WakeUpBoo

Copyright

Thank you for your contribution; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Stand-up comedy, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission. For more information on this, see:

• Copying text from other sources
• Policy on copyright
• Frequently asked questions on Wikipedia's copyright policy
• Policy and guideline on non-free content

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may find the pages below to be helpful.

• Introduction
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa (talk) 13:46, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Helen Joyce

As the notice says, there isn't necessarily any problem with your edits; the WP:ACDS system simply doesn't work unless everyone is "aware". Newimpartial (talk) 00:38, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps we should have a chat. You have accused me of "Whitewashing", This is not the case. I took some care to describe Sex Matters accurately and without bias and with NPOV. something the article did not previously do. WakeUpBoo (talk) 00:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I disagree strongly with that characterisation. In your version, Joyce became director of advocacy for Sex Matters, a not-for-profit human rights campaign organisation with a focus on queer theory and womans legal rights.. In doing so, you removed from this passage reference to the highest-quality and most relevant secondary source (PinkNews), and inserted content (e.g., with a focus on queer theory) that is not supported by any of your sources, even the WP:SPS, and you doubled down on that by placing the whole description in wikivoice.

Meanwhile, the stable version to which I reverted refers to Sex Matters asa campaign group whose executive director is Maya Forstater, which has been described as an anti-trans group, a human rights organisation, and a womans rights organisation. That version is impeccably sourced, only states what the sources afford, and doesn't privilege any description of the group in wikivoice but rather gives three different characterisations with attribution, two of these being from publications whose editorial slant is sympathetic to the group.

How you think WP:NPOV could be promoted by removing the best-sourced (and only critical) descriptor, adding unsourced content, and putting the result in wikivoice, I have no idea, but NPOV is not in fact to be achieved by way of unwavering support of the subject written about. To present only material flattering to subject (in this case, Sex Matters) while removing well-sourced critical material is correctly known as "whitewashing", and that was the effect of that part of your edit even if it was not your intent. Newimpartial (talk) 01:20, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I was simply trying to get an understanding of the specifics of what you objected to. This huge dump of bureaucratic wiki jargon seems a bit excessive when we are only referring to one rather short sentence. Is it the reference to Maya Forstater? I edited this as I didn't see what relevance she has on Joyce's Bio page. The page is not about Sex Matters and the organisation has a large number of executives, co-founders and contributors, whose only association to Joyce is the organisation itself. It's fair to say the group has been described as anti-trans but that is the opinion of pink news (in this case) and in this context comes across as a pejorative. That doesn't seem very encyclopaedia-like to me. There is no doubt that Sex Matters is highly critical of trans activism and queer theory generally, which is what I referred to. Also, I cited the organisation's official website so please don't accuse me of using a self-published source, that is not true. You seem to be implying I have an agenda to promote Sex Matters in a flattering light. That's a bit of a stretch for one sentence in a biography about a journalist, isn't it? There're no hard feelings on my part, I'm trying to understand here, can we talk in a more normal way, like people? WakeUpBoo (talk) 02:34, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

To start with the most basic point: the organisation's official website is a self-published source, in that it is neither independent of the organisation nor is it reliable except within the scope of WP:ABOUTSELF. It can of course be used, but only with caution.

Second, re: There is no doubt that Sex Matters is highly critical of trans activism and queer theory generally, which is what I referred to - the part about queer theory isn't in the sources you cited, and as far as I know it is original research on your part.

The fact remains that PinkNews describes Sex Matters as an anti-trans organisation, and this is a (perhaps the predominant) mainstream view. There has been a lot of discussion in various fora (including WT:WTW) about whether MOS:LABEL covers anti-trans, and the view that it does has never gained consensus. Even if it did, however, an attributed statement (like the one in the status quo version of the text) would remain compliant with policy.

The fact that Sex Matters is headed by Forstater is one of the best-known things about the organisation, so I don't see any valid argument to exclude that information based on WP:DUE, though I admit it makes the status quo sentence a bit long.

Anyway, the key point is that you took a well-sourced and accurate attributed statement and made it into a poorly sourced and questionably accurate statement in wikivoice, apparently because you felt that a well-sourced attributed statement came across as a pejorative. Please don't do that. Newimpartial (talk) 02:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I have found our exchange surprisingly informative and shall digest the information you've supplied so that I might better put it to good use in the future.

In the meantime, I'll leave you to continue the thankless task of patrolling the wild west that is wiki editing and who knows, maybe one day, if our paths should cross, you'll take the time to tip your white hat in my direction and maybe even stop by for a root beer and a chat. I know for my part, If I hear those keys a jinglin' I'll be sure to do the same. You just can't beat the milk of human kindness. WakeUpBoo (talk) 03:20, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

For the record, most of the changes you made to the Joyce article were clear improvements. Most. :) Newimpartial (talk) 03:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)