Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:05, 8 December 2021

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Arts and Entertainment This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Comedy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. LGBTQ+ studies: Person This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies This article is supported by the LGBTQ+ Person task force. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Pronoun usage in article

We can honor Butcher's wishes for not using "she", "her", "hers" as pronoun referrals without going against standard English grammar which we should be using per our manual of style. It is less awkward and still mostly conformant to the MOS to avoid pronouns completely by rewriting then having awkward reading non-standard grammar in an encyclopedia article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

See also MOS:GENDERID "Avoid confusing constructions by rewriting". Non-standard grammar is confusing to read and if it can be rewritten to avoid it, it should. If the only issue is pronoun usage we can avoid the issue completely by rewording places where it is an issue. "They are" to refer to a single person is jarring and wrong no matter the reason. "They is" is also jarring and wrong so don't do either. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I'd say the use of "they" for a known singular antecedent with a non-binary gender is grammatical in the idiolects of many already, and is quickly becoming more and more accepted.

"Avoid grammar issues such as "they is" vs "they are" for singular." What's the issue? In the prestige dialects of US English "they are" would be the unquestionably grammatical choice. (Though I will note that I believe "they is" would be grammatical in some dialects of English such as AAVE where present tense verbs do not conjugate.)

"They are" isn't jarring to me. I'd be curious to see how widespread this "jarring" feeling is among US English speakers. --ChiveFungi (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

"They are" is a plural construct in standard English and it has not reached any level of acceptance for singular use that would be appropriate for an encyclopedia written for general English language users. When I first read it referring to a single person I immediately perceived a grammar mistake and it stopped the easy flow of reading that good written prose should facilitate. "They is" is generally considered correct only in non-standard dialects.

Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style says "The MoS presents Misplaced Pages's house style, to help editors write articles with consistent and precise language, layout, and formatting, making Misplaced Pages easier and more intuitive for users. Plain English works best. Avoid ambiguity, jargon, and vague or unnecessarily complex wording." and "If a style or similar debate becomes intractable, see if a rewrite can make the issue moot." My rewrite was to make the issue moot. I honors the wishes of the subject and still conforms to English as generally used by our target readers. I noticed that there was instability in the article with editors changing pronouns back and forth and figured a bit of a rewrite would work to avoid the issue completely and would make the article easier to read for most readers without dishonoring the subjects choices. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

This has been discussed before many times because the same complaint has come up from a few users with regard to other articles: there is no consensus to for any systematic removal of pronouns. If a few individual sentences are genuinely unclear, they can be reworded (see e.g. the article on Emma Sulkowicz for a model), but singular they itself is perfectly clear, widespread and of long standing (indeed, singular they is older than singular use of the originally-plural pronoun you). (It is indeed so widely used and understood that I've yet to meet anyone who objected to it who didn't also use it themselves when they weren't thinking about it. My fav is when someone complains that "anyone who brings this kind of language into their writing is ".) -sche (talk) 18:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

i skimmed.

i agree with sche that they/them/their may be appropriate for referring to an individual in some circumstances.

i agree with G Perez that their usage (see what i did there?) is confusing in some circumstances.

i think they/them/their are less likely to be mistaken for poor grammar if Butcher's preference is mentioned before it is applied elsewhere in the article. Maybe even a hatnote? like the one on the Fann Wong article that says, "No, we aren't calling Fann by her given name left and right--we're using her family name, like it says in Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Subsequent_use."

i think using them to mean one person is grammatically incorrect, but not necessarily incomprehensible, and may have connotations for the speaker/writer/situation. For comparison, consider phrases like "me and you" or "I don't never need no help!"

Sometimes what is grammatically correct or acceptable changes. i remember when, if the boss had a kid, they were the boss' kid, and English teachers would take points off your grade if you wrote "the boss's kid". i remember a time when the rule switched, and suddenly the boss's kid was right and writing "the boss' kid" cost you points. By the time i graduated, either was acceptable.

i like the "see if a rewrite can make the issue moot" strategy G Perez mentioned. sche, i think you think the article is easy to read and understand using the singular they/them/their, but do you think it's easier to understand than Perez's revised version? If both versions are equally easy for you to understand, i think you should allow the version that others (such as Perez and me) find easier to understand. The article can still mention Butcher's pronoun preferences, and use them where necessary, yet also permit editors (because anyone can edit) to seek and employ ways to make them unnecessary.

(little off-topic: "singular they is older than singular use of the originally-plural pronoun you"? Interesting! Citation needed please?)

--71.121.143.188 (talk) 07:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I think avoiding pronouns makes the article awkward and stilted, and is bad. As for the last bit: singular they is attested since the 1300s, e.g. in the 1325 Cursor Mundi, within a hundred years of when English first borrowed plural they from Old Norse (displacing the native Old English third-person plural hie, ironically because it had become too similar to the singular he) — and no-one thought to object to it until the 1790s (see the ] article for references for all those dates). By contrast, you only became common as a generic singular in place of thou in the 1600s, in a shift which was immediately controversial. (However, use of ye as an honorific singular in imitation of the French tu-vous distinction began a bit earlier.) Language evolution is neat! :) -sche (talk) 01:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Additionally, the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style states that "They/them pronouns are always acceptable in article space for subjects who have stated that they prefer them." --Intercostal (talk) 18:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Gender_identity#Best_practices

Requested move 23 November 2021

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: Moved: as the name change is related to their gender transition, WP:DEADNAME applies absent a compelling argument against doing so. Sceptre (talk) 09:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

RB Butcher → River Butcher – Butcher reported on 11/23/21 on Twitter that they have changed their first name to River. Title of page needs to be changed to reflect that. 2601:204:102:6140:2017:A142:30B:C91C (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:22, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose but would not object to relisting. We need evidence (related to WP:AT of course) on which to base the move. Andrewa (talk) 23:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support This tweet which is literally used as a source in the article, is all the evidence we need. https://twitter.com/rivbutcher/status/1463175060173295621 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c5:a212:3b00:6ca5:1bf6:a960:96a0 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 1 December 2021 (UCT) (UTC)

  Please read WP:UCRN and explain using the criteria there why this page should be moved. For example can you present any reliable secondary sources who name the subject in the way the primary source does? -- PBS (talk) 17:29, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose until there's good evidence that sources independent of the subject pick up using the new name. Dicklyon (talk) 17:58, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
• Support There's literally news articles about the fact that they changed their name.https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nonbinary-comic-river-butcher-changes-their-name-urges-followers-to-create-a-loving-space-for-trans-people-in-our-society-222616821.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAICVf9UAQXXvAkpu0eo-7Ef6P2Ujr9Qrsv1IAYlaQv1m3FGU2m9AWPiVcjbmFhYmk_-Bj0jVxFdS3d-pXzP2paVMbaaGliDxlO_135M5pYhoi8gwCce19gl1UM8XnGVuDx-lvgqir7Dvi3iqZTKSjGG8NQan1WW2TT0GKvl2XT9e — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:A212:3B00:6CA5:1BF6:A960:96A0 (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  • That is a primary source based on the same twitter post that you cited before.
  • Also please note that you can't !vote twice in the one RM. The closer will just ignore the second, but it is inconsiderate to expect them to do this. Andrewa (talk) 01:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Why do we need a secondary source in this particular instance? Acting as if our primary source of information,(River themself) is somehow not a reliable source on the subject of changing his own name is ridiculous, but instead of acknowledging this fact, we're all just waiting around, and twiddling our thumbs on this subject, hoping that he'll be featured in an article unrelated to their name-change that references said name change, even though that's going to take a lot longer than you seem to think, this just seems like an attempt to delay the inevitable, which would be to just acknowledge that he's changed his name and following this changing the title to match this information, it seems to me that waiting to do such a thing is a humongous waste of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:A212:3B00:6CA5:1BF6:A960:96A0 (talk) 01:33, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Primary sources are in a sense intrinsically reliable. That is not the issue here. Our article name polices are designed to get the reader to the information they want. There are good reasons for preferring secondary sources.

But you make a good point about delaying the inevitable. That is why we have WP:NAMECHANGES and WP:ignore all rules. See also wp:the snowball clause and wp:correct. I can't close this as I am involved, but were I to do so I would take arguments based on those pages into account, particularly the policy but the other pages are based on policy. On the other hand, I would be required to discard any !votes and discussion that showed no understanding of the matter of issue. Andrewa (talk) 16:46, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is an encyclopaedia not a news site or a blog and so Misplaced Pages is not the place to be first to publish new information. Misplaced Pages is not a leader its a follower of usage in reliable secondary sources. See also "Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball" when reliable secondary sources start to use the new name then the article can be moved. -- PBS (talk) 19:22, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Agree. Well put. And I would add, it should not be moved before then. You imply this but I think it is best to be explicit. Andrewa (talk) 09:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Here’s an article from the LA Times, where he is mentioned and it’s unrelated to River’s coming out. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2021-12-06/dave-chappelle-netflix-is-a-joke-comedy-festival — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:A212:3B00:184E:639E:9913:C1D1 (talk) 04:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Birth name

I have reverted this edit. There seems no reason to remove this information. Andrewa (talk) 23:18, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class biography articles
• Start-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
• Low-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
• Arts and entertainment work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Start-Class Comedy articles
• Low-importance Comedy articles
• WikiProject Comedy articles
• Start-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
• Start-Class WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
• WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
• WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
• Start-Class WikiProject Women articles
• All WikiProject Women-related pages
• WikiProject Women articles