Template:Did you know nominations/Trans Day of Revenge
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 17:28, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Trans Day of Revenge
edit- ... that an album that promotes violent actions towards anti-transgender activity was released only a day after the June 12, 2016 gay club shooting in Orlando?
Created by EditorE (talk). Self-nominated at 21:17, 29 June 2016 (UTC).
Long enough (almost 6,000 characters), new enough (created on 29 June & nominated on same day), and within policy.- Hook is short enough, interesting, within policy, and supported by [1].
- QPQ done.
Overall, this nomination passes, congratulations. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:03, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
I have pulled this one from prep as the hook and article have multiple issues. Firstly, the hook says the album "promotes violent actions" which isn't exactly supported by the sources and is arguably defamatory; secondly, the article repeats this claim, sourcing lyrics that again do not clearly support it; thirdly, some of the other lyric interpretations also smack of original research, and finally, the article needs a copyedit as it contains grammatical and other errors that make it difficult to comprehend. Gatoclass (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: I have fixed the grammer errors that you mentioned were in the article, and comments for approvement of any of my articles is appreciated. However, there are many problems with this comment. For one thing, it doesn't seem you read the sources I cited in the article, which led you to believe the lyric interpretations were original research. The info you described as "original research" is actually text paraphrased from the sources, not original analysis. I'll give you a comparison:
- Wikipedia article: "several concepts are represented in only one verse, mainly with how the media and even people who are a part of gay communities negatively treat transgender people: "Remember those/Dead and gone/but don't let the media set us up for harm/HRC, selfish fucks/Yuppie gays threw us under the bus.[2]"
- Source cited: "In the title track she compresses historical and modern indignation into a single verse: “Remember those/Dead and gone/but don’t let the media set us up for harm/HRC, selfish fucks/Yuppie gays threw us under the bus.” In a few seconds, a library shelf’s worth of ideas are touched on: Queer erasure, the particular way in which media tends to flatten the specificities of queer life, the way that even within the queer community, transgender people are treated as inexplicable, illegitimate, politically inconvenient."
- Another thing is that the hook cited is backed with a reliable source. The article said "Lyrically, Trans Day of Revenge bashes people's pacifism towards state terrorism, transmisogyny and respectability politics in the United States.[3]" The source cited saids "In Trans Day of Revenge, they tear down pacifism in the face of state violence, transmisogyny, and respectability politics" Pacifism means "the belief that any violence, including war, is unjustifiable under any circumstances, and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means." So basically, the article and source cited said that the album bashes pacifism, or non-violence, towards these issues, therefore promoting violence towards these problems. Even the critical reception mentions the album's main message ("many critics found it as an essential album due to its message of taking violent measures instead of praying for peace.[6][10][12][13][14]"), and the statement in the section is all backed up with reliable sources. I also really don't see how you think lyrics like "When peace is just another word for death, it's our turn to give violence a chance!" don't support what the album is lyricallyf going for. Most of the problems you are stating here are causes of your misreading and for the majority of your argument, aside from the prose errors you mentioned (which there weren't really that many), the fault is on you for misinterpretation of the article. I don't mean to be rude here, I'm just hoping you learn from your mistake here so something like this doesn't happen again. editorEهեইдအ😎 06:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: I have fixed the grammer errors that you mentioned were in the article, and comments for approvement of any of my articles is appreciated. However, there are many problems with this comment. For one thing, it doesn't seem you read the sources I cited in the article, which led you to believe the lyric interpretations were original research. The info you described as "original research" is actually text paraphrased from the sources, not original analysis. I'll give you a comparison:
- Sorry, but I'm not at all persuaded by these arguments. To start with, one line in one song from the album doesn't translate to an entire "album which promotes violent actions" per the hook, which gives a very misleading impression. Also, the word "promotes" is highly problematic. And what the sources say do not support your interpretation, for example, one source used to support the claim that the album "promotes violent actions" merely says the album is characterized by "rage and aggression", which is not the same thing at all. Again, being critical of pacifism is not the same thing as "promoting violence". The problem is that both the hook and article are overstating the case, and in ways which the band itself might find very objectionable. And while the band may indeed may be endorsing violent self-defence in certain circumstances, that too is not the same thing as "promoting violent actions" toward any manifestation of "anti-transgender activity" as the hook implies. What is required here, I think, is a little more subtlety of language, the hook and article are currently falling short of that IMO. Gatoclass (talk) 13:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Once again, comments are appreciated; at least you explained that "The problem is that both the hook and article are overstating the case, and in ways which the band itself might find very objectionable. And while the band may indeed may be endorsing violent self-defence in certain circumstances, that too is not the same thing as "promoting violent actions" toward any manifestation of "anti-transgender activity" as the hook implies", and I'm happy to provide an ALT hook, but before I do that, I cleary need to provide you with more examples just so I can prove to you that your comment that what "the sources say do not support your interpretation" is beyond incorrect:
- Wikipedia: "The record closes with the lines "Not as weak as we seem," which shows how people who work very hard just to survive in society are foolishly seen by many as frail or untenable.[6]", Cited source: "“Not as weak as we seem,” Switchblade yells on the EP’s very last line. On this forceful show of strength, G.L.O.S.S. show the folly in underestimating the resolve of people who fight every day just to stay alive."
- Wikipedia: "The lyrics to "We Live" are about a person who shows the pride of being a transgender person and being able to successfully live in a society against people of transexual gender: "We live with trauma locked inside / We fight against the urge to die."[6]" Cited source: On “We Live,” Switchblade howls, “We live with trauma locked inside / We fight against the urge to die,” exhibiting pride in simply surviving a toxic culture that seeks to harm transgender people like her."
- Wikipedia: "On “On "Out From The Desk," the singer demands everyone to attack: "Bent ears/Can't be enough/Out from the desk/Let's all crew up/Boot the fucker!”[7]", Cited source: "On “Out From the Desk,” the album’s explicit rallying cry for action, Switchblade calls people to go out and fight. “Bent ears/Can’t be enough/Out from the desk/Let’s all crew up/Boot the fucker!”"
- Wikipedia: "The song deals with how the amount of police brutality in society can lead to establishment of who dies and lives, lines including "Killer cops aren't crooked.../they do as they're told," and "Black lives don't matter in the eyes of the law.."[2]", Cited source: "The song describes police brutality and the degree to which this brutality flows from the superstructures that determine who survives in America. “Killer cops aren’t crooked.../they do as they’re told,” she sings. “Black lives don’t matter in the eyes of the law.”
- If I need to go any further to show you why the sources support these statements in the article (which I'll be still happy to do), than I think its fair for me to suggest the word "paraphrase" or "reading comphresion" isn't in your vocabulary. I'm gonna have to be rude here for a second; Wikipedia reviewers with this lacking amount of reading comprehension skills and an understanding of how articles rephrase text could be a pretty bad damage for the DYK, GA and especially the FA community or similar, and is probably a good indication to retire from reviewing (it's a joke, this is just a suggestion so please don't take it personally). I'm giving you 24 hours to prove to me why these statements are not supported by the sources. In the meantime, here's an alternative hook:
- ALT1 that an album bashing concepts of pacifism towards problems like transmisogyny was released only a day after the June 12, 2016 gay club shooting in Orlando? editorEهեইдအ😎 17:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Once again, comments are appreciated; at least you explained that "The problem is that both the hook and article are overstating the case, and in ways which the band itself might find very objectionable. And while the band may indeed may be endorsing violent self-defence in certain circumstances, that too is not the same thing as "promoting violent actions" toward any manifestation of "anti-transgender activity" as the hook implies", and I'm happy to provide an ALT hook, but before I do that, I cleary need to provide you with more examples just so I can prove to you that your comment that what "the sources say do not support your interpretation" is beyond incorrect:
- Sorry, but I'm not at all persuaded by these arguments. To start with, one line in one song from the album doesn't translate to an entire "album which promotes violent actions" per the hook, which gives a very misleading impression. Also, the word "promotes" is highly problematic. And what the sources say do not support your interpretation, for example, one source used to support the claim that the album "promotes violent actions" merely says the album is characterized by "rage and aggression", which is not the same thing at all. Again, being critical of pacifism is not the same thing as "promoting violence". The problem is that both the hook and article are overstating the case, and in ways which the band itself might find very objectionable. And while the band may indeed may be endorsing violent self-defence in certain circumstances, that too is not the same thing as "promoting violent actions" toward any manifestation of "anti-transgender activity" as the hook implies. What is required here, I think, is a little more subtlety of language, the hook and article are currently falling short of that IMO. Gatoclass (talk) 13:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Well, I'm sorry that you appear to have taken offence at some of my comments, and perhaps some of them came across as a little blunt, but sometimes one is obliged to be frank to get the point across. I am still not persuaded by your comments above, and regarding the hook, I have no idea what "concepts pacificism" is and I've never heard the term "transmisogny" before so I don't know how widely it is recognized, so I still think the article needs a more appropriate hook and I still think the article needs a cleanup. I would do it myself, but I don't have the time and energy to devote to it right now. I think what I will do is contact a relevant Wikiproject and see if somebody there can provide some assistance. Gatoclass (talk) 02:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Whoops! I meant "concepts of pacificism", good catch! I'll be back soon, guys. editorEهեইдအ😎 07:38, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment. I have no experience as a DYK reviewer but would like to offer a couple of general comments. The topic is interesting and worthy of an article (and maybe a DYK), but there are still some issues with the grammar; certain passages seem awkwardly worded, not quite idiomatic. Examples:
- many critics found it as an essential album"
- The record closes with the lines "Not as weak as we seem,"
- A major praise included how the band delivered their message
The first two are easily fixed, but I'm not quite clear on what the third one is supposed to mean. More difficult, but equally important, would be revising the article to remove any hint of OR. I'm not saying there are blatant problems—the sourcing is actually rather extensive, and clearly much effort went into paraphrasing carefully but not closely—but the effect is nevertheless a bit OR-ish. For instance:
- * The record closes with the lines "Not as weak as we seem," which shows how people who work very hard just to survive in society are foolishly seen by many as frail or untenable.
It is opinion, not fact, that it shows any such thing. If it says so in the source, there probably should be direct attribution; otherwise, the word is problematic. It's a similar thing with "foolishly". The article should summarize what the sources say, but it appears to also be summarizing what the lyrics actually mean, and that's always a risky business. (I also wonder if "untenable" is the right word in the context. That adjective isn't typically applied to people or groups of people.) Rivertorch's Evil Twin (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- EditorE, can you please tell us where you are in terms of addressing the various comments and issues noted above? It has been over three weeks since you said "I'll be back soon, guys." Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: I actually have been editing the article, and I'm making the article have more quotations to make the writing clearer without having to use too much paraphrasing. However, I do request a withdraw of the DYK nomination. editorEهեইдအ😎 16:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)