SandyGeorgia (talk | contribs) Tag: Reply |
No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 302: | Line 302: | ||
:That's quite incorrect, Decodingw. The criticism is widespread in the highest quality sources, and it is uniformly spread in time; much of it predates anything Rowling said about trans people. I encourage you to read the cited sources. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde]] ([[User Talk:Vanamonde93|Talk]])</span> 22:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC) |
:That's quite incorrect, Decodingw. The criticism is widespread in the highest quality sources, and it is uniformly spread in time; much of it predates anything Rowling said about trans people. I encourage you to read the cited sources. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde]] ([[User Talk:Vanamonde93|Talk]])</span> 22:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
::Agree with Vanamonde, who is solidly familiar with the entire body of sources. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 22:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC) |
::Agree with Vanamonde, who is solidly familiar with the entire body of sources. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 22:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
My point is that although critics have been pointed out, they are not "many" as the article says. There could be many NOW, but at the time of the releases, they were very few talked about. [[User:Decodingw|Decodingw]] ([[User talk:Decodingw|talk]]) 22:50, 16 January 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:50, 16 January 2023
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 Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 11, 2008, and on June 26, 2022. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Template:Vital article
|
Other talk page banners | |
Addition to philanthropy section
I propose adding the following, citing three WP:RSP reliable perennial sources (The Telegraph, the Guardian, and PinkNews):
In late 2022, Rowling launched Beira's Place, a sexual assault crisis centre in Edinburgh meant to serve exclusively cisgender women. The centre has described itself as a "single-sex service", and has said that it plans to refer any "individuals identifying as trans women to other appropriate services in the area".[1][2][3] Snokalok (talk) 02:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Tagging @SandyGeorgia into the discussion Snokalok (talk) 02:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies for intruding on this conversation, but I would also like to note that this information has been discussed in a BBC article as well. Aoba47 (talk) 02:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the additional (BBC) source,[4] Aoba47; that gives us several mainstream usable sources for due weight. The structure of the Philanthropy section is a paragraph each on:
- Women, children and young people at risk
- Ukraine (also children at risk)
- Medical causes
- Proceeds from specific publications to support causes
- Army Benevolent fund following on the revelation that Galbraith was Rowling.
- Because Beira's Place deals with rape/sexual violence, it crosses the topics of paragraphs 1 and 3 (women at risk along with medical), so it is unclear to me where the content would best fit, and whether the paragraph structure should be adjusted. (One example-- not sure if it's the best one-- would be to move Ukraine from the second to third para, leaving women first, medical second; then combine Beira's place with Ukraine in a paragraph that covers these other women/children at risk medical causes.) I don't see a stand-alone paragraph about a lesser charitable donation than covered in the two main paragraphs. Besides figuring out how to incorporate this into the existing or a new paragraph structure, the POV presentation and over-quoting in the proposed text needs to be hammered out. I picture one or two sentences at most, and don't think the proposed sentence above is quite there yet. I suggest working in the format we developed during the FAR will be helpful to hammer out a consensus. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'll look it over now and reply when I have thoughts, though I do think that given Rowling's stance on trans rights and involvement in activism against such, and that every article above either heavily implies or directly states a connection to a row over rape crisis centers in Edinburgh serving and being run by trans women, the fact that Beira's Place was founded specifically such that it would only serve cis women is a very notable point that should be addressed in some capacity. Snokalok (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- The current proposal addresses only that POV, and leaves out considerable other important information. It would probably be easier to craft neutral text for this article, which relies on Summary style (and where we made serious cuts to Philanthropy to keep the WP:SIZE reasonable), if Beira's Place is written first. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Right, I read over the link, and while I do believe the article should still mention the actors criticizing her views as well, that's for another thread and I get the style we're working with now.
- Anyway, what would be your suggested wording? Hammering something out is a lot easier with multiple proposals. Snokalok (talk) 03:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- I am still struggling with structure (where the content fits); there's a twist in that BBC says it is not a charity, so while Rowling is funding a philanthropic venture, it's not like other causes as it won't accept donations. Again, getting more of the basics of the entity in to its own article will make it easier to hammer out how to handle it here, where we have to keep an eye on WP:SIZE. (The article does mention the actors criticizing her views-- it's footnoted so we don't have a laundry list.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hence why I think it should be in the transgender views section. The place was founded over trans rights, and was deliberately made to exclude trans people, by someone who - speaking neutrally - is viewed by most of the population whether for and against trans rights, as being prolifically in the "against" camp.
- Speaking simply, it's not a charity, but it *is* absolutely related to her views on trans rights. Snokalok (talk) 03:33, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- I should add, the structure I feel will be easier to figure out once we have a wording nailed down - though obviously you're the more experienced editor. Snokalok (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- I will put up a draft for working through proposed wording momentarily (not helped by having sprained my wrist and my computer needs to go for repair). It would be most helpful if editors new to the article would recognize that we can't add a couple hundred words every time JKR makes headlines, which is about once a month, and that new content needs to be worked in to existing content in a way that flows. I'm not entirely happy with my first draft, as it is still too long, but with computer and wrist issues, I'll momentarily put up what I've got so far to get the ball rolling. I noted that DMVHistorian's draft was much shorter, which I think is the way to go, since other issues can be explored at Beira's Place, but I had already worked on my draft when DMV put theirs up (with some differences in claims from sources). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- I should add, the structure I feel will be easier to figure out once we have a wording nailed down - though obviously you're the more experienced editor. Snokalok (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- I am still struggling with structure (where the content fits); there's a twist in that BBC says it is not a charity, so while Rowling is funding a philanthropic venture, it's not like other causes as it won't accept donations. Again, getting more of the basics of the entity in to its own article will make it easier to hammer out how to handle it here, where we have to keep an eye on WP:SIZE. (The article does mention the actors criticizing her views-- it's footnoted so we don't have a laundry list.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- The current proposal addresses only that POV, and leaves out considerable other important information. It would probably be easier to craft neutral text for this article, which relies on Summary style (and where we made serious cuts to Philanthropy to keep the WP:SIZE reasonable), if Beira's Place is written first. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'll look it over now and reply when I have thoughts, though I do think that given Rowling's stance on trans rights and involvement in activism against such, and that every article above either heavily implies or directly states a connection to a row over rape crisis centers in Edinburgh serving and being run by trans women, the fact that Beira's Place was founded specifically such that it would only serve cis women is a very notable point that should be addressed in some capacity. Snokalok (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the additional (BBC) source,[4] Aoba47; that gives us several mainstream usable sources for due weight. The structure of the Philanthropy section is a paragraph each on:
- Apologies for intruding on this conversation, but I would also like to note that this information has been discussed in a BBC article as well. Aoba47 (talk) 02:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Just to interject, I would point out that none of the sources listed use the term 'cisgender'. There is in fact nothing in the sources to indicate that the service would not be available to either transmen or non-binary people whose sex is female, as the service utilises single-sex exemptions, which also apply to these groups. I have also added an archive link to the Telegraph article for anyone without access. 2A00:23C8:2C97:1D01:ECDC:CFC3:E310:F152 (talk) 09:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- What? Yes they do: the PinkNews source says explicitly that
JK Rowling’s service, on the other hand, will only serve, and only employ, cisgender women.
Loki (talk) 20:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- What? Yes they do: the PinkNews source says explicitly that
- Just to interject, I would point out that none of the sources listed use the term 'cisgender'. There is in fact nothing in the sources to indicate that the service would not be available to either transmen or non-binary people whose sex is female, as the service utilises single-sex exemptions, which also apply to these groups. I have also added an archive link to the Telegraph article for anyone without access. 2A00:23C8:2C97:1D01:ECDC:CFC3:E310:F152 (talk) 09:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ Wakefield, Lily. "JK Rowling launches sex abuse support service that excludes trans women". PinkNews.
- ^ Sanderson, Daniel. "JK Rowling says she's rich enough to take the flak as she launches women-only support service". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 12 December 2022.
- ^ Carrell, Severin. "JK Rowling launches support centre for female victims of sexual violence". The Guardian.
- ^ "JK Rowling funds women-only rape help centre in Edinburgh". BBC News.
Philanthropy Draft 1
Current (481 words) | PROPOSED Draft 1 (517 words) |
---|---|
Aware of the good fortune that led to her wealth and fame,[3] and wanting to use her public image to help others despite her concerns about publicity and the press, Rowling became, in the words of Smith, "emboldened ... to stand up and be counted on issues that were important to her".[4] In 2000, while she was still writing the Harry Potter series, Rowling established the Volant Charitable Trust, named after her mother.[5] Its mission is to "alleviate social deprivation, with a particular emphasis on supporting women, children and young people at risk".[6] Together with the MEP Emma Nicholson,[7] Rowling founded the Children's High Level Group (now Lumos) in 2005.[5] She was appointed president of the charity One Parent Families (now Gingerbread) in 2004,[8] after becoming its first ambassador in 2000.[5] She also collaborated with Sarah Brown[9] on the writing of a book of children's stories to benefit One Parent Families.[5] Rowling's charitable donations before 2012 were estimated by Forbes at $160 million.[1] She was the second most generous UK donor in 2015 (following the singer Elton John), giving about $14 million.[10] Lumos has advocated for reform in orphanage care in Ukraine since 2013, working with an orphanage west of Kyiv.[11][12] After the February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Rowling stated that she will personally match up to £1 million in donations made towards an emergency appeal launched by Lumos.[13] Rowling has made donations to support medical causes. She named another institution after her mother when, in 2010, she donated £10 million to found a multiple sclerosis research centre at the University of Edinburgh.[14] She gave an additional £15.3 million to the centre in 2019.[15] During the 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony, accompanied by an inflatable representation of Lord Voldemort,[16] she read from Peter Pan as part of a tribute to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children.[17] To support COVID-19 relief, she donated six-figure sums to both Khalsa Aid and the British Asian Trust from royalties for The Ickabog.[18] Several publications in the Harry Potter universe have been sold for charitable purposes. Profits from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and Quidditch Through the Ages, both published in 2001, went to Comic Relief.[5] To support Children's Voice, later renamed Lumos, Rowling sold a deluxe copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard at auction in 2007. Amazon's £1.95 million purchase set a record for a contemporary literary work and for children's literature.[19][20] Rowling published the book and, in 2013, donated the proceeds of nearly £19 million (then about $30 million) to Lumos.[21][22] Rowling and 12 other writers composed short pieces in 2008 to be sold to benefit Dyslexia Action and English PEN. Rowling's contribution was an 800-word Harry Potter prequel.[23][a] When the revelation that Rowling wrote The Cuckoo's Calling led to an increase in sales,[2] she donated the royalties to ABF The Soldiers' Charity (formerly the Army Benevolent Fund).[5][25] |
Aware of the good fortune that led to her wealth and fame,[3] Rowling wanted to use her public image to help others despite her concerns about publicity and the press; she became, in the words of Smith, "emboldened ... to stand up and be counted on issues that were important to her".[4] Rowling's charitable donations before 2012 were estimated by Forbes at $160 million.[1] She was the second most generous UK donor in 2015 (following the singer Elton John), giving about $14 million.[26]
Long interested in issues affecting women and children,[27] Rowling established the Volant Charitable Trust in 2000, named after her mother[5] to address social deprivation in at-risk women, children and youth.[28] She was appointed president of One Parent Families (now Gingerbread) in 2004,[29] after becoming its first ambassador in 2000.[5] She collaborated with Sarah Brown[30] on a book of children's stories to benefit One Parent Families.[5] Together with the MEP Emma Nicholson,[31] Rowling founded the charity now known as Lumos in 2005.[5] Lumos has worked with an orphanage west of Kyiv, Ukraine since 2013;[32][33] after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Rowling offered to personally match up to £1 million in donations to Lumos for Ukraine.[34] Later in 2022, during her advocacy against the proposed Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, Rowling stated she would found and fund Beira's Place, a women-centred rape help center to provide free support services for female-only survivors of sexual violence;[27][35] with long wait times at existing facilities, Rape Crisis Scotland welcomed the services while noting rape crisis centres in Scotland had served trans and non-binary people without incident.[36] Rowling has made donations to support other medical causes. She named another institution after her mother in 2010, when she donated £10 million to found a multiple sclerosis research centre at the University of Edinburgh.[37] She gave an additional £15.3 million to the centre in 2019.[38] During the 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony, accompanied by an inflatable representation of Lord Voldemort,[39] she read from Peter Pan as part of a tribute to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children.[40] To support COVID-19 relief, she donated six-figure sums to both Khalsa Aid and the British Asian Trust from royalties for The Ickabog.[18] Several publications in the Harry Potter universe have been sold for charitable purposes. Profits from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and Quidditch Through the Ages, both published in 2001, went to Comic Relief.[5] To support Children's Voice, later renamed Lumos, Rowling sold a deluxe copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard at auction in 2007. Amazon's £1.95 million purchase set a record for a contemporary literary work and for children's literature.[41][20] Rowling published the book and, in 2013, donated the proceeds of nearly £19 million (then about $30 million) to Lumos.[42][43] Rowling and 12 other writers composed short pieces in 2008 to be sold to benefit Dyslexia Action and English PEN. Rowling's contribution was an 800-word Harry Potter prequel.[44][b] When the revelation that Rowling wrote The Cuckoo's Calling led to an increase in sales,[2] she donated the royalties to ABF The Soldiers' Charity (formerly the Army Benevolent Fund).[5][45] |
Sources
|
---|
Notes References
|
Discussion of philanthropy Draft 1
My first draft is still too long, even after cuts to older text, and I suggest DMVHistorian's much briefer addition is the way to go. Nonetheless, I re-jigged the paragraph structure to fit the new content in; we can't just plop in a new paragraph to the article each time JKR makes headlines. I have tried to create a para structure where the first para is context/overview; second para is women/children causes; third para is other medical (as rape involves medical); and fourth is publications to fund charities. I expect multiple iterations to get the prose nailed down, and would appreciate help as I have sprained my wrist. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- I like how you have written it and re-structured the section. Perhaps the text starting with "with long wait times..." could be removed to shorten the section further. I have also added similar context to the Beira's Place page so it is covered there as well. So sorry about your wrist - that is never fun, especially for a writer! DMVHistorian (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Just dropped my computer to repair, apparently I need a new hard drive, but I ran out of time to investigate why your text said it was a charity when other sources say it is not ???? Now confined to iPad typing for a few days ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oh no - hope it gets fixed soon... Calling it a charity was a mistype on my end - I had first seen it listed as such in an MSN/Washington Examiner article (Link). I added some additional context to the Beira's Place page regarding the registered status. DMVHistorian (talk) 22:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Got it, thanks; I feared I had missed something in frustration over wrist/hard drive and my hurry to get a draft up. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oh no - hope it gets fixed soon... Calling it a charity was a mistype on my end - I had first seen it listed as such in an MSN/Washington Examiner article (Link). I added some additional context to the Beira's Place page regarding the registered status. DMVHistorian (talk) 22:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Just dropped my computer to repair, apparently I need a new hard drive, but I ran out of time to investigate why your text said it was a charity when other sources say it is not ???? Now confined to iPad typing for a few days ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Works for me. Sorry this matter has been a literal pain. Crossroads -talk- 00:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Could we get more feedback from others? What do others say about cutting the length per DMVHistorian's post at 21:16, 14 December, as the content is now covered at Beira's Place? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Do we need the clause that comes after the semi-colon that begins "with long wait times ..."? The relationship between Beira's Place and Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre is perhaps best covered in the dedicated sub-article. Thoughts? Victoria (tk) 21:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- DMVHistorian also suggested losing that clause. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:51, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- As no one has disagreed with losing the clause beginning at "with long wait times", which has bloated the content about this one issue to an WP:UNDUE size, I will install without that clause. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- DMVHistorian also suggested losing that clause. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:51, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- For clarity, is this the wording we are considering;
In December 2022, Rowling announced that she was the founder and funder of Beira's Place, a domestic violence charity established to provides specialist services to cisgender women aged 16 and over in Edinburgh and the Lothians who are survivors of sexual violence.[1][2]
? If so, I would ask that the word cisgender is removed, as it is inaccurate. This is not a term used by those involved in the centre. They have stated that the service is making use of the single sex exemptions as provided for in the Equality Act. Both trans men and non-binary people born female are entitled to protections under that exemption. The service excludes users on the basis of sex, which would therefore mean it does not serve men, trans women and non-binary people born male. I also assume the proposal is to change the word 'charity' to 'organisation'. 109.144.213.18 (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)- Hello 109.144.213.18, the current draft language being considered is included directly above in the table with the header "PROPOSED Draft 1 (517 words)" - Thank you! DMVHistorian (talk) 14:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Re 109; not only is that wording problematic; the sources are not the highest quality. See the full proposal above as indicated by DMVHistorian, which re-jigs the existing paragraph structure to work in the new content contextually rather than just dropping in a whole new paragraph. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:50, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- I would avoid using the term "female-only", as the implication in this case is assigned female at birth, but the term "female" is colloquially quite often applied to trans women as well. Snokalok (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps "AFAB-only" or "assigned female only" Snokalok (talk) 15:32, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Every source uses women-only; most in the headline. Every source body uses female only. No source uses the term assigned female only; see WP:OR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Per the Beira's Place article:
- In a statement provided by the organisation, Beira's Place wrote "we believe that women deserve to have certainty that, in using our services, they will not encounter anyone who is male. Where appropriate, we will refer men or individuals identifying as trans women to other appropriate services."[3][4]
- Assigned female at birth is the technical term for what we're dealing with here, it's not original research, it's simple terminology. Just because the BBC doesn't see trans women as women, doesn't mean wikipedia shouldn't either.
- If you like, perhaps we could simply add a parentheses of some sort saying (not including "individuals identifying as trans women", per the org) or something along those lines with citation Snokalok (talk) 00:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Or, come to think of it, actually we should just make it say "cisgender-women centered". That's one extra word, and conveys the org's intent far better, as "women-centered" alone is misleading. Snokalok (talk) 01:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Every source uses women-only; most in the headline. Every source body uses female only. No source uses the term assigned female only; see WP:OR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps "AFAB-only" or "assigned female only" Snokalok (talk) 15:32, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- I would avoid using the term "female-only", as the implication in this case is assigned female at birth, but the term "female" is colloquially quite often applied to trans women as well. Snokalok (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Installing without the additional clause of content covered at Beira's Place, and rewriting for flow and context, results in 489 words. Keeping the size manageable meant trimming other words about JKR's much more significant philanthropy, and I concur with trimming that clause to not give undue weight to one of JKR's lesser contributions that has also been less covered by sources. It seems increasinly necessary to remind that we can't add entire paragraphs every time JKR makes news, and need to keep the flow and context and weight and size in line. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ "JK Rowling launches organisation to help victims of sexual violence". The Economic Times. Retrieved 2022-12-14.
- ^ "J.K. Rowling Funds Sex Abuse Crisis Center That Excludes Trans Women". news.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2022-12-14.
- ^ "JK Rowling opens Beira's Place, 'woman-only' sexual violence support service in Edinburgh". MSN. Retrieved 2022-12-14.
- ^ Davidson, Gina (2022-12-12). "JK Rowling launches new women-only sexual abuse support centre". LBC. Retrieved 2022-12-14.
Adding the citeable biological word is a good solution, but it was done in a way that compromised the prose. I have attempted repair, but the prose is still iffy now; perhaps better wordsmiths will have a look at how the entire construct can now be repaired. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Gender and Transphobia in The Introductionary Paragraphs
I do not believe the introduction of this article are currently written from a sufficiently neutral point of view, specifically in that the contraversy surrounding rowling's views on gender and transness in politics are not given their due weight in the introduction, while her book series Harry potter, which is not the focus of this article, is given undue weight taking up half of the first paragraph, is the background focus of the second paragraph summarizing her life, and is given the entirity of the third paragraph for introductory literary analysis and a summary of its early critical reception.
This article is meant to be about rowling, not harry potter, and yet harry potter dominates while information about her current affairs and opinions are relegated to two sentences buried underneath four paragraphs, two standard desktop screens, and four standard phone screens. And, when the introduction does finally break the topic of conversation, doesn't to overview her opinions, but instead provides an overview of the reaction to those beliefs that is not at all descriptive. It's describing the shadows on plato's alogrical wall instead of the beliefs of the person casting those shadows, and again this article is supposed to be about rowling, not harry potter nor the people criticizing rowling. It's supposed to be about rowling.
By overweighing harry potter and underweighing rowling's current activity as a self-identified terf (as a significant portion of new articles about her have been about her alleged transphobic beliefs rather than about her work as an author), this article is failing to be neutral by eneffect minimizing rowling's very relevant current political beliefs and actions in favor of focusing on her less currently relevant old work.
It is my opinion, that revisions should be considered to bring the framing of the article's introduction more into line with my interpretation of wikipedia's guidelines on neutrality and due weight. Unfortunately, I have neither the practiced ability nor the neccessary permissions to write those revisions, and am only able to voice my disatisfaction with the current version of article. Sebastiantemple (talk) 19:19, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Rowling has an article only because of Harry Potter. She was unknown before it. The vast majority of scholarly sources discussing Rowling are related to Harry Potter, and the rest are biographies, which aren't covering her recently expressed political views, as far as I'm aware. We're going to need a lot more coverage of her views in reliable sources before mentioning them in the first paragraph would be reasonable, per WP:DUE. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Per Vanamonde93, in fact, in relation to the all reliable sources, JKR's historical position as an author, and WP:NOTNEWS, the position that the lead spends too much time on current news could be taken. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding Vanamonde; yes, rowling only has a major article that people care about because of harry potter. But the article isn't meant to be about harry potter: Harry Potter quite deservingly has its own plethera of articles: Rowling has this one article, and it should be about her specifically especially in its introduction.
- Focusing too much on harry potter in the introduction buries information about that's specifically about rowling like her philanthropy or (self-identified) trans exclusionary radical feminist beliefs.
- Regarding vanamonde and sandygeorgia; I'd very happily believe that there aren't enough scholarly source yet cited by wikipedia about this portion of the the topic of JK Rowling, if that weren't the case, the introduction and article would have already been rewritten to reflect that. However, and I very strongly doubt that there aren't a substancial number of scholarly articles written about Rowling's political beliefs and action as it relates to gender.
- Recognizing that google scholar isn't a source and is at best a barameter about how much scholars with a wide range of reputibility are talking about a topic where google's spiders can see, and it gives no information as to the specific opinions expressed in the literature about the topic it's returing results for, since google scholar results for article written containing these keywords since 2018 are at time of writing:
- •JK Rowling: 15,800
- •JK Rowling trans: 5,270
- •JK Rowling transgender: 1,100
- •Harry Potter: 17,900
- •Harry Potter Transgender: 14,700
- •Harry Potter Queer: 5,330
- I feel I can safely say that a conversation about Rowling, her belief gender, and how that all relates to harry potter is currently raging in the scholarly community, especially if you consider that JK Rowling's all time google scholar results are 35,000, almost half of the scholarly material on rowling was written in the last six years, and a third of that comes up with the key word trans.
- If my rude google scholar searches are indicative of actual patterns in accademic writing, and I grant that's admittedly an if, but granted that if, that indicates that there absolutely is enough scholarly writing about the topic to warrant it a greater due weight than it's been given, and wikipedia doesn't have those articles ready to cite because no one's done the effort of bringing that information to wikipedia, not because no one's don the effort of making that information available.
- I am again restating that I believe revisions should be considered, and now based on your responses and my rudimentary I'm suggesting that an effort to review of current writing on the topic would be prudent, if for no other reason than to update the biliography and works cited. Sebastiantemple (talk) 23:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- That is indeed a questionable "if". I would be the first to acknowledge that Rowling's views are likely to receive more attention in sources going forward, but when on the very second page of a google scholar search for "JK Rowling transgender" I get a medium.com article and a news piece, I suggest you need to look a little deeper. Note also there's approximately 35k results for Rowling and Harry Potter as primary search subjects. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think we should compare this to another similarly large figure in the news recently - Kanye West.
- Yes, Kanye West is a legendary musician and that was what made him famous in the first place, but the fact that he is now a self-declared Nazi and supporter of Adolf Hitler, is not something that should be particularly downplayed, the due weight is there. Rowling being a TERF is no different, and while this article does have a section on her transgender views, yes, it feels... sanitized. It doesn't mention any of the most glaring parts of her anti-trans activism or rhetoric, only the most favorably covered. Kanye received no such sanitation meanwhile. Snokalok (talk) 04:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is a sticky subject. I'm going to venture that that difference between Kanye and Rowling is that Kayne has been on a wide-ranging antisemitic tirade for about 2-3 months now, Like, solid, everything he does is digging the hole deeper, resulting in near-universal condemnation and huge financial repercussions. Rowling's transphobic remarks have angered the LGBTQ community to no end, but the condemnation is not universal...the far-right and the Christian fundamentalists love it, as do a minority of feminists. She has also not suffered financially to any great extent. So, I don't think at this time there is a basis to say more in the lede of the article than we already do. I personally find this regrettable, but, the reality is that society by & large sees transphobia as just not the 3rd rail that antisemitism is. Zaathras (talk) 04:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- And Joanne has been railing against trans rights since 2020. Kanye's antisemitism has (unfortunately) garnered support as well, and while I agree the condemnation is more universal, at a certain point I don't think we should be basing our NPOV on a both sides equivalence between the far right and everyone else. The midway point between far right and center, is still hard right. Snokalok (talk) 14:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- To play devil's advocate, she has only aired her slanted views to social media and the occasional answered question in an interview, and has not made her beliefs self- or life-defining, and neither has the media. her transgressions, thus far, have garnered controversy but they are not career-defining. Kanye's entertainment career as he has known it is all but done. That is career-defining. Zaathras (talk) 23:51, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- And Joanne has been railing against trans rights since 2020. Kanye's antisemitism has (unfortunately) garnered support as well, and while I agree the condemnation is more universal, at a certain point I don't think we should be basing our NPOV on a both sides equivalence between the far right and everyone else. The midway point between far right and center, is still hard right. Snokalok (talk) 14:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is a sticky subject. I'm going to venture that that difference between Kanye and Rowling is that Kayne has been on a wide-ranging antisemitic tirade for about 2-3 months now, Like, solid, everything he does is digging the hole deeper, resulting in near-universal condemnation and huge financial repercussions. Rowling's transphobic remarks have angered the LGBTQ community to no end, but the condemnation is not universal...the far-right and the Christian fundamentalists love it, as do a minority of feminists. She has also not suffered financially to any great extent. So, I don't think at this time there is a basis to say more in the lede of the article than we already do. I personally find this regrettable, but, the reality is that society by & large sees transphobia as just not the 3rd rail that antisemitism is. Zaathras (talk) 04:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- That is indeed a questionable "if". I would be the first to acknowledge that Rowling's views are likely to receive more attention in sources going forward, but when on the very second page of a google scholar search for "JK Rowling transgender" I get a medium.com article and a news piece, I suggest you need to look a little deeper. Note also there's approximately 35k results for Rowling and Harry Potter as primary search subjects. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Do you really think the scholarly literature on the impact of Kanye West's music can be compared to that of JKR and Harry Potter? If so, that might explain the DUE WEIGHT miss here. Snokalok, please have a look at WP:PROPORTION for perspective relative to one of the most successful authors of all time vis-a-vis what all has to be covered in this bio, and remember taht there is an entire sub-article devoted to her political views. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Well, just searching Kanye West on google scholar, I got 20,300 results, compared to JKR's 15,800, so yes, I'd say one of the most influential and successful musicians in modern history, is comparable to one of the most successful authors in modern history. Snokalok (talk) 14:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- If you add in the Harry Potter searches, that brings the results up to 35000 vs 20000, both of which are on the same order of magnitude as each other so, yeah, definitely comparable I'd say. Snokalok (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- What? Absolutely Kanye can be compared to Rowling. To quote his article:
West is among the most critically acclaimed popular music artists of the 21st century, earning praise from music critics, fans, industry peers, and wider cultural figures. In 2014, NME named him the third most influential artist in music.
- I do agree there's a line Kanye has crossed that Rowling hasn't yet, namely that "Nazi" is an extra special taboo in modern Western culture that transphobia just isn't yet. There's a reason we have an essay titled WP:NONAZIS but not WP:NOTRANSPHOBES. Like, he came out as a Nazi with Alex Jones of all people sitting next to him trying to get him to dial it back. Even anti-semitism alone isn't the kind of taboo that openly identifying as a Nazi is.
- That being said, I also agree that there hasn't been enough coverage in this article of her recent comments. The transphobia is becoming an increasingly large part of her notability, to the point where if you told me someone wrote an article on Rowling yesterday, I'd strongly expect it to be about her transphobia, and not Harry Potter or anything derived from it. Loki (talk) 05:16, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Setting aside entirely my personal feelings about these individuals and their views; LokiTheLiar is correct in saying Kanye has said things that aren't considered defensible in Western society at large, while Rowling's views would have been considered mainstream not that long ago, and are still couched in terms of "protecting women's rights" (I'm obviously not endorsing that claim, but that's how she spins it) in a way that mainstream society hasn't confronted head on. We're not going to reach a consensus here by making analogies; our only path has always been summarizing what the best sources say about her, and I venture to predict there's sources available today that weren't available a year ago. I suggest we confine discussion here to the best of these sources, and if someone wishes to adjust how we're writing about her views, I suggest your first task is to identify such sources. Vanamonde (Talk) 06:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, bet. Here's ten to start.
- Anania, Valentina. "The Author is Cancelled Long Live the Authors." Makings gives a brief overview of rowlings actions relating to gender and what the audience reaction to those views mean fordiscuss what the reaction to rowling's views mean for the concept of autorship: Among citations of theory, are citations demonstrating rowling's beliefs which woulding meet the source criteria for wikipedia directly but lend credibility to the Anania, including Hibberd, (the poorly aged) indy100, and Lenker. Rowlings transphobic views are not the focus of the article, but are an instrumental jumping off point for what the article seeks to discuss.
- Simpson, Johanna Consuelo. Inclusion in Fandom: How Harry Potter Fans Rhetorically Create Representation. is a Doctoral thesis which discusses who the harry potter fandom creates representation in their interpretation of the text and transformative works. It briefly touches on the subject of rowling's personal representation headcanons, not meantioning transphobia directly, but citing Fleming who's response exists as a reaction to rowlings transphobia from the perspective of a cis lesbian woman. It's not directly related to the subject, but does exist tangential to it.
- Bloch, Natania. Reimagining Religion in a Contemporary Context: The Case of Harry Potter is a thesis which examines religion from a jewish perspective and then re-examines that through harry potter. The thesis isn't about rowling's views on gender but has a short section towards its end titled "Authorship and Controversy" focused exclusively on rowling's transphobic controversy.
- Gwenffrewi, Gina. "J. K. Rowling and the Echo Chamber of Secrets." Transgender Studies Quarterly. to quote the abstract: "This autoethnographic article attempts to capture the distress of a trans woman in Scotland at the transphobia in the legacy media's coverage of the J. K. Rowling furore in June 2020. Through the use of a frame narrative, the article analyses some of the transphobic elements of Rowling's essay published on June 10, 2020, originally titled “TERF Wars,” which prompted an online backlash and a subsequent cycle of negative legacy media coverage against trans people. The article deconstructs two opinion pieces in the Scotsman and the National that depict Rowling as a victim and trans women as abusive and/or delusional, with an accompanying association of trans women with virtual spaces, set against cis women inhabiting real-world spaces."
- Dahlen, Sarah Park and Ebony Elizabeth Thomas. Harry Potter and the Other: Race, Justice, and Difference in the wizarding world. Is a collection of essays about the themes of identity and justice as they appear in harry potter. I have not had the opprotunity to read it yet, but it has an essay titled "Chosen Names, Changed Appearences, and Unchallenged Binaries: Trans-Exclusionary Themes in Harry Potter." which I cannot tell from the preview to what extent rowling's views are dicussed, the following is an except: "That is, one might think that the trans-exclusionar rhetoric of the essay was a wholely new development in the thinking of the author. As this chapter will show, however, the text reveals otherwise. That being said, it is never my..."
- Tudor, Alyosxa. "Terfism is White Distraction: On BLM, Decolonising the Curriculum, Anti-Gender Attacks and Feminist Transphobia. Engenderings." is a scholarly opinion piece published in the University of London SOAS, looking at the broader implications of rowlings terfdom and concern trolling for 'women's safety' means in the context of anti-Black racism, and how the two forms of bibotry are entwined.
- [https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/TMR/article/view/8292 Uspenskiy, Andrey Uspenskiy. “Wumben, Wimpund, Woomud: An Exploration of Social Censure in the Internet Age." Is a essay published in The Morningside Review, discussing what rowling said and did to lead to the controversy surrounding her views on transness and gender, what the reaction, both generally and academically has been, and what that means for trans people and people who like harry poter.
- Wahlström, Hanna. "The structural issue with cisnormative feminism: WHY CISNORMATIVE FEMINISTS LIKE J.K ROWLING IS TRANSPHOBIC." Is a gender studies student thesis. I do not have access to the content of the thesis, but the title makes it out to be relevant to the discussion, and it should probably be looked into as a potential source.
- Heggestad, Jon. Behind Closed Doors: Sex Education Transformed is an accademic review of the Natalie Fiennes's Behind Closed Dores: Sex Education Transformed. It's third point discusses how Fiennes discusses coverage of "the trans issue," saying quote, "This reframing seems particularly relevant in the wake of J.K. Rowling's transphobic tweets from earlier this year-tweets which repeat much of the same problematic rhetoric that Fiennes identifies here." From this I believe Fienne's book itself doesn't discuss rowling, though it should be consided as a potential new source for citations broadly about the topic, but an accademic review of the book putting the material the book discusses next to rowling evidences that the academic community is both aware of rowling and her opinions on gender, and considering them as seporate from her status as the original author of harry potter. Rowling is being brought up in conversations about sex and gender in accademic circles because of her transphobic beliefs.
- Quatrini, Amerigo. On J. K. Rowling's Discourse on Transsexual Issues, An Analysis of the Language Used on Rowling's Twitter and the Sociolinguistic Implication of Hate Speech is an article examining the rhetorical structure of rowling's transphobic statements and the broader implications that with regard to hate speech and discrimination. My attention's running thin so I'm gonna be able to focus up and read this article but it's definitely relevant.
- My hands are starting to hurt from typing so I'm gonna take a break now, but these are just ten sources to start the discussion. In selecting these texts, I ignored dozens of articles from Vox and the like in the google scholar results; then after opening my tabes tabs, I rejected two articles as wholely irrelevant to trans issues, rejected two articles as wholely irrelavent to Rowling, and rejected five articles as definitely not up to wikipedia's citation criteria. If any of these are no good, I'm new here and I'm not even a fourth of the way through the tabs I over-ambitiously opened at the start of the source hunting session. Sebastiantemple (talk) 23:52, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Have you seen WP:SCHOLARSHIP? (Just because something-- like Vox-- appears on scholar.google does not make it a high-quality source as required for featured articles.) This disappointing list reaffirms my concern that we don't yet have the kinds of sources we'd optimally have before re-tackling this material. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I've read wp:Scholarship, that why I "ignored dozens of articles from Vox and the like," and these seemed fine to me, the majority are hosted on the websites of universities and journals that seem reputable enough to me.
- If the problem is that I only found ten, I picked ten as an arbetrary starting point for discussion so I could get feedback to improve both my selection of sources and my synopsi of them going forward and not because I ran out of sources to consider. But, the feedback that the list is "disappointing," is so vague as to be unhelpful, so if I may ask what about any, or each even, of these sources is specifically disappointing? Sebastiantemple (talk) 03:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- One is an opinion piece, several are theses that need further examination, and I didn't find much of relevance that could be added from the sources on a quick glance and based on what I could access. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- FWIW you should have included articles from Vox. Vox and other mainstream news outlets are reliable sources on here, and generally outweigh weaker scholarly sources like masters' theses which don't go through traditional peer review. For a list of commonly used sources and whether they're generally reliable, see WP:RSP. (Note that in some specialized topic areas you may want to use more specialized guidelines like WP:MEDRS for medical sources, but in general news sources are good.)
- However, I disagree with SandyGeorgia here in that I would definitely not call this list "disappointing". That's quite a lot of sources, and so even if each individual one is weaker than we'd normally like, as a whole they're pretty strong evidence that Rowling is increasingly becoming known for her transphobia. Loki (talk) 04:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- I skipped vox and other news sources not because of their reliability, but because of their newsiness. The availability of a plethera of news articles on rowling's transphobia and the events that brought it to light, was never, as far as I can tell, a point of contention.
- The point of contention, was instead on how much scholarship related to rowling was focused on her transphobic views:
- • per Vanamonde: "The vast majority of scholarly sources discussing Rowling are related to Harry Potter, and the rest are biographies, which aren't covering her recently expressed political views."
- • per SandyGeorgia: "JKR's historical position as an author, and WP:NOTNEWS, the position that the lead spends too much time on current news could be taken."
- I considered that my efforts would be best spent focused on the point of contention, that is, the amount of scholarship about rowling's transphobia, andso I skipped vox etc because theyr broadly considered news over than scholarship. If I was mistaken in that assessment, do feel free to add a selection of credible potential news sources about the topic to suppliment the scholarly sources I'll be continuing supply. Sebastiantemple (talk) 05:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Have you seen WP:SCHOLARSHIP? (Just because something-- like Vox-- appears on scholar.google does not make it a high-quality source as required for featured articles.) This disappointing list reaffirms my concern that we don't yet have the kinds of sources we'd optimally have before re-tackling this material. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is completely innapropriate to compare the two. There is a reason why Nazis are taboo and gender critical views are largely not. The two things are entirely different… whereas Nazi views promoted the murder of millions, including Jews, disabled people and Black people, gender critical views do no such thing but merely criticise views that have only really emerged in the last 20 years. Moreover, while Nazi views are not widely held due to obvious reasons, gender-critical views are often held although not often shared online. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/30/guardian-readers-nominate-their-person-of-the-year https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/30/75-of-americans-believe-in-only-two-genders-male-a/ https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/two-thirds-of-voters-oppose-snps-gender-reform-plans-d8wh3wh9w Scientelensia (talk) 12:30, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not inappropriate to compare 'gender critical' individuals or 'trans exclusive radical feminist' (read: transphobes) views to fascism given the history of fascism burning books on sex and gender and killing gay and trans people, because remember gay and trans people were also targets for genocide during the holocaust.
- Now, I'm not calling gender critical individuals nazis. I'm just saying in the pyramid of hate model, the genocide fascists want to commit (wit regard to trans people specifically) is built on top of the rhetoric that gender criticals and terfs espouse, and it is absolutely appropriate to point that out. Sebastiantemple (talk) 21:13, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- "Even anti-semitism alone isn't the kind of taboo that openly identifying as a Nazi is." Well, your average anti-Semite is not openly advocating for a "Final Solution" to the Jewish problem, nor embracing ultranationalism in a purge campaign against all ethnic and religious minorities. Nazism has a close association with genocide and ethnic cleansing, while other discriminatory ideologies have had less violent histories. Most transphobes are not calling for mass executions either. Dimadick (talk) 14:30, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- Setting aside entirely my personal feelings about these individuals and their views; LokiTheLiar is correct in saying Kanye has said things that aren't considered defensible in Western society at large, while Rowling's views would have been considered mainstream not that long ago, and are still couched in terms of "protecting women's rights" (I'm obviously not endorsing that claim, but that's how she spins it) in a way that mainstream society hasn't confronted head on. We're not going to reach a consensus here by making analogies; our only path has always been summarizing what the best sources say about her, and I venture to predict there's sources available today that weren't available a year ago. I suggest we confine discussion here to the best of these sources, and if someone wishes to adjust how we're writing about her views, I suggest your first task is to identify such sources. Vanamonde (Talk) 06:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Well, just searching Kanye West on google scholar, I got 20,300 results, compared to JKR's 15,800, so yes, I'd say one of the most influential and successful musicians in modern history, is comparable to one of the most successful authors in modern history. Snokalok (talk) 14:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Do you really think the scholarly literature on the impact of Kanye West's music can be compared to that of JKR and Harry Potter? If so, that might explain the DUE WEIGHT miss here. Snokalok, please have a look at WP:PROPORTION for perspective relative to one of the most successful authors of all time vis-a-vis what all has to be covered in this bio, and remember taht there is an entire sub-article devoted to her political views. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
It's pretty much a given that once Nazism is introduced into a conversation concerning an unrelated topic, the quality of discourse degrades significantly. Pretty much the same with Kayne West.
OP has a legitimate point we should focus on.
I do think the overly vague last sentence of the lede minimizes the significance of the ongoing controversy over JKR's views and should better specify what kind of support she is garnering from whom in order to give context to the issue. Crescent77 (talk) 21:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- The last (transgender) sentence of the lead was the result of one of the most contentious, highly attended, and poorly formulated RFCs in recent Wikipedia history. During the January thru April Featured article review, many of us discussed that it was too soon for a new RFC, and discussed plans to revisit at the end of the year, when hopefully more sources would be available. I have been constantly scanning, and don't believe actually there are more of the high-quality, journal, scholarly sources we should have to effectively revisit that sentence. (Hence my preference to wait another three or six months so we can try to get it right, and avoid WP:NOTNEWS as we now have.) When we do revisit the sentence, the old RFC provides a great example of how not to present or run an RFC. The next RFC should have proposed text well discussed and hammered out in advance, before RFC launch, and be put forward in a planned manner, with an abundance of advance discussion, so we don't again end up with a Garbage In/Garbage Out no consensus conclusion. Meanwhile, what would be even more helpful would be for new participants to the talk page to read the entire FAR, and its five archives, and be familiar with high quality sourcing required by the featured article criteria; with or without Nazis or Kanye West, it is frustrating to see so many proposals on this talk based on either no or inferior sourcing. There are few to no FAs that enjoy the breadth and depth of consensus this one has. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posting at the bottom, as I've lost track of the threading here. Theses should generally be avoided in an area where better sources are available. They don't undergo peer review the same way books and articles do. Particularly when we're discussing not just the description of a controversy but how it's framed in Wikipedia's voice, we need the highest-quality sources. I'd honestly take a publication like Vox over most theses. Many of the non-theses sources above are also questionable; The Morningside Review appears to be an undergraduate journal, IJLLL may not be predatory but it looks borderline at best, and the Gender Forum source is a review of a book that doesn't apparently discuss Rowling, and contains a single comment about this issue. The only ones that look remotely usable to me are the Transgender Studies Quarterly source, and possibly the essay in Harry Potter and the Other; and two sources aren't enough to consider reframing the lead. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:24, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agree ... Sebastiantemple, to become familiar with what best sources look like in this case, have a look at examples like Pugh used in the article now. Since we will eventually need to undertake a comprehensive update, it should be based on a preponderance of topnotch sources, not partial/sketchy theses mentioning points of marginal relevance. We just aren't there yet; as VM93 indicates, we are still at a stage where the news sources are better than some of the rest. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:35, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Right, with that helpful feedback, I'm about ready to disappear into source hunting for an extended period of time. I just have one question before I do: Regarding Vanamonde: "two sources aren't enough."
- How many high-quality sources would you consider 'enough'? Not as a binding agreement, but a target for me to work towards? How many would you personally consider 'enough'? Sebastiantemple (talk) 00:18, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Depends a lot on a bunch of factors, especially the quality of the high-quality sources and how many high-quality sources disagree with the claim you're making. But as a general estimate I'd say 5ish? Loki (talk) 18:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- The question is not only "how many"; it's how far removed from the news events to get a WP:NOTNEWS perspective. Also, broader scholarly reviews (all of JKR not just niche trans issues) are always good (eg, Pugh). We are still too close to the event(s) to have thorough analyses. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:03, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agree ... Sebastiantemple, to become familiar with what best sources look like in this case, have a look at examples like Pugh used in the article now. Since we will eventually need to undertake a comprehensive update, it should be based on a preponderance of topnotch sources, not partial/sketchy theses mentioning points of marginal relevance. We just aren't there yet; as VM93 indicates, we are still at a stage where the news sources are better than some of the rest. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:35, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Edit notice proposal
I have just noticed that this article has no edit notice, and suggest that one could be helpful. An edit notice is something that every editor sees from the edit window when editing the article. As a sample of how they work, you can attempt to edit dementia with Lewy bodies, where you will see Template:Editnotices/Page/Dementia with Lewy bodies as a sample of what was added to all medical Featured articles following on these discussions:
I suggest we use the boilerplate language as seen in the first paragraph at Template:Editnotices/Page/Dementia with Lewy bodies (the second para is specific to medical content), as that wording has consensus. Working in specific links to
- Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1
- Talk:J. K. Rowling/FAQ and
- Template:Ds/alert
could also be helpful for this article, but brevity is key to encouraging readability. Vanamonde93 I believe you are also experienced with editnotice pages. If we can agree on wording, either Vanamonde93 or I have template permissions to add this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- We may want to create Template:BLP FA editnotice to mirror Template:Medical FA editnotice, but with language that references WP:BLP and WP:BLPDS instead of MEDMOS and MEDRS. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- I like that idea! It would make the template more broadly useful. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is also within scope for Gender and sexuality DS: also, contentious BLP FAs are relatively uncommon, and we shouldn't deploy an edit notice by default as it adds to load times. So I'm slightly inclined to prefer a notice specific to this page. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also, almost all of the contentious edits to this page are related to gender and sexuality ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:00, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Edit notice proposal Draft 1
J. K. Rowling is rated as a featured article on Wikipedia. While the article and its content is completely open for users to edit (just like with any other Wikipedia article), please keep in mind that it went through a community review process in April 2022, which verifies and ensures that the article represents a thorough survey of the relevant literature, uses high-quality sources, and complies with the other featured article criteria. It is requested that you discuss any significant proposals or changes on this article's talk page and gain community input, support, and consensus before proceeding to make the desired changes.
This article is subjected to additional editing requirements for pages related to gender-related disputes or controversies. As the biography of a living person, this article must also comply with Wikipedia's BLP policy. Other questions may be addressed in the FAQ.
Discussion of Draft 1 Edit notice
Started above, pls discuss. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. Crossroads -talk- 23:08, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- Rather than "It is requested that you discuss..." it might be better with more active voice, that is, "Please discuss..." Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:43, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Suggested alteration of the canned wording: Please discuss any significant proposals or changes on this article's talk page and gain community input, support, and consensus before proceeding to make the desired changes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Seems fine to me, prefer Callanecc's suggested wording. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Vanamonde93, I've created Template:Editnotices/Page/J. K. Rowling. I noticed that most of the others edit notice pages are also semi-protected ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Notice looks good to me. I'm not sure I see a rationale for protection; it's on a single page (ie, not widely transcluded) and only visible to desktop editors. Not pre-emptive and all that. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thx ... I wasn't sure on that! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Notice looks good to me. I'm not sure I see a rationale for protection; it's on a single page (ie, not widely transcluded) and only visible to desktop editors. Not pre-emptive and all that. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also, I deleted the one sentence about BLP when I saw the article already has a canned BLP editnotice. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Vanamonde93, I've created Template:Editnotices/Page/J. K. Rowling. I noticed that most of the others edit notice pages are also semi-protected ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Seems fine to me, prefer Callanecc's suggested wording. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Suggested alteration of the canned wording: Please discuss any significant proposals or changes on this article's talk page and gain community input, support, and consensus before proceeding to make the desired changes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Jessica naming convention
Why her full name follows the portuguese convention? She has the mom surname first and then dads surname second. If jessica born in uk then she would have rowling in the last name not arantes. 2404:8000:1027:85F6:B404:34A3:8805:7618 (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- As far as I'm aware, the UK naming convention is "whatever the parents decide to put on the birth registration form". That said, only one of the cited sources (Pugh) mentions the full name. If this is an error, perhaps other sources will list the name differently? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:32, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- We have already visited the question; it should be somewhere in archives, but not sure if talk or FAR archives. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Found: Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_14#Jessica_rowling. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:56, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Inline citations in Lede
Why are there no inline citations in the lede/opening sections? Seems odd, considering the volume of attention surrounding the subject. Crescent77 (talk) 22:04, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Discussion on critical reception
The article says that the Harry Potter novels have "mixed reception" and were criticized by "many" for some the views that are in it, but this is not true. The Harry Potter novels were always very well received at their time, and the views in the novels were always discussed and viewed in good eyes. Only recently people have been trying to revision the novels in a "bad light", especially following Rowling's comments on Trans people. Comments of the novels being antisemitic, racist, even pro-nazi, receiving RTs on Twitter from people who didn't even read the books just because they don't like Rowling or have never liked Harry Potter. So, the article should be changed to "some reviewers", not "many", because 1) that's not true and 2) this is only a recent discussion by Ill people. Decodingw (talk) 22:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's quite incorrect, Decodingw. The criticism is widespread in the highest quality sources, and it is uniformly spread in time; much of it predates anything Rowling said about trans people. I encourage you to read the cited sources. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Agree with Vanamonde, who is solidly familiar with the entire body of sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
My point is that although critics have been pointed out, they are not "many" as the article says. There could be many NOW, but at the time of the releases, they were very few talked about. Decodingw (talk) 22:50, 16 January 2023 (UTC)