Jump to content

Talk:Barbara Ann Wilcox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk16:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Ann Wilcox
Barbara Ann Wilcox
  • ... that transgender woman Barbara Ann Wilcox (pictured) successfully petitioned a California court to recognize her chosen name in 1941? Source: Slate
    • ALT1: ... that transgender pioneer Barbara Ann Wilcox (pictured) proposed to her husband the day she met him? Source: Slate

Created by Sdkb (talk). Self-nominated at 09:10, 7 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: What a great hook ALT1 is, I love it. Just a few small issues: "She died on September 9, 1962." needs a cite. ALT0 is not currently mentioned directly in the text, so that would need fixing or we can roll with ALT1. Also QPQ needs doing. Mujinga (talk) 17:12, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sdkb Cool QPQ is done, death is cited. I definitely think ALT1 is more hooky, so we can proceed by either 1/ striking ALT0 or 2/ mentioning and citing ALT0 in the article, then I can approve both. Up to you! Mujinga (talk) 11:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mujinga: Let's go with ALT1, then! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 16:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
cool, striking ALT0 and approving ALT1, image is relevant and appropriately licensed. Mujinga (talk) 21:26, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Notes from new page patrol review

[edit]

Nice work! North8000 (talk) 18:52, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is her deadname relevant like why is her old name on the page 4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.127.88.66 (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because she became notable under that name. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

gender pronouns

[edit]

Should the article refer to her as 'her' rather than 'he' in the article 42.2.120.167 (talk) 11:25, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Discospinster: Hey! might I presume this user should be "she" instead of "he"? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:59, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Propose to protect this article as pronouns are being edited/reverted at a high frequency. The legal basis for gender identity is, as a current status worldwide, not universal, and thus open for debate. Because this article refers to an American person, I do think "she" should be used, considering the legal jurisdiction. Shonen84 (talk) 12:03, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And we have no interest in all of that. We have MOS:GENDERID. Will probably SP for a long time. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nice, ok, wasn't aware of that, thanks! Shonen84 (talk) 12:11, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. It has been a learning experience for me as well. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage?

[edit]

The article states: "When Richards's marriage became public during her case, she told reporters she would have it annulled. . ." This is the first mention of an actual marriage in the article (only a proposal is mentioned previously, leaving it up in the air if the proposal was accepted and if a marriage actually took place). There needs to be something about getting married before referring to a marriage. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Piledhigheranddeeper, fixed! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:17, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]