M.j.f.inkbo
Welcome!
edit
|
Please open a discussion on the Pauli Murray talk page
editWhile you raise some valid points, these are the type of changes that need consensus. Please open a discussion on the Talk:Pauli Murray page. Perhaps a similar solution might be arrived at like that of James Barry (surgeon). Peaceray (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, I will certainly look into that other talk page. However your immediate reverting is disheartening to me as an advocate of LGBTQ+ recognition on even the small level. I have looked at the other article you linked and it seems quite a different situation from that of Murray (who actively sought hormone treatment, used language also used by other transgender historical figures like “inverted” and refusing to regard themself as homosexual for liking women.) I can see the slight similarity but I can’t help but wonder from the reference used (one where pronouns are avoided entirely) that an ideology of biological pronouns is being used here, which makes me concerned as that goes against the general academic and sociological consensus on gendered or neutral pronouns. They/them pronouns are used to refer to many people and do not assert an identity in the way assigning he/him or sticking to she/her would. I can’t help but feel that the validity of my points is not fully understood. I do understand the need for consensus though.M.j.f.inkbo (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- My apologies for feeling the necessity to revert your very first edit. Although "Be bold" is one of Wikipedia's editing guidelines, our 4th pillar mandates consensus, & implicit consensus through editing is part of that policy. Given that this article has already gone through a rigorous good article review process & that the pronouns have been 3rd person feminine for over 15 years, would you not agree that a substantial pronoun change deserves discussion & consensus?
- Regarding the James Barry article, this was a case in which the gender identification has never fully known. Barry lived as a man & sought to only be known as a man to the grave. Yet there is some implication that Barry may have had heterosexual relationships with men, never had a relationship with a woman, & may have only assumed the role of a man to practice medicine. I believe Barry wanted to carry that secret to the grave to protect the military comrades who knew but supported Barry nonetheless. I suggested looking at the article, which uses Barry's surname rather than pronouns as per consensus, because it is a tool in the chest. It may not be the proper tool for this instance, but I think that we need to look for examples elsewhere when a subject had not explicitly expressed a preference for a pronoun. I believe that we need to be cautious with inference. Peaceray (talk) 00:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
My apologies that the edit seemed to come off as assertive to you. My intention in using they/them was to be neutral, as it is a neutral pronoun which doesn’t deny a masculine or feminine identity, neither does it assert one. If my intention had been to project a narrative, I may have used he/him as some more impassioned and inferring people have in writings and podcasts. I understand that people are accustomed to using societally assigned pronouns for basically everyone. I think it is equally inferring for people to assert that Murray “came to terms with womanhood” as it is to infer that they would have liked to be a transgender man. We are talking about someone in a life situation with no options to express the matter and nonetheless they as I said showed indications of differing self identification from the way gay women identified. I agree that one must be careful with inference but I think this bias goes in both directions, and the reverted edits did not only include pronouns but also things like “many regard Murray as an LGBTQ+ icon” which does not assert a particular narrative but is rather broad and also difficult to deny reasonably. happy holidays. M.j.f.inkbo (talk) 03:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
December 2020
edit
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Pauli Murray, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. As per Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, please open a discussion on the talk page to come to consensus on exactly how to do this. Peaceray (talk) 23:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- In what way was it not constructive or did it go against the guidelines? (which by the way, state that editing can be begun without knowing the entirety of...) Thank you, M.j.f.inkbo (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- I reverted you, & asked you to open a discussion on the talk page. You ignored that & went back to changing the pronouns. The BOLD, revert, discuss cycle explanatory supplement indicates that this is against the consensus policy. Please note that skipping the discuss step in the BOLD-revert-discuss process can also be edit warring, which is also against policy. I used a warning that employs the {{uw-disruptive1}} template, rather than than a more serious template like {{uw-ew}}. Peaceray (talk) 00:51, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
This is not true - I was editing the pronouns before I saw any reverting happening! I went to the talk page after I saw your suggestion but it took me a minute to figure out where was the best area for it. I have not re-edited the pronouns back after your reverting them. That is simply false. I didn’t receive any notifications until after I had finished editing pronouns. How have I violated terms that were laid out? (and again, what I had looked at said that I didn’t need to read the entirety of every wikipedia guideline before beginning editing, or I wouldn’t have tried to edit! I simply thought people in this community were unaware of the issue, and was trying to be helpful. M.j.f.inkbo (talk) 03:09, 25 December 2020 (UTC)