager? I tried doing this myself, but as I contribute too little to US-based Wikipedia, I'm not autoconfirmed to do this. Besides, I'd like a confirmation on this.

SirQuackTheDuck (talk) 01:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with this. This page is a biography, so it should be called after the persons name. I don't see anyone else responding to your comment, so I expect a page move won't be a problem. Thijslandsmeer (talk) 11:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Disagree, she's better known by her YouTube name. Alex (talk) 11:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I understand that, but then why are the Dutch, French, and Portuguese Wikipedia titles for this page her actual name? Thijslandsmeer (talk) 12:53, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Why is "Goodwill ambassador at UN" a separate section?

This should just be part of the career section. There isn't anything more special about this than anything else in the career seciton. (Tagging Missnicky1991 and Umimmak who were the ones who added the section.) ―JochemvanHees (talk) 22:23, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@JochemvanHees: yeah feel free to combine/move it. I "created" it just by reverting a deletion and by adding a secondary source, but I probably should have moved that info to an already existing section when I reinstated it. Umimmak (talk) 23:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)