Chelsea Manning name row: Wikipedia editors banned from trans pages - Polidicks

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;42669972]ffs we've been over this The articles are titles as such because they are their better known names. Chelsea mannning is better known as Bradley Manning.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Venezuelan;42669336] The only argument you can counter that precedent with is that most people identify her as Bradley still, whereas most other cases their adopted names are the more well-known cases I've found that would counter this: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwayne_Johnson[/url] despite everyone calling him "The Rock" still [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Rotten[/url] Johnny Rotten [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Combs[/url] Diddy[/QUOTE] And now since someone mentioned it The Wachowskis

[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42669946]Or it could just be that some of us want some accuracy. I can also see why people use quotation marks; given that there has been no legal name change it does make it pretty uncertain.[/QUOTE] stop dancing around it, its not that confusing. you act like seeing a pseudonym makes you go "UHHHH IM SO CONFUSED AND ALL OF THIS IS WRONGGG". its not a big deal and can just have (born as bradley manning)

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42669984]And now since someone mentioned it The Wachowskis[/QUOTE] wrong wachowskis is a legal name change, Chelsea is not i refer you to my prince vs teller example

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42669955]no offense nigerianprince but given your history with these issues it's hard to believe you have no ulterior motive I'd love to be proven wrong[/QUOTE] nigerian isn't the only one who thinks this. I agree, until a legal name change happens, it should start with Bradley Edward Manning, at the very least for consistency and professionalism. This has nothing to do with insensitivity.

oh look i even found a article on a female to male person that legally changed their name/gender [img]https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-AiRRzB2p33M/Um3RT0_BjHI/AAAAAAAADNI/0t5-PpKopKA/s0/2013-10-27_19-51-59.png[/img] " In May 2010, he [B]legally [/B]changed his gender and name."

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;42670003]wrong wachowskis is a legal name change, Chelsea is not i refer you to my prince vs teller example[/QUOTE] was it the article doesn't make that clear in the entire body let alone the first sentence (which is nigerian's main issue)

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42670072]was it the article doesn't make that clear in the entire body let alone the first sentence (which is nigerian's main issue)[/QUOTE] there's no source in the wikipedia article, but i did some digging and that's her legal name ditto with chaz's gender/name, so the front of the article uses chaz not chastity

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42670072]was it the article doesn't make that clear in the entire body let alone the first sentence (which is nigerian's main issue)[/QUOTE] It shouldn't have to be made clear anywhere, because they should be keeping with precedent and starting the article with the legal name.

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42669955]no offense nigerianprince but given your history with these issues it's hard to believe you have no ulterior motive I'd love to be proven wrong[/QUOTE] A history with transgender people's name changes on wikipedia? Not really. I really tire of people who accuse me of having one of the following because they cannot refute what I say: -an 'ulterior motive' -an 'agenda' All I've been saying is that wikipedia and the internet in general should be made as accurate as possible; if that means including all of someone's aliases while recognizing the official, legal name then so be it.

[QUOTE=TestECull;42660743]I would have said "Ok, all of you stop bitching..."[/QUOTE] talk about kicking e-ass

[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;42670144]It shouldn't have to be made clear anywhere, because they should be keeping with precedent and starting the article with the legal name.[/QUOTE] we've proven before that that is not in fact precedent [editline]28th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=nigerianprince;42670157]A history with transgender people's name changes on wikipedia? Not really. I really tire of people who accuse me of having one of the following because they cannot refute what I say: -an 'ulterior motive' -an 'agenda' All I've been saying is that wikipedia and the internet in general should be made as accurate as possible; if that means including all of someone's aliases while recognizing the official, legal name then so be it.[/QUOTE] That's an entirely subjective idea of "accuracy"

Did I miss an article that didn't start with the legal name of the person it is about posted here?

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42670191]That's an entirely subjective idea of "accuracy"[/QUOTE] Given that your legal name is an important item of personal information without which you cannot get a passport, bank account, telephone number I'd say its objective that your name should be accurate.

[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;42670224]Did I miss an article that didn't start with the legal name of the person it is about posted here?[/QUOTE] yup [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Mencia[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_mercury[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Dee_Ramone[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richie_Ramone[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marky_Ramone[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Ramone[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_vicious[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringo_Starr[/url]

[QUOTE]The committee’s statements were sparked by a heated argument between editors on the site over whether the article for Chelsea Manning, the Wikileaks source, should exist under her preferred name or under “Bradley Manning”, the name she was using before she came out as transgender in August 2013.[/QUOTE] These dolts really argue over shit like this? Just do what every other Wikipedia page does; use their current name for the title and then put 'Born ...' in the right hand column. It's not hard at all. Ever seen a Wikipedia page for music artists and the like?

[QUOTE=Ninja Duck;42670265]These dolts really argue over shit like this? Just do what every other Wikipedia page does; use their current name for the title and then put 'Born ...' in the right hand column. It's not hard at all. Ever seen a Wikipedia page for music artists and the like?[/QUOTE] I'd imagine a lot of wikipedia's policies came about from huge arguments like these.

[QUOTE=Primigenes;42670357]Why not just title her page as "Chelsea Manning" and have Bradley Manning redirect to that? Like Wikipedia's been doing that for awhile now so I don't get the problem.[/QUOTE] because trans, and apparently legal names are a must all of a sudden.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;42669949]i'm not misgendering her, nor am i saying "ew trannies are icky"[/QUOTE] Nah you've been fine. That's why I said nearly. [QUOTE=nigerianprince;42669946]Or it could just be that some of us want some accuracy. I can also see why people use quotation marks; given that there has been no legal name change it does make it pretty uncertain.[/QUOTE] Dude you can't even defend the quotation marks around "her" using her damn name as a basis for acting like she's not really female. And as far as accuracy goes, use Bradley manning born xxxx(known as Chelsea manning) it's rly not hard.

[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42670252]Given that your legal name is an important item of personal information without which you cannot get a passport, bank account, telephone number I'd say its objective that your name should be accurate.[/QUOTE] all either personal or bureaucratic uninteresting things, nothing the wide Wikipedia audience needs or wants to know

[QUOTE=Paige;42670367]Dude you can't even defend the quotation marks around "her" using her damn name as a basis for acting like she's not really female. And as far as accuracy goes, use Bradley manning born xxxx(known as Chelsea manning) it's rly not hard.[/QUOTE] First off, I don't think I ever referred to her as "her". Secondly, it doesn't really have to do with her 'acting female' or not; its because she never legally changed her identity to match her gender. I don't know how you expect that there is some onus on the rest of society to recognize a name that hasn't been legally changed, but there isn't.

[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42670396] I don't know how you expect that there is some onus on the rest of society to recognize a name that hasn't been legally changed, but there isn't.[/QUOTE] and I don't know why you keep reducing names to their legal definition it defies the very principles of language what we call things is an unwritten social contract You can call her Bradley if you want but (assuring everything goes how it should) you'll be merely one of few and you'll just be stubbornly making communication difficult

i think the big problem is that honestly, wikipedia as a whole has no fucking idea what to do because honestly, mainstream media isn't fucking sure what to do, and wikipedia is supposed to follow, not make trends i have no idea how this'll turn out, but as of right now there's no simple solution [editline]27th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Paige;42670367]Nah you've been fine. That's why I said nearly. Dude you can't even defend the quotation marks around "her" using her damn name as a basis for acting like she's not really female. [B]And as far as accuracy goes, use Bradley manning born xxxx(known as Chelsea manning) it's rly not hard.[/B][/QUOTE] ok good we agree hugs and such all around???

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42670416]and I don't know why you keep reducing names to their legal definition it defies the very principles of language what we call things is an unwritten social contract You can call her Bradley if you want but (assuring everything goes how it should) you'll be merely one of few and you'll just be stubbornly making communication difficult[/QUOTE] Let me guess, somehow Chelsea Manning isn't being stubborn by not getting a legal name change?

[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42670462]Let me guess, somehow Chelsea Manning isn't being stubborn by not getting a legal name change?[/QUOTE] Chelsea Manning's kinda sorta on trial and unable to which I know you know

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42670471]Chelsea Manning's kinda sorta on trial and unable to which I know you know[/QUOTE] Chelsea Manning has been convicted and is serving a sentence of 35 years. Again, there may be complications with changing her name while in prison, but that isn't immediately clear from the research I have done.

Stop calling him Chelsea Manning over and over again. You're forcing it and its stupid.

calling her the name she wants is "forcing it" all right then

It reminds me of when a kid at school would only allow you to address him by a nickname he made up, despite everyone already knowing him perfectly well by his regular name.

I think what we've all learned about wikipedia from this thread is that it's an inconsistent clusterfuck, and none of this really even matters. There's examples of birth names before, and after their assumed names. You can make a big deal about it if you want, or you can accept wikipedia's editing policy is not as strictly enforced as they'd have you believe (and the only reason this event required so much deliberation is because it is politicized).

[QUOTE=RosettaStoned;42670567]It reminds me of when a kid at school would only allow you to address him by a nickname he made up, despite everyone already knowing him perfectly well by his regular name.[/QUOTE] Depends on how easy the nickname is to say really, heck if I were to call you a nickname based on your username, it'd be rose since yours is too long, imo. Heck, I get called "dead" half the time in TS and such.