Talk:Ky Schevers

Did you know nomination

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 Bruxton (talk) 01:00, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Ky Schevers in 2023

• ... that transgender rights activist Ky Schevers (pictured) transitioned to male, detransitioned to female, then retransitioned? Source: https://abcnews.go.com/US/former-detransitioner-fights-anti-transgender-movement-backed/story?id=92597182 "Schevers was assigned the sex of female at birth and later chose to start gender-affirming care by taking testosterone to transition from female to male in her mid-20s. She stopped taking testosterone, though, in the years that followed while she continued to explore and question her gender, later falling into an online anti-trans group of "detransitioners" – people who once did but no longer identify as transgender. Now, Schevers says she has “retransitioned," identifying as transmasculine and gender queer, which means she identifies with both genders."
  • ALT1: ... that transgender rights activist Ky Schevers (pictured) was assigned female at birth, transitioned to male, detransitioned, then retransitioned? Source: Same
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Letitia Christian Tyler
  • Comment: Here's one of the few people about whom one can state, with respect to both pronouns and gender identity: "She's a good looking man".

Moved to mainspace by GRuban (talk). Self-nominated at 16:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ky Schevers; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral: - I'm not sure Conservatives took her story to make their own political points is justified without a secondary source giving that analysis. I don't think a summary sentence is needed there at all, so would suggest just cutting; otherwise, reword more neutrally, e.g. Conservative commentators took interest in Schevers's story. I also would suggest changing and convinced (regarding Keira Bell) to simply prompting, as "convinced" can have negative connotations.
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - The proposed wordings could be misinterpreted as meaning that Schevers transitioned back to male.

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: My biggest problem with this article, GRuban, is that you wrote it and not me. But I'll settle for reviewing it. :D (#twinning on "BLPs on trans people which cite Evan Urquhart", btw.)

So, regarding the hook, there's the misinterpretation issue raised above, and also stylistically could be better, I think. Namely, the "transgender rights activist" pseudo-title makes it kind of clunky, and also means a large percentage of it is blue. So I'm going to suggest

ALT2: ... that Ky Schevers (pictured) transitioned to male, detransitioned to female, became a trans rights activist, and then retransitioned as transmasculine genderqueer?

I hesitated slightly on picfree here because it appears to be by Lee Leveille but uploaded to healthliberationnow.com by Schevers. However, Leveille is listed as co-maintainer of the blog, which I think is sufficient evidence of consent to the release under CC-BY SA.

Again, really interesting article. Looking forward to seeing it on the Main Page once we've tidied up these two small concerns. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@Tamzin:: Point by point:

• Biggest problem: Ha, ha! Eat your heart out, mop-wielder! Yes, it's a very interesting article and she's a very interesting subject. Thank you very much. Now, to be frank, I try to only write interesting articles. But this is certainly one of them!

As a related side note, I've now written two articles about notable trans people, this one and Iszac Henig; I'm not really planning to write more, but who knows; I write articles about interesting people when I come across them and see they don't have one yet. However transgender is a touchy subject, that I'm not nearly as knowledgeable about as I may seem. I have been lucky not to have seriously offended people, including my subjects. I had thought to consult with User:Newimpartial whom I had thought an expert in the field, and whom I had collaborated with before, but they were busy initially and more recently seem to have been topic banned from the area . So, in short - though that day may never come - in case it does and the bug bites me again to write another trans-related article, would I be able to consult with you, your adminshipness?

• Conservatives took: Rephrased to make weaker mostly following your guidance.
• convinced - rephrased to make stronger - it's not really debatable that the ruling was a direct outcome of the case. That was the point of the case. Now you could argue that Bell herself didn't do the convincing, her lawyers did, but her bringing the case caused the ruling. That's what rulings are, outcomes of cases, they don't come about without cases.
• image - Lee Leveille, the photographer, is her partner, in multiple meanings of the word; they run the "Health Liberation Now!" organization together, possibly with other volunteers or not, it's not clear, but they're definitely the main people. That's the website where the image was posted, and she didn't post it there, s/he (Leveille) did, s/he's the main website maintainer. Schevers also has two or three blogs, which is what she was asking about in the description, specifically https://reclaimingtrans.com/ and https://medium.com/@kyschevers (she closed down the crashchaoscats blogs since her retransition, but I think there were two or three of those as well). But in the end Schevers didn't post the image on any of those, Leveille posted it on HLN. Let me make all that more clear in the image description, I can see it can be confusing.
• hook - so your proposed changes are threefold: remove the link around transgender rights activist; move it later; and specify transmasculine genderqueer as retransition? I can do two of those. I would, however, like to keep the activist label earlier. I know, you want to say that she only became a trans rights activist after she renounced her detransition. However, that's not really the case; she actually was already (a) a notable activist (b) in the transgender rights field (c) during her detransition. We shouldn't erase that part, it's a big part of her notability, and it would be wrong to call her an anti-trans activist during that time; she was never categorically against gender transition as such, even though conservatives used her story that way. Her line was that it wasn't right for her at the time, so presumably it wasn't right for at least some other people, but she never categorically said it wasn't right for anyone. If you look carefully, she's not categorically against detransition itself either. Maybe we can just say "transgender activist" and not specify for or against? So, let me propose:

ALT3 ... that transgender activist Ky Schevers (pictured) transitioned to male, detransitioned to female, then retransitioned as transmasculine genderqueer? --GRuban (talk) 19:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

@GRuban: Sorry for the slow reply here, currently working on consolidating two residences' worth of people and things. You are of course welcome to swing by any time with articles on trans bios; far preferable than swinging by with a block request. :P Although we do seem to have the same number of trans bios, so, not sure how much more I know than you.

As to the matter at hand, I'm happy with all prose changes. Regarding the hook, I feel like it's still misleading to lead with "transgender activist", because she wasn't transgender when she transitioned (sorta by definition). Also wouldn't "transgender" be redundant with the rest there? What about something that starts in medias res like

ALT4: ... that after her detransition was used to argue against transgender healthcare, Ky Schevers broke with the detransition movement and later retransitioned as transmasculine genderqueer?

After all, it's implicit in a retransition that there was a past transition and detransition. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Eh. If we use the rule that any adjectives about a person have to describe them throughout their lives, rather than just what they are mostly known for, we pretty much can't say anything, since we all start out as infants without much to make us notable (with the possible exception of various royalty notable for being born). I mean, sure, your proposal does work, but it doesn't seem as hooky - as in weird, quirky, interesting, enticing readership - to me. If I can't think of anything better in a day or so, I will go with it. Or maybe you can think of yet a better one? --GRuban (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. @leek, got any ideas for hook-sharpening? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, how about: theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• ALT4a: ... that after Ky Schevers' detransition was used to oppose transgender healthcare, she retransitioned as transmasculine genderqueer?

Nice little added snap for the careful readers with the "she/her" moved closer to the "transmasc". Re: adjectives next to a bio in a hook, I tend to take a pretty flexible approach. If they were that thing during the events relayed in the hook, it works – if not, but the label is still important, use "former" or "future". theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

After thinking it over, I will accept any of ALT2, ALT3, ALT4 or ALT4a. I still think "trans/detrans/retrans" is the "hookiest", but Tam is the reviewer here, I will accept their choice. --GRuban (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• Given that 2 remaining hook contenders are my own wording, I think it's best for a fresh pair of eyes to decide on what hook(s) to approve. Review passes otherwise. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 01:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

• New reviewer needed to choose which hooks work, and approve it/them. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:22, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
• Approving Alt3. --evrik ^(talk) 15:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)