| Revision as of 04:55, 10 June 2020 editTalyaNe (talk | contribs)431 edits →Similar controversies← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:12, 10 June 2020 edit undoBastun (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers26,421 edits →Similar controversies: rNext edit → | ||
| Line 140: | Line 140: | ||
| :::: Clearly current events have overtaken things here, hence my strike through. From a Misplaced Pages perspective, Rowling's latest comments, and the subsequent coverage they have generated, should prove helpful to editors. I would suggest that editors refrain from throwing aspersions at other Wiki editors, as has been done on this talk page. My aim, as I would hope is the aim of most editing here, is to edit Misplaced Pages and particularly BLP's fairly, keeping balance and context in mind, and attempting to avoid personal bias/agendas. Passing judgement on others supposed motivations is neither helpful, in the spirit of collaboration or general politeness. ] (]) 20:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC) | :::: Clearly current events have overtaken things here, hence my strike through. From a Misplaced Pages perspective, Rowling's latest comments, and the subsequent coverage they have generated, should prove helpful to editors. I would suggest that editors refrain from throwing aspersions at other Wiki editors, as has been done on this talk page. My aim, as I would hope is the aim of most editing here, is to edit Misplaced Pages and particularly BLP's fairly, keeping balance and context in mind, and attempting to avoid personal bias/agendas. Passing judgement on others supposed motivations is neither helpful, in the spirit of collaboration or general politeness. ] (]) 20:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :::::I stand by my comment. Your contributions speak for themselves and appear to be aimed at minimising, specifically, coverage of negative opinions of transgender issues. That is contrary to Misplaced Pages's policy of ]. You could of course prove me wrong by supporting the inclusion of coverage "the subsequent coverage they have generated", which you say above that you support. ]<sup>]</sup> 20:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Twitter is far from reliable unless it comes from proven sources making use of Twitter like for example a journalist. When your information comes from multiple tweeters its incorrect. Hate to see[REDACTED] fall to tabloid standards over unproven allegations and virtue signaling. Hpdh4 11:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Twitter is far from reliable unless it comes from proven sources making use of Twitter like for example a journalist. When your information comes from multiple tweeters its incorrect. Hate to see[REDACTED] fall to tabloid standards over unproven allegations and virtue signaling. Hpdh4 11:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| Line 152: | Line 154: | ||
| ::::::Because: and <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 04:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | ::::::Because: and <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 04:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::That explains quite well why we shouldn't include stuff like ]'s brilliant reply, and also why we probably shouldn't include Rowling's reply (to your notice). But not why we shouldn't have The Trevor Project. I mean, GLAAD's response is quite clearly not news, and therefore is included. Same for the Trevor Project. ] (]) 04:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | :::::::That explains quite well why we shouldn't include stuff like ]'s brilliant reply, and also why we probably shouldn't include Rowling's reply (to your notice). But not why we shouldn't have The Trevor Project. I mean, GLAAD's response is quite clearly not news, and therefore is included. Same for the Trevor Project. ] (]) 04:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::That explains nothing. :-) No valid reason for excluding Radcliffe's response on behalf of the Trevor Project has been presented. Given the inextricable links between Radcliffe and Rowling, excluding any mention of his response - especially given - would actually seem perverse. ]<sup>]</sup> 20:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:12, 10 June 2020
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the J. K. Rowling article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 |
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | J. K. Rowling is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| [REDACTED] | This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 11, 2008. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | 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.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
![[REDACTED]](https://u3vuiephb.global.ssl.fastly.net/File:Misplaced Pages-logo-v2.svg){kind=link}
 | A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on July 31, 2017. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mgs1234 (article contribs).
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2019
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
in the Childhood part, can you change it from 23 months to 1 year and 11 months 185.39.202.226 (talk) 08:13, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Not done - it's common practice to list anything less than two years as combined months. Changing to years and months breaks the flow of the sentence and adds unnecessary complexity. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2019
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Charlton Athletic fan. 213.106.89.77 (talk) 11:49, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:01, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2019
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please can you change the key image to this image? I have permission to use the attached image, the credit should be: Photography Debra Hurford Brown © J.K. Rowling 2018
Tbp2018 (talk) 10:48, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Not done: That photo does not exist. NiciVampireHeart 12:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- More to the point the photo has not been uploaded with the correct permissions. I suspect you were trying to link to an offline image, or one that is somewhere on the web - but not hosted either by Misplaced Pages or on Commons.
- I suggest you upload the image first, apply the necessary permissions for what seems to be an image with specific copyright details, and then try again. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- Is this the one? Esowteric+Talk 13:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- If it is, I'd be willing to bet that the licensing info is incorrect and needs changing/correcting before it can be considered. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- Is this the one? Esowteric+Talk 13:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
WorldCat data in error for Pegasus article?
The data for an article mentioned in the section on Rowling's education is wrong. It says the year of Rowling's article "What was the Name of that Nymph Again?" from Pegasus, the journal of the University of Exeter's Classics department is 1988. However, I found a PDF of that article which clearly dates it as 1998. Not to mention that Rowling mentions Professor Binns in the article; the Potterverse wasn't even a gleam in her eye in 1988.
I think whoever wrote the citation got the date from WorldCat. 1988 is written in the Publisher field, but I don't know that necessarily means the article should be dated 1988.
A Princeton library has the correct date for it online. I suppose I could just change the citation to the Princeton library instead of WorldCat, but I find that untidy.
Should I try to change the WorldCat data? It seems like you have to be affiliated with some library in order to request changes. Quickfoot (talk) 01:05, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Education section
The Education section notes J.K. Rowling's "What was the Name of that Nymph Again? or Greek and Roman Studies Recalled" as being published in 1988, but it appears to have been published in 1998 as found within the Journal of the University of Exeter Department of Classics And Ancient History on a University website at: https://blogs.exeter.ac.uk/pegasus/files/2013/06/41-1998.pdf
AndrewHeagle (talk) 11:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)Andrew Heagle
References
Why add the the maya forsater situation and TERF accusations with biased sources
| This is clearly a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, WP:OTHERSTUFF and also WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Reasoning has been explained several times with no change to the OP's attitude. This will clearly go nowhere. |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Is it because[REDACTED] editors are now toxics SJWs . I mean, brie larson gets a free pass with her man hating views on[REDACTED] but Jk Rowling is accused without proof . People cant add man hating to brie Larson article because[REDACTED] isnt a gossip rag but TERF can be added to Jk Rowling ? With one tweet and biased sources ? Talk about hypocrisy. This should apply to brie as well- if you add Terf to JKR you should be able to add Man hating to Brie . Gossip rag argument is moot point if your willing to vilify one person on the bases of poor gossip sources but not the other. People can't make edits to articles of other celebs like brie Larson because of poor sources and[REDACTED] not being a gossip rag YET here we are with gossip sources for Jk Rowling. Even if people change the maya situation, it will be reverted by some SJW editor . Don't get me started on Johnny Depp being abused by amber heard and online tapes being released - someone on wiki said these tapes were doctored. Anything to believe woman as if woman cant do harm. Their are woman criminals. Hypocrisy 101 is showing and it must end . Social justice doesn't equal to equality but reverse revenge . Hpdh4 12:11, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
|
Similar controversies
I recently edited this article to remove the line Similar controversies have arisen with regards to her liking tweets which some considered to be transphobic
. This line was initially supported by a PinkNews source, which I removed per WP:RSP, and by articles from Vox and LGBTQ Nation, both of which can be considered reliable sources. However, neither article would appear to effectively support that sentence. The Vox source was in fact previously used to support this sentence Media outlets stated that Rowling had expressed controversial views on transgender issues prior to this incident, with some describing her as transphobic
which I removed in this edit as it appeared to be a generalisation, not supported as per WP:3REFS. Retrospectively, this source does not adequately support the remaining sentence, as it principally covers the Forstater case, with the rest of the article being social media speculation, making it WP:UNDUE as a source for the sentence. The LGBTQ Nation source relies entirely on speculation regarding social media. I do not believe that there is enough reliable coverage to support the sentence, per WP:3REFS and that to include it based on the sources given would be WP:UNDUE for a WP:BLP. I would therefore propose to revert to the edit here . AutumnKing (talk) 19:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for discussing. It won't be hard to find additional Rowling's opinions on transgender issues, and I'll happily add them over the next couple of days. Minimising coverage of negative opinions of transgender issues and activism seems to be a particular interest of yours, but coverage of such opinions does seem to be on the increase. Note that social media such as Twitter can be used as a reliable source. Bastun 22:18, 6 June 2020 (UTC) --- Huh. Timely tweets tonight. She and Gl*nner seem to do this a lot! Bastun 22:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Bastun: References to news coverage of the tweets and subsequent commentary will be better than linking to WP:PRIMARY tweets and snippets. Should wait before expanding on the recent controversy, though the previous Forstater controversy needs some better expansion itself. Gotitbro (talk) 04:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oh, absolutely. Bastun 08:31, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- Clearly current events have overtaken things here, hence my strike through. From a Misplaced Pages perspective, Rowling's latest comments, and the subsequent coverage they have generated, should prove helpful to editors. I would suggest that editors refrain from throwing aspersions at other Wiki editors, as has been done on this talk page. My aim, as I would hope is the aim of most editing here, is to edit Misplaced Pages and particularly BLP's fairly, keeping balance and context in mind, and attempting to avoid personal bias/agendas. Passing judgement on others supposed motivations is neither helpful, in the spirit of collaboration or general politeness. AutumnKing (talk) 20:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- I stand by my comment. Your contributions speak for themselves and appear to be aimed at minimising, specifically, coverage of negative opinions of transgender issues. That is contrary to Misplaced Pages's policy of neutrality. You could of course prove me wrong by supporting the inclusion of coverage "the subsequent coverage they have generated", which you say above that you support. Bastun 20:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Twitter is far from reliable unless it comes from proven sources making use of Twitter like for example a journalist. When your information comes from multiple tweeters its incorrect. Hate to see[REDACTED] fall to tabloid standards over unproven allegations and virtue signaling. Hpdh4 11:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HPDEATHLYHALLOWS4 (talk • contribs)
Per WP:NOTEVERYTHING, especially WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTSOAPBOX, and keeping in mind the reasoning at WP:RECENTISM, we should not include every single flash-in-the-pan piece of commentary. As of right now, regarding her June tweets, we have what the tweets were about, their criticism, and, for WP:NPOV, the WP:BLP subject's response, all covered by WP:Secondary sources. This is more than enough coverage of this extremely recent incident. Crossroads 20:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed, we should not include every flash in the pan response. I added some criticism of Rowling's most recent anti-trans tweets yesterday, made by several notable people not directly associated with her, which were subsequently removed, and on balance, that's probably the correct decision. Keeping in mind WP:NOTPAPER, WP:BALANCE, WP:TENYEARRULE, however, the criticism of her tweets by Daniel Radcliffe which was reported today most certainly is proper to include. Bastun 23:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- Why? Because he's Harry Potter? What about Evanna Lynch's response? Should we include it too? Serendious 23:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- No, because he's responding via the Trevor Project after years of collaboration with them, making it pretty much their official comment, even if his name is on the open letter. Why is GLAAD okay but The Trevor Project not? YuvalNehemia (talk) 04:32, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- We don't need two advocacy groups' detailed comments. Remember, this is a flash in the pan source-wise. It should be kept brief. Crossroads 04:41, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- So why does her reply belong here? Just state the outline of the controversy and link to Politics of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights. Why is her reply significant enough for the main article, but The Trevor Project's is not? Especially if the latter got more media attention? YuvalNehemia (talk) 04:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Because: and Crossroads 04:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- That explains quite well why we shouldn't include stuff like Mara Wilson's brilliant reply, and also why we probably shouldn't include Rowling's reply (to your notice). But not why we shouldn't have The Trevor Project. I mean, GLAAD's response is quite clearly not news, and therefore is included. Same for the Trevor Project. YuvalNehemia (talk) 04:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Because: and Crossroads 04:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- So why does her reply belong here? Just state the outline of the controversy and link to Politics of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights. Why is her reply significant enough for the main article, but The Trevor Project's is not? Especially if the latter got more media attention? YuvalNehemia (talk) 04:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- We don't need two advocacy groups' detailed comments. Remember, this is a flash in the pan source-wise. It should be kept brief. Crossroads 04:41, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- No, because he's responding via the Trevor Project after years of collaboration with them, making it pretty much their official comment, even if his name is on the open letter. Why is GLAAD okay but The Trevor Project not? YuvalNehemia (talk) 04:32, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Why? Because he's Harry Potter? What about Evanna Lynch's response? Should we include it too? Serendious 23:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- That explains nothing. :-) No valid reason for excluding Radcliffe's response on behalf of the Trevor Project has been presented. Given the inextricable links between Radcliffe and Rowling, excluding any mention of his response - especially given the coverage it has received - would actually seem perverse. Bastun 20:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages articles that use British English
- Misplaced Pages featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- FA-Class biography articles
- FA-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Mid-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- FA-Class Bristol articles
- Mid-importance Bristol articles
- WikiProject Bristol articles
- FA-Class children and young adult literature articles
- Top-importance children and young adult literature articles
- FA-Class Women writers articles
- High-importance Women writers articles
- WikiProject Women articles
- WikiProject Women writers articles
- FA-Class WikiProject Women articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- FA-Class novel articles
- High-importance novel articles
- FA-Class Fantasy fiction articles
- High-importance Fantasy fiction articles
- FA-Class Harry Potter articles
- Top-importance Harry Potter articles
- Harry Potter task force articles
- WikiProject Novels articles
- FA-Class Literature articles
- Mid-importance Literature articles
- Selected anniversaries (July 2017)
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press