Jump to content

Talk:Emma Dumont

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

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emma Dumont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:30, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emma Dumont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of infobox and image

[edit]

It was known that in an Instagram live, Emma said she didn't want her birth name to be revealed to the public, but any source of the footage is unable to be found. After the infobox was deleted and the image was replaced, the new image was also eventually deleted. The new image of Emma's photoshoot was probably uncited. However, a compromise could be to use the old image (at the 2017 SDCC) in the infobox, but not list the birth name at all. Blacklister3000 (talk) 23:20, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 December 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 06:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Dumont → Nick Dumont – Although I have proposed a reverted move, I want to first acknowledge that I recognize this is a difficult situation; I also accept the article being at either name. Typically, a celebrity coming out as transgender / non-binary would prompt WP:DEADNAME, meaning we should immediately move the article to the individual's correct name. However, as is discussed in the sources available at this time, Dumont's representative has stated, “Their work name is still going to be Emma Dumont, but they will go by Nick with friends and family" ([1]). As such, this is not a typical case, and I do not believe it is appropriate to immediately assume this article should be listed under one name or another. Importantly, although Dumont has updated their name and pronouns on Instagram, they have not changed their social media handles or made a public statement regarding their preferences. Although I wish Dumont could speak to this issue directly, I believe it is valuable to discuss as a community. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging MikutoH and Hogariron, who previously moved the article. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Women, WikiProject Biography, WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, and WikiProject Musicians have been notified of this discussion. LIrala (talk) 05:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support We must respect the wishes of the article subject. At the top of their current Instagram profile, it reads, "Only call me Nick." I strongly encourage you all to please remove the bold typefont from their deadname.Arbeiten8 (talk) 07:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Only call me Nick if ur cool okay?" in a bio - without further explanation - leaves a lot to interpretation, and doesn't give us much to work off of. I think we may even consider keeping the entire page as Emma and leave a note in personal information that they're referred to as Nick by friends and family, because we don't know who they consider "cool" on this topic. Of course, if it is evident that their wish is not to be referred to as Emma professionally, then we should change the entire thing, but frankly I don't think that Nick should be in bold in the header. ChimaFan12 (talk) 09:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose at this point. According to LA Times, they're "adopting a new name in their personal life while keeping the name Emma for their professional one"; Huff Post "Their work name is still going to be Emma Dumont, but they will go by Nick with friends and family." Per nom, this is not a straightforward case, and unless they make an announcement that they want to be known as Nick by everybody, per WP:COMMONNAME I think we have to stick to Emma for now. We usually go by stage name, pen names, etc. if better known by these names and referred to in the press in this way. See what sources use in 3-6 months time. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment On a side note, regardless of other changes, the first sentence in the lead and in the first section should also indicate that Emma Dumont is their birth name. Also, needs refs out of the lead per WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pending further information. We don't know who they want calling them Nick, and if it's a close circle only type of thing, as their representative indicated, that is not the sort of thing we should be putting on Wikipedia in the header in any capacity. We should put that they are that they are reportedly transmasculine nonbinary, that their pronouns are they/them, and in the body under personal life that they are referred to as Nick by friends and family. ChimaFan12 (talk) 09:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per nom, I was considering starting this but didn't want to poke that hornets nest. charlotte 👸♥ 10:04, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hörgő (talk) 11:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hörgő: see WP:VOTE. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 15:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voted as this, because the aforementioned person uses the name Emma professionally. Hörgő (talk) 15:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Laterthanyouthink. Professional names will generally be more recognizable - Talk:Eddie Izzard/Archive 2#Requested move 15 March 2023 is some kind of precedent for this. estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: if they're keeping Emma as their professional name, then future sources are likely to keep using it as well, making it COMMONNAME. Unopposed to future proposals if they include sources using Nick rather than Emma. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I just did a bold edit and removed Nick from the header; I probably should have waited for discussion to begin, so if any of you are inclined to revert it, please do so and continue to discuss here. I personally do not think a friends and family/"if ur cool" name belongs in the header and is much better suited for the personal life section, until such a time where it is clear that Emma wants to go by Nick. That said, this is an unusual situation and all I'm really looking for here is input and consensus. ChimaFan12 (talk) 00:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know nothing about this person, but there are 2 reasons for keeping the alt name in the lead - firstly, that the article is the target of a redirect from that name, and secondly, that I would think that fans would expect to see mention of it. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for responding. I have one question, which is why are there redirects from that name? Shouldn't those defer to whatever the consensus of the discussion here is? From the looks of this conversation, those ought to be kept as Emma and not Nick as of now. My other concern is that I don't think that the encyclopedia nature of this Wiki should decide based on what devoted fans (i.e. "stans") think, if the subject themselves does not use the name outside of friends and family. ChimaFan12 (talk) 05:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:OTHERNAMES. We always add redirects from any significant alternative names, to aid navigation for the users. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thank you for explaining. I had taken what you said to mean we changed links on other pages, like projects Emma had been in. ChimaFan12 (talk) 10:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dumont has changed their display name on their Instagram to Nick Dumont, even though their username on the platform is still "emmadumont". I think it's clear that "Nick Dumont" will be a recognizable name regardless of what name they'll be using professionally. Therefore, the name should be kept in the lead. Aditoo17 [💬|✒️] 12:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that it should be kept in the lead, as an alternative name via the redirect. It's not trivial. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

'They' clarification in lead

[edit]

The note next to 'They' in the first line of lead saying, "According to their Instagram, Dumont uses they/them pronouns" looks ill, given that I haven't seen any other person's article using 'they' have any such clarification. Also it is cited by their Instagram page, which is a primary source and may change at any moment. Hence, for now I've removed it. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 05:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see MOS:GENDERID - we use the latest self-reported identification from BLPs with regards to their correct name and pronouns, for which we typically have their public social media accounts as reference. Raladic (talk) 15:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Written without knowing recent changes
Thanks, I've already seen that, but the thing I removed was an inline citation placed directly next to the pronoun 'they'. I don't see other articles abouts people using 'they/them' cite the pronouns this way. Also I don't think there is a need to cite the pronouns themselves if correct ones are used, however that is something I am not discussing here. --ExclusiveEditor (talk) 17:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC) [reply]
Okay, maybe we can cite their social media, but an archive of it by default would be better. ExclusiveEditor (talk) 17:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Raladic: I did everything above in a quite lot of haste, so what I mean is that I don't see other articles 'noting' in particular that the user is using those pronouns. However, given that they announced their new pronouns recently, we may add an inline citation to their social media's archive directly next to their pronoun. Also, noting their pronouns this way feels unnatural and may could be against the intention of GENDERID itself. Thanks, ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 18:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2024

[edit]

Emma Dumont is now Nick Dumont, they have transitioned and are now a transgender male. They use they/them pronouns. Hol.grain (talk) 19:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: This is under discussion above, Talk:Emma_Dumont#Requested_move_7_December_2024. LizardJr8 (talk) 19:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LizardJr8: Courtesy:  Completed ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 09:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emma_Dumont&oldid=1263037682"