283
edits
No edit summary |
(→Bump) |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 356: | Line 356: | ||
It's been over two months now, you guys. We should really maybe think about getting a final ruling. If the conversation is going to go on longer, I ''still'' say we should remove the deadname ''in the meantime'' if nothing else. [[User:WaltK|WaltK]] [[User talk:WaltK|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC) | It's been over two months now, you guys. We should really maybe think about getting a final ruling. If the conversation is going to go on longer, I ''still'' say we should remove the deadname ''in the meantime'' if nothing else. [[User:WaltK|WaltK]] [[User talk:WaltK|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC) | ||
: I think we've had enough for a conclusion here, but I was sort of hoping [[User:SOTO]], resident trans admin, could field this one, and they've been very busy IRL. (For the curious: I do, as stated on my user page, use they/them pronouns interchangeably with he/him, but I'm really nowhere near trans "enough" to count as an involved party here, if only because I don't actually have a deadname myself.) Am happy to close it under advisement from trans friends and such if the community wills it, though. This ''has'' gone on too long. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 20:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Just bumping again now the fork has occurred to get an official ruling on this [[User:Hasrock36|Hasrock36]] [[User talk:Hasrock36|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
::: +1 on we need an official ruling. I didn't toss my two cents in during the bulk of the discussion as I was still largely a lurker, but since I've started engaging with editing a little more, I'd like to add my piece. Removal of the deadname in its entirety on moral grounds would almost certainly be a big NPOV violation. That said, that would still be the route I'd be most in favour of. Otherwise, documentation of the facts, couched in content warnings, BTS explanations, and {{tlx|hidden text}} would be my next preferred option. In a different, more perfect world, the article as it stands would be probably basically fine, but we live in a world filled with rampant, rising transphobia, a media machine fanning the flames, and governments actively legislating against trans people's existence. We should, as a community, actively stand against this in our policy and direction of coverage, in my opinion. We do, insofar as RW coverage is concerned ([[T:ACTOR]]); We should reflect that attitude across our whole coverage. - [[User:CodeAndGin|<span style="color:green" title="CodeAndGin">CodeAndGin</span>]] | [[User_talk:CodeAndGin|<span title="Talk to me">🗨</span>]] | 15:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::I would also like to say that this I do think needs closing I have made my statements and I still stand by them I do think that this is very important and that Moral and Policy perspectives should both be taken into account whilst I lean slightly more towards the Moral points I still think policy a NPOV should be taken into consideration even if in the end they are disregarded--[[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
edits