This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) 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.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2023, when it received 11,041,143 views.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report8 times. The weeks in which this happened:
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 sourcedmust 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.
Margot Robbie is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Latest comment: 2 months ago15 comments5 people in discussion
Hello. News about Margot Robbie being pregnant was released in early July (via People Magazine). However, Wikipedia editors have reverted any edits adding info about this in the article since Robbie hasn't seemingly confirmed her pregnancy herself. This is understandable. However, in an interview, Robbie's Barbie costar Ariana Greenblatt confirmed that Robbie is pregnant. (See the article here: https://people.com/barbie-s-ariana-greenblatt-says-her-mom-guessed-margot-robbie-s-pregnancy-before-the-news-broke-8693523.) I believe this is verification enough for Robbie's pregnancy news to be included in the article. Let me know what you think so we can reach a consensus. Thanks, CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 01:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources says "the magazine should not be used for contentious claims unless supplemented with a stronger source.". That article is written in a particularly tabloid style that instantly triggered my scepticism. Content such as "her mom, Soli, had a dream about Robbie's pregnancy" is a serious trigger. There MUST be a better source somewhere. HiLo48 (talk) 01:54, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
That second, probably independent source is good, but the word "adorably" doesn't belong in quality journalism either. I recommend citing both sources. HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
At this time, sources' framing of the supposed pregnancy does not merit a neutral claim here about Robbie being pregnant. Yes, Robbie is probably pregnant. So what? Every source has attributed their reporting to anonymous sources, published that it has been reported elsewhere that Robbie is pregnant, or included a quote from somebody famous suggesting Robbie is pregnant. None has neutrally said so. The only appropriate way to write about any pregnancy is "Robbie is reportedly pregnant" or "actors Ariana Greenblatt and Alexandra Daddario have suggested that Robbie is pregnant". Which of these meets WP:BLPGOSSIP and WP:NOTNEWS? KyleJoantalk04:21, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Tell that to her and the sources that have only suggested she is pregnant (and would not neutrally state as much). As an observer, I'm convinced she's pregnant. As a user, "I'm convinced she's pregnant" fails BLPGOSSIP and NOTNEWS. KyleJoantalk04:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
It's obviously clear that she's pregnant, and it's ridiculous to fight over sourcing when WP:COMMONSENSE should triumph. Having said that, simply being pregnant does not warrant a mention in her bio. Let her deliver her child, which should then be mentioned. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion isn't about whether she's pregnant, though. It's about whether we should include a neutral claim stating it. It sounds like you're saying pregnancies aren't appropriate to include regardless of sourcing. This point contradicts the COMMONSENSE reference because that essay suggests that we could ignore the policies referenced and include a claim, so which is it–should a claim be included as per COMMONSENSE or excluded based on something else? KyleJoantalk09:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Not a binary argument. Pregnancies by themselves aren't notable for inclusion. Also, the COMMONSENSE argument doesn't ask us to disregard policies. What I'm trying to say is that, if the pregnancy claim needs to be included then the current sourcing is fine, because it's obvious that she's pregnant, per COMMONSENSE. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 09:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
COMMONSENSE is about making helpful edits despite what the "rules" are. Unless the essay is used to support how it's helpful to include or exclude a claim about Robbie being pregnant, it sounds more like COMMONSENSE would be the argument in some other dispute to include some other claim. KyleJoantalk10:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=logo}
