Talk:Leelah Alcorn/Archive 3

2915:

or deny access. it is not the bear makn issues over bathrooms, it requires an activist component. these terf think their saving the world everytime they kill a trans kid. my ex-dr of 6 yrs, sarah pickle, is one such terf; guised as a hormone provider in cincinnati to manipulate social concensus surrounding leia alcorns suicide, she came for that reason only. i know all this because i meet leia, i did sound for the 2nd and 3rd memorials.i helped the founder of heartland trans wellness (Jac) keep that organization a trans focused resource (when sellbach and kabanoff tried to turn it into an lgbt center.) i was also targeted for holding keys to trans healthcare (if you google medical necessity of electrolysis, ill be the first thing pops up, the powerpoint , wordpress , fundraiser.) and keys to outright birth certificate corrections, not the ACLUs amendment that still outs us in any background check whatsoever. see theve developed themselves a mob hierarchy within the BDSM scene, picking up menard cult theory, working off protestant catholism, named Hellfyre (everything on fetlife with the name Sincinnati is part of them, including club Sinday in middletown an the playspace that closed last yr after my statehouse speech was played on NPR) dr sarah pickle was the access point to a heart surgeon who performed an experimental surgery on a trans sub 20 yrs ago. the surgeon won acclaim for inventing a trick of stopping the heart befor it was approved by the FDA. she told me he lost his job last yr over refusal to take a covid vaccine (though told by sarah its cause he came forward about the dog he practiced on first) black heaveyset keloid scars pilots liscence originally from NY (supposedly from christ heart center. he threatened my life. they pull kidneys an guinie pigs from the disabled an poor at the central clinic, for the UC medical arts building that is their landlords, though central acts without any oversight from UC autonomously. for 12k you can sell a kidney apparently. they dont do the surgerys in a hospital, they did them in a basement of a house they burned down last month to cover the evidence in franklin township ohio. i used details of that heart surgery, as told me by the sub they performed it on when i was being inducted (one of evelyn heffliners clients 2016, we had a pilot trans group at central), during my statehouse speech interjection of the 2020 ohio barbering bill, towards the end to express fear. yes im the trans kid who took out the speaker of the ohio house over the nuclear buyout in cleveland at gunpoint, deplatformed dave chappelle, an herald the end of the world in a theatric manor, while deregulating the hardest state to work in for any hair related field. i was there due to overegulation on the field of cosmetic therapy (electrolysis hair removal, as ive won 99+hrs of face and genital work under medicaid but cant find a provider in state willing too, so i have to become the missing component; the state is denying trans people surgery by denying us the preop). the sub wrecked their black mazda on the cinci/nky loop 2016 an went to prison with the scars from the heart surgery on their chest to prove everything. their domme is Heather, a cinci state student ambassador 2016 in clifton. they lived in NKY at the time i knew them in an apartment, shes originally from illinois. heather has an anesthesiologist brother in another state they utilize. they had a storage locker an knew the owner. im since been studied intently by various groups including the mob. was told by sarah pickle, after the buyouts the threats an the blackmail didnt work, that i would be framed or murdered if i didnt leave state an go offgrid. Sarah is admin at university of cincinnati and planned parenhood sw ohio. a legislative aid to aAntonio who pushed the fairness act which didnt cover trans at all in its conception, she worked at both central clinic and mark donovans office in urology, shes bigboned, only one person will fit that work history...this pack of terf use "tactical aquisition" on their targets and in their manipulations learned in the navy. the highway memorial was a way to deliberatly "rename" Leia alcorn so as to detract from her impact. if leia is the resistance, all the trans organizations in cincinnati are the empire.. they made a fake profile for officer Angela Vance who released leias' suicide note (that wasnt sellbach) on linked in. according to her partner now acting LGBT liason officer, Angela never has or will be on social media. they use a black girl who was recipient of the UC buyout when their cops killed that black man, she bought a gold grandam with it, shes who cut the brakes on the NKY amazon distrbution centers trans couple, worked there for the sole reason of targetting them. she also loosened bolts on my transmission and followed me waiting for my car to flip in a shelter in columbus she business being at. im attempting to come forward for the health and safety of a community ill never know. my lifes in danger but so is everyone else. im kittysbelle on wordpress

1638:"Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views. For example, the article on the Earth does not directly mention modern support for the flat Earth concept, the view of a distinct (and minuscule) minority; to do so would give undue weight to it." 1968:

is to say "here is what someone important thinks"; who is this and why should we care about their opinion? Some commenters above have accused remove !votes of simply not liking what the quote says, but I think the opposite is much more likely - there doesn't seem to be any reason to care about what O'Neill thinks, outside of some people agreeing with him. If you think what he says needs to be included because it's true, find sociologists or the like backing it up; if you think it's a major reaction to the topic, find secondary sources covering it. Don't cite it to a random quote in a thinkpiece from a not-very-reliable publication. Some of the arguments presented above also veer towards

1364:. For something to be FRINGE it would necessitate pushing a pseudo-scientific or otherwise widely rejected notion. O'Neill's analogy—that the harassment of the bereaved by a few progressive activists is a bit like the harassment of the bereaved by the Westboro Baptists—is hardly on a par with claim that the earth is flat or that the moon is made of cheese. In my view, the use of FRINGE here is being used against political analogies and commentary that some editors find distasteful, but that doesn't actually make it FRINGE, under Knowledge's definition. 1275:(at the end of the day, 'gender critical' attitudes to transgender topics are still the mainstream view across the majority of the world, and one very widely held in Western countries). Erasing reliably sourced viewpoints because they are seen as right-wing or anti-progressive is bad for Knowledge. There's already a fairly widespread social perception that Knowledge has a "liberal agenda" and is dominated by progressive-leaning editors, and stuff like this just plays right into that narrative. 2609:, then, for instance ? That individual, likewise, became famous worldwide only because of his suicide, there would be no Knowledge article if the guy hadn't put himself on fire and stoically let himself burn to death in full view of everyone -- so the same arguments should apply, shouldn't they ? Interestingly, most murderers have an article with their name only as the title, not something like "Murders of John Doe" or "John Doe's shooting spree" (or when there is an article about 2791:

context. In the case of Leelah, unfortunately a big part of her story is her parents continuing to deadname her, including on her tombstone. If we don't include her deadname, it would be difficult to convey accurate information when discussing her family, particularly since her parents' bigotry lead to her death. With biographies of trans individuals, we need to go on a case by case basis, but it is policy to use the preferred name and gender (i.e. she/her/they etc.).

1346:. That's just not how things work at Knowledge. You may disagree with O'Neill's view (and I may disagree with O'Neill's view) regarding transgender issues but that does not mean that his published article ceases to be an RS. As I said above, at the end of the day most people in the world today probably regard trans women as men; does this mean anything any of them publish on the topic suddenly cease to meet Knowledge's reliability guidelines? Clearly not. 31: 1789:. The commentator appears to primarily notable for making controversial/trolling statements in general. That he said one here does not seem noteworthy unless it were to have been discussed by multiple secondary RS. Above it was noted that two RS picked it up, but compared to comments by Dan Savage and others, this was minimal coverage at best. Inclusion of these inflammatory statements seems to be an attempt at false balance to me. 2499:

bearing on the writing of a general purpose encyclopedia) to refer to an individual exclusively in relation to that individual's death, specifically death by suicide, which implies that this is the only “notable” thing about that individual's whole life, the only worthwhile thing that person was ever capable of doing. Perhaps it is, in this particular case, and it would somehow give credence to George Carlin's stance expressed in

1608:"In Knowledge parlance, the term fringe theory is used in a very broad sense to describe an idea that departs significantly from the prevailing views or mainstream views in its particular field. Because Knowledge aims to summarize significant opinions with representation in proportion to their prominence, a Knowledge article should not make a fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is." 2170:

something to the effect of "a Tumblr post says x, y and z" and citing it to that same post. Do you think we're using the source to say something beyond what's permissible per that policy, or do you think one of the five areas where the policy advises caution applies (that it's "unduly self-serving an exceptional claim", that it "involve claims about third parties", etc.)? Of course, none of this means we're

2505:: "That's probably the most interesting thing you can do with your life--end it!" But nonetheless, the majority of other languages Wikipedias which have an article about this individual named it “Leelah Alcorn”, without mentioning the suicide part right there in the title, which seems definitely more respectful and more logical (unless both articles are present as in the lone case of turkish Knowledge). 2023: 471: 267:

themselves to the obvious male or female sex. Stating Leelah Alcorn was 'assigned male at birth' therefore carries the implication that she was born intersex ....which I believe is incorrect. Furthermore, the idea that all people are somehow 'assigned' a sex at birth negates the fact that the vast majority are either obviously male or female, and no 'assigning' is ever needed. --

1506:, most specifically, but rather than adding additional text to the RfC I would recommend removing the wording I flagged up. You would of course be completely free to then bring up arguments about WP:UNDUE and WP:FRINGE in your comments. As it stands, however, I think that the RfC wording is slanted and that will probably invalidate any outcome (whatever the outcome may be). 303:

majority of people are male or female, and no 'sex assignment' is needed. If Leelah Alcorn was deemed intersex at birth then I concur that the wiki entry should describe her as 'assigned male at birth' - however I do not believe this to be the case, and until such evidence proves otherwise, the phrase 'assigned male at birth' should be stricken or modified.--

1299:

issues”? That seems seriously POV and completely irrelevant. I also strongly believe that O’Neill’s repeated use of slurs and emphatic denial that Alcorn was a girl should really demonstrate that this is not a reliable source presenting facts; it is a deliberately inflammatory opinion piece. Therefore, its inclusion lends undue weight to extreme views.

1263:

FAC, which probably says something about my views) but I cannot shake the conclusion that at the end of the day, attempts to remove this sentence come down to an attempt to erase the views of a notable commentator because they are critical/hostile to a lot of progressive and/or LGBT activism. I think that the comments which have appeared bear this out:

2072: 520: 1534:

obviously be cited if it is factual and neutral, an article which tangentially reports on something as 'proof that conservative voices are being silenced' is pushing its own unrelated agenda, quite separate from the subject of the article, and is surely therefore not notable or Reliable by the standards which would merit inclusion.

1248:

political beliefs. I’m not accusing you of any ulterior motive, and I think for the sake of a productive and respectful discussion, allegations like this should be kept out of it. Additionally, the best decision here should stand on its own merit, and not based on why people are or aren’t supporting it.

814:

wouldn’t have any objection to an actual non-opinion article that criticizes some of the hate toward Alcorn’s parents. That is a reasonable point to have here. But a piece that repeatedly calls gays “fags”, and refuses to acknowledge that Alcorn was a girl, seems to be more hateful conjecture than fact.

1463:", which implies that these policies apply in this case (which is in dispute) and neglects to mention policies that could be cited in support of the retention of this text. I would be happy to see an RfC but would like to see wording that I feel was less slanted toward supporting the case for removal. 2848:

and the upshot of that was a version broadly the same as the current version. I'm not sure why the deadname was added back to the lede in the interim given the fairly clear existing consensus. I don't think there's much risk of confusion in the current version – the quotes from the parents and school

2417:

While using deadnames is incredibly disrespectful, I think that it should remain once, perhaps twice if we include the direct quote from her note, but once in her parents' quotes, and then the rest can be replaced with Leelah. It should be noted why the name is being inserted as (Leelah), as to avoid

1901:

The consensus right now is unequivocally clear; it can always be restored later if it swings the other way. Also, Cpotisch is correct that it was removed for over three months with no objections - I would say that that's the most recent stable version. It was your restoration, in this context, that

1566:

I think the question here is whether these are opinions worth listing, not how accurately it represents its own editors’ opinions. I also think that the comparison to the Westboro Baptist Church draws a serious false equivalency, and isn’t really relevant to the article. And again, my motivation here

1247:

Another way of looking at it is that you only just reverted my edit, three months after it was made, since apparently no one else disagreed with my choice strongly enough to roll it back. Also, I think it would be best to stop claiming that the motivation for its removal is just my (or anyone else’s)

367:

I think that by using the term "assigned male/female at birth" would be more suitable and convenient since it's what the majority of Wikipedians are used to and it's no use changing it now because if it is changed,then all the transgender-related pages would have to be altered and rephrased.However,I

2387:

remove the instances in quotes, but rather whether those quotations are significant enough or useful enough to the reader to outweigh the other concerns. It would be a shame not to mention her mother's Facebook post for example, which was widely reported and commented upon, though I suppose we might

2229:

Leelah's dead-name should be removed from the page. It's incredibly disrespectful to her, especially as a trans-woman who's death was used to start a conversation on the violence that trans individuals face. It is also not common practice to dead-name other trans individuals in their Knowledge pages

1962:

sets a lower bar but is not a blank-slate to ignore reliability for opinions - we still rely on the reliability of the source to do basic fact-checking and editorial control in terms of eg. an opinion at least being representative of something and not being completely groundless, and we particularly

1656:

Indeed so, nobody disputes that Spiked is a reliable source for its own opinions, but the matter here is whether those opinions - which are actually on a different subject - are actually notable, or relevant to THIS article. Just as you wouldn't include a section outlining the political views of the

1327:

explicitly states that to achieve NPOV an article must represent "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Attempts to remove these sentences are a textbook case of editorial bias,

1204:

and have been in place for two years with no prior concerns being raised about them (although the latter is not in itself a reason for retention). They reflect press commentary of an event discussed in the section, with press commentary from other sources (some from even less mainstream sources than

917:

clarifies fringe theory does not just refer to scientific theories, for example, but any ideas that are far out the mainstream. "In Knowledge parlance, the term fringe theory is used in a very broad sense to describe an idea that departs significantly from the prevailing views or mainstream views in

690:

Thanks for bringing the issue to Talk. Thanks also for correcting me about when I added that information; in my head I thought I added it in around about the time when I brought this article to GAN, way before it even reached FAC. Clearly my memory was wrong. That still means, however, that the text

212:

I notice the word f*** is used three times in this article. Tried to change this but it wouldn’t let me. I take swearing very seriously. Can somebody edit that for me please and put it like I did with the asterisks? I’m not sure we should be swearing on this encyclopaedia. Be like the newspapers and

2914:

hi, used to come to our support group in cincinnati. she named herself after princess Leia. leelah alcorn is a deliberate mispelling. it was a fem version of her dead middle name. understand the definition of terf is one who premeditatedly inserts themselves into positions of power above us to harm

2809:

I mean, truthfully, her deadname should be removed, especially in the lede as she's unknown under that name. However, we then have to deal with the section on her parents and the quotes using her deadname. If that comes out of nowhere, it's confusing for the reader. This is something editors should

2402:

My ideal situation would be that all instances of her previous name are removed, including the ones in quotes, but obviously we need to balance it. If there's additional consensus to remove the ones in quotes and replace them with (out of respect), I would recommend that. The fact that her mother

2308:

I don't have any objection to removing the name, but would appreciate clarity on which instances (if any) others think should stay in the article. At present "Joshua" is used six times in the article and "Josh" once. Is there a consensus to remove the three instances that don't appear in quotations

1967:

weight. This feels like a quote that was dropped in because it reflected an editor's views (and in an effort to express a framing that cannot be reliably sourced as fact) rather than because it represents any significant commentary or line of thought about the topic. The purpose of opinion pieces

843:

Respectfully, I would appreciate it if you would stop claiming that I’m only objecting due to differing political views. That is not the case. I am simply taking issue with the inclusion of material that seems to represent a fringe opinion, by someone who uses repetitive offensive, homophobic≤, and

708:

are far-right sources, so I get the impression that their understanding of "far-right" might encompass almost anything they disagree with). The fact that this piece of commentary is being singled out for removal, when the inclusion of press commentary from other sources—like the more geographically

1595:

IS anyone saying that we should "not mention O'Neill's views because we disagree with them"? Again, I'm not simply pushing to have this removed due to my own political views. If irrelevant anti-conservative opinions were expressed somewhere for no logical reason, I would remove them as well (and I

1533:

to begin with. But perhaps more to the point, I think there's an important difference between a journalistic report of an event, and a report which uses a current event to push a particular viewpoint or agenda, which seems to be the case here. While good reporting can come from anywhere and should

1262:

I only raise the issue of political POV pushing because in this particular case I believe it has clear relevance. I really don't want to make personal attacks or criticise editors for their personal viewpoints (particularly as I may share said beliefs - hell, I brought this article through GAN and

813:

Do you dispute that this is an opinion piece, and not an article? And that it seems a bit POV to say that liberals are “intolerant toward anyone holding conservative views on social issues”? That seems to be a subjective attack on the left that doesn’t lend any relevant information to this page. I

798:

Saying that "O’Neill is objectively a far right source" based on personal opinion is not really helpful. If such a judgment were "objective", there would be evidence for it independent of personal opinion; say, a reliable source actually describing him as "far right". The article about him doesn't

741:

to a minority perspective. What is it about O'Neill's perspective that makes it worthy of inclusion in an encyclopaedia article? His views are clearly not mainstream (I presume we can agree on this). They haven't, to my knowledge, been reported on or discussed in other reliable sources. At present

2641:

Maria Hertogh because I'd significantly expanded the article to include more about Maria's life after the riots, and there were no objections raised. Recall WP:BEBOLD. Also, I must point out that per WP:TRANS, you must refer to the subject of the article by her pronouns and appropriate gender. Ms

2498:

The article is named “Suicide of Leelah Alcorn”. I find this extremely disparaging (much more so than the so-called “deadnaming” mentioned in above discussions -- a term I just discovered reading this very page by the way, so this whole debate merely amounts to niche nitpicking and should have no

2271:

Yes, it should be removed. She stated that her name was Leelah, on her Tumblr page, which I assume is good enough as it is used to describe herself. There is no good reason to deadname her, though I do agree with Gaybabyxan that it ought to be mentioned that her parents used it at her funeral, to

2169:

explains that it's acceptable to use self-published sources (e.g. Tumblr posts) "as sources of information about themselves" provided they don't fall foul of any of the listed restrictions. In this article a Tumblr post is used precisely as a source of information about itself; i.e., we're saying

858:

Sorry, are you confusing me with Midnightblueowl? It was Midnightblueowl who suggested that you made a politically-biased edit; I don't know or care anything about your political views. The relevant point is that you want to remove certain content based simply on unsupported assertions that it is

775:

My edit was not due to any political motivation, and I apologize for both coming off that way and accidentally deleting the reference to the Washington Post. However, O’Neill is objectively a far right source who pushes his POV endlessly in that article. He uses slurs, goes on a tangent about the

2969:

Alright, most of this is incomprehensible so I'm just addressing the name thing - do you have a public source for that, and how the hell did she get to a support group??? Her parents tried to cut off her access to anything gender-affirming, as shown by the existing article and many Tumblr posts.

2790:

if a person was not known under their deadname, it shouldn't be mentioned. If, such as in the case of Caitlyn Jenner, the person was well known prior to transitioning, an explanation is included in the bio, but the person is at all times referred to by their chosen name outside of the historical

1612:

I don't think Spiked is a mainstream source, or that the opinions it expresses are widely held. O'Neill is not simply criticizing the people who went after Alcorn's parents. He–and I know I've said this many times already–uses inflammatory language and slurs, and refuses to accept Alcorn's trans

1298:

This article exhibits a fringe take on the issue, and the way it is presented here includes and emphasizes some completely irrelevant claims. Why should Knowledge be claiming that this “represents a new breed of illiberal liberal that are intolerant of anyone holding conservative views on social

898:

states, "In Knowledge parlance, the term fringe theory is used in a very broad sense to describe an idea that departs significantly from the prevailing views or mainstream views in its particular field. Because Knowledge aims to summarize significant opinions with representation in proportion to

1412:

I perhaps was a little verbose above and for that I apologise, but at the end of the day every argument presented at RfC should be up for discussion (including my own). In the case above, I believe that Cpotisch fundamentally misrepresented three Knowledge policies (NPOV; FRINGE; RS) and it was

2617:), which would seem to imply that, although they became famous only because of their criminal actions, their whole life up to that point should somehow be deemed significant enough to grant them that kind of consideration. Perhaps that Alcorn individual should have murdered 30 or 40 people and 2054:

Change "Jill Soloway, the writer of the television show Transparent, dedicated her Golden Globe Award for Best Television Series to Alcorn." to "Jill Soloway, the writer of the television show Transparent, dedicated their Golden Globe Award for Best Television Series to Alcorn." This is to be

302:

I disagree. Sex assignment is specific to the intersex community and any mis-use of the term because it is simply more familiar to readers does Knowledge a disservice; its function is to supply proper/factual information and not to win some popularity contest. Again, the vast and overwhelming

2642:

Alcorn used she/her/hers and was a girl in life; we are bound to respect that in the wake of her death. I am satisfied that while you have raised a pertinent issue about the naming of the article, you do so in language which means to demean her. Be a better Wikipedian, please, and thank you.

1229:, which makes it quite clear that to achieve NPOV, an article must "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Removal, in my view, represents just such an "editorial bias". 266:

The majority of people are not assigned a sex at birth, they are simply noted as male or female. The entire idea of 'assigning a sex at birth' comes from those in the intersex medical community who deal primarily with infants born with ambiguous sexual characteristics; those that do not lend

1972:, ie. this idea that criticisms of progressive ideals must be included regardless of how obscure the source is in order to "balance" things out in some ineffable way. That's not how inclusion or balance works - we decide balance based on the reputation and prominence of the sources. -- 1864:

Did you have consensus to revert my edit in the first place? Because again, it stood for three months without any objections. At the moment, I see no consensus that my edit should have been reverted in the first place. I won't put it back, but this seems like a double standard -

550:

on WP need to match those on Wikidata? Because while "American transgender girl" is an adequate short description of "Leelah Alcorn" (which is what Wikidata has an entry for), it seems inadequate for this article, which is more of about "suicide of American transgender girl".

2374:

I don't really see the need for an RfC unless anyone wants to argue the name should be removed in every case, or that it shouldn't be removed in any case. It looks like there's a reasonably clear consensus to remove the uses not in quotes and leave those that are in quotes.

899:

their prominence, a Knowledge article should not make a fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is." O'Neill isn't expressing a "fringe theory", or any kind of "theory". He simply expressing a personal opinion. Shouldn't the difference be clear?

1151:"O'Neill's point of view is the only point of view the article offers on the specific issue of the specific matter of harassment of Alcorn's parents". With respect, I don't believe that that is entirely true. The sentence above includes some commentary on the issue from 1132:

has ascribed any significance to them. Second, O'Neill's point of view is the only point of view the article offers on the specific issue of the specific matter of harassment of Alcorn's parents, which would be questionable even if his views were mainstream.

828:

The material about O'Neill's views is in a section titled "Reaction." It seems quite appropriate to mention an opinion piece in a section dealing with Reactions to the event the article is about. Your disagreeing with O'Neill's views is irrelevant, as noted.

695:

certainly applies regarding the need for consensus prior to removal. I do believe that the original removal (by Cpotisch, not you) was politically motivated POV-pushing, which is the main reason why I reverted. Their claim that they were removing a

2639:

Abobibibelot, there is no real standardised criterion, I believe, at which the renaming of a person-centric event Knowledge article to the name of the person themself becomes appropriate. I made this change awhile back with Maria Hertogh riots --:

2256:

Yes! I agree, this should happen. Deadnaming trans people is part of the problem. Leelah was her name and there's no reason to mention her even having a deadname other than stating that her mother used it for her funeral as a fucked up power trip.

918:

its particular field." Near every mainstream English language news source discussed Alcorn, and they included opinions from many more notable people. It seems like we are valuing marginal but extreme opinions by including Spiked magazine over say

1221:. For this reason (among others), I have concerns that this attempt at removal is a case of political-POV pushing. Obviously a lot of progressives might not be too happy with seeing comparisons drawn between certain progressive activists and the 776:

left being “intolerant” and conservatives being harassed for no reason, and perhaps most importantly, continues to misgender Alcorn throughout the article. I do not think that sort of language is suitable as a source here. I strongly agree with

1172:

Yes, I suppose that's true. I don't really like the phrasing of that either – it's a few words of opinion, stripped of context in an otherwise factual sentence – but that's neither here nor there. (Also, "self-appointed vigilantes"? Aren't all

715:—is not being questioned again suggests to me that such removals are politically motivated. Political POV pushing is, of course, something Knowledge likes to avoid. Moreover, nothing has been presented suggesting that O'Neill or Spiked are not 1209:) appearing at various other junctures throughout this article: it is thus pertinent that this piece of commentary is being singled out for removal while no concerns are being raised regarding the inclusion of commentary from, for example, 1393:

I would advise against doing so – your feelings have been made clear several times over, so it's a waste of your time and that of others who might read your comments under the misapprehension that they contain anything new or worthwhile.

746:

featured in the article on the question of the harassment of Alcorn's parents: there are no quotations articulating opinions that are directly at odds with his, so the weight we're ascribing to his view vastly exceeds what's warranted.

387:

I don't think that her dead name should be included in the article. As someone who had to fight for respect and recognition for her whole life it seems disrespectful to tell the world her dead name in such an easily accessible article.

1834:

I'm removing the O'Neill content until we get consensus otherwise. My previous edit stood for three months before Midnightblueowl undid it without getting consensus, so I think mine should be viewed as what was the "current" version.

282:

The more widely understood definition of sex assignment is when a doctor declares a baby to be either male or female, not physically "giving" a gender to an intersex baby. I do appreciate your reasoning, but according to

1906:. (Truthfully, given the increasingly one-sided nature of this RFC, I would say it was reckless. It is not correct that we have to wait an entire month when an RFC's outcome is obvious; a consensus is a consensus.) -- 2877:

The article says she was walking southbound on I-71 before she was struck near the South Lebanon exit, but the South Lebanon exit is north of Kings Mills? Either there should be some clarification here or it's wrong.

1700:

Writing for the United Kingdom-based website Spiked, the columnist Brendan O'Neill compared their tactics with those of the Westboro Baptist Church, for both "view harassment of the bereaved as a legitimate form of

443:

say, and we should not be deviating from that course of action to show someone some form of deference or respect (or, conversely, disrespect). Reliable Sources regularly refer to her birthname; thus, so should we.

844:

anti-trans language. I believe that that lends doubt on whether these are opinions worth listing here. The fact that it is the “reactions” section does not mean that we have to include every response or opinion.

1058:

stated that those harassing Alcorn's parents represented "a new breed of illiberal liberal" who were intolerant of anyone holding conservative views on social issues. He compared their tactics with those of the

2323:

I assume we can't remove the quoted ones, but I would support removing the lede, infobox and "Life" section instances. It might be worth making a note by the first instance of the quote that this is Leelah's

502:

Take out the "had" in "Within a year, the city of Cincinnati had criminalised conversion therapy. " please, it's not needed and might be taken to imply this was just the beginning of many such effects

2830: 737:

is not the issue here – of course O'Neill is a reliable source for his own views. Rather, the issue is whether his views are significant or encyclopaedic, or whether including them ascribes

2567: 1581:

Saying that we should not mention O'Neill's views because we disagree with them (because they draw a "serious false equivalency", or whatever) doesn't have any basis in policy.

1225:

and I fear that it is this, consciously or not, which underpins the present attempts to remove this prose. Accordingly, removal of these sentences would be in contravention of

1567:

really isn’t political, and I don’t have an issue with the inclusion of a conservative take on the issue, but this strikes me as far too POV to fairly represent that side.

668:. I'm happy to discuss this further and seek a consensus, but the only argument that's been made for including the quotation is spurious, so there isn't much to discuss. – 2667:

Some friends are trying to make me pray about it and they are trying to make me a cis girl . I’m a trans boy not a girl . I don’t want this conversion it’s not working .

2625:

to be treated with some dignity, rather than some cipher to advance a cause... (At least (s)he wouldn't have traumatized a poor truck driver for the rest of his life.) --

1552:

Regarding Spiked's reliability: We are using it as a primary source for the editor's opinion. Are you arguing that it is not reliable for its own editors' opinions?

2099:

It says plain as day that Tumblr is a self published source in the rules. You shouldn’t be using self published sources whether or not it is related to the topic.

2403:

still uses her previous name is definitely significant enough to warrant inclusion, though the name itself does not necessarily need to be included, I suppose?

1323:

making that claim. Knowledge is stating that Brendan O'Neill, a cultural commentator, made this claim. Big difference. That's why it isn't POV at all. In fact,

2309:(in the lede, infobox and first sentence under "Life"), while leaving the four in quotes (quoting her suicide note, her mother, her school and her father)? – 2829:

If you're looking for consensus, I definitely agree that her deadname could be removed from the lede and instead to the first graf discussing her parents.

1389:

The purpose of an RfC is to invite contributions from other editors (i.e. those not previously involved) in order to achieve a consensus. If you intend to

1124:. First, the views articulated by O'Neill in this passage, including but not limited to his comparison of LGBT+ activists to the far-right hate group the 1958:(the author is making sweeping claims about society and culture) and rarely meet that standard. Regarding the argument, above, that it's just opinion, 962:

I've opened a request for comment (which is not a vote, but will hopefully result in getting other editors' input and arriving at a consensus) below. –

1887:

was the "current" version. Your edit was the BOLD alteration. Let's just wait and see how the RfC pans out rather than getting ahead of ourselves.

1081: 799:

contain anything like that. Simply disagreeing with O’Neill's article, or disliking the language it uses, is not a justification for removing it.

873:

Many commentators more notable than O'Neill expressed opinions on Alcorn; I lean towards agreeing that inclusion of his views would run afoul of

2717: 333: 159: 2452:

Please unite this article with Wikidata item Leelah Alcorn (Q18697285) and let it link to articles about same topic in other languages.

2687: 231: 193: 134:

to solicit broader input as this article (and anything associated with it, like a move) has the potential to be very controversial. —

2834: 2922: 2353:. Given that this is rated as a Featured Article, this might be a decision that needs to be made through a Request for Comment (RfC). 1817:

as per legobot, this is not encyclopedic content, simply an inflammatory statement by a commentator in a dubiously reliable source --

1467:, would you agree to either removing the wording which I find objectionable or ending this RfC and launching a new one in its place? 1455:

I have concerns about the neutrality of the wording of this RfC, specifically the inclusion of "or should the passage be removed per

2754: 2513: 2245: 1342:

Moreover, the fact that O'Neill does not hold to the view that trans women are women does not mean his op-ed cannot constitute a

2590:

Have you read the previous discussion on this topic from Jan 2015 (linked toward the top of this page as a move discussion)? --

1226: 2349:

Removal from the lede shouldn't prove too controversial but removals from the main body may raise concerns about contravening

2893:

The source appears to be saying that the truck which struck her was traveling southbound. This should definitely be fixed. --

2710:

The caption for one of the images here refers to Joey Soloway by their deadname. I feel like that should probably be fixed.

2672: 2610: 1586: 1443: 904: 864: 834: 804: 766: 508: 2606: 1055: 859:"fringe"; I'm left trying to explain that that won't do. Remember that the content is presented as O’Neill's opinion only. 2614: 2007:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1994:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1036:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

647:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1642:

Someone simply holding a view and expressing it through a site we know does not necessarily make it worthy of inclusion.

1042: 64: 59: 2475: 1850:

And I've restored it. Best to wait until an uninvolved editor comes along and closes the RfC with a specific decision.

1766:

As well as waiting enough time to let people comment, you'd actually have to have a consensus. I don't see one here.

1413:

important that that was flagged up, both for them and for other editors reading this. Critical scrutiny is important.

84:

I think that this article should be renamed "Suicide of Leelah Alcorn" as it better describes the article. Thoughts?

2946: 2862: 2483: 2393: 2314: 2179: 2114: 1490: 1399: 1182: 1138: 1108: 967: 752: 716: 673: 531: 440: 89: 38: 2649: 2571: 2358: 1892: 1855: 1824: 1757: 1725: 1511: 1472: 1418: 1369: 1351: 1343: 1333: 1280: 1234: 1201: 1162: 1129: 724: 449: 2668: 2033: 1582: 1439: 900: 860: 830: 800: 762: 504: 481: 337: 308: 272: 163: 2721: 2457: 1600:

take on the issue, that it pushes the author's irrelevant anti-liberal opinions, and that its inclusion lends

406:

given half the article is about people deadnaming her after her death, it seems relevant to put it in there. -

235: 197: 2155: 2121: 2104: 2029: 1222: 1217: 1125: 1060: 711: 477: 2529: 2926: 2818: 2799: 2630: 2580: 2553: 2241: 2140: 1969: 1806: 1596:

have in the past). So your argument strikes me as a bit of a strawman. What I AM saying is that this is a

927: 738: 733:

Setting aside entirely irrelevant comments about other editors' political motivations, I'd point out that

601: 393: 373: 304: 268: 115: 2757:

which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —

2469: 2453: 2060: 2350: 1955: 436: 228: 189: 85: 2942: 2858: 2626: 2576: 2479: 2389: 2310: 2175: 1486: 1464: 1395: 1178: 1134: 1104: 963: 779: 748: 685: 669: 527: 430: 403: 389: 2776: 1613:

identity, which diverges considerably from what Knowledge stands for, and from the other sources here.

2989: 2975: 2960: 2938: 2918: 2883: 2713: 2501: 2369: 2354: 2339: 2299: 2295: 2283: 2262: 2258: 2237: 2233: 1888: 1851: 1753: 1721: 1666: 1539: 1507: 1468: 1414: 1384: 1365: 1347: 1329: 1276: 1230: 1158: 720: 655: 445: 284: 155: 142: 2686:

for discussing transphobia except as it relates to Leelah Alcorn. If you ask at the Reference Desk (

2419: 2418:

confusion and/or more people trying to find out why rather than reading the article for what it is.

2056: 1485:

What "policies that could be cited in support of the retention of this text" do you have in mind? –

244:

As long as the word not used in Knowledge's tone (for example, a quote), it's allowed on Knowledge.

2683: 2423: 2214: 2166: 1977: 1959: 1911: 1822: 1153: 2899: 2787: 2772: 2738: 2695: 2596: 2408: 2333: 2277: 2151: 2117: 2100: 1938: 1870: 1840: 1771: 1742: 1707: 1647: 1572: 1557: 1390: 1304: 1253: 1016: 953: 849: 819: 789: 627: 414: 348:'Assigned male at birth' is in fact commonly used terminology for trans women. If you read up on 47: 17: 2811: 2792: 2388:

find a way to discuss it without quoting it – that would be a topic for further discussion. –

2199: 2136: 2084: 1820: 1790: 1050: 594: 369: 323: 292: 249: 108: 1597: 1460: 1361: 1211: 1020: 931: 914: 895: 874: 631: 570:

1. Shorten it. 2. Take out the names of the parents. 3. Article is written as an eulogy.

218: 179: 174:

Please can somebody change the word f*** which is used three times and put it in asterisks?

152:

How about just "Leelah Alcorn" it is about her life even if we mainly know of her in death

2537: 1328:

seeking to strip out views that are seen as critical of progressive and/or trans activism.

2985: 2971: 2956: 2879: 2851:

She rejected the name she was given by her parents, and signed her suicide note "(Leelah)

1951: 1786: 1662: 1601: 1535: 1456: 1121: 1010: 939: 919: 886: 878: 575: 556: 357: 136: 1128:, are not mainstream views; there's no evidence they're held by anyone else, or that any 1045:

section of this article include the following passage, or should the passage be removed?

677: 2622: 2210: 1973: 1907: 1903: 1503: 1324: 349: 2810:

further discuss. Can we introduce her deadname only in the section about her parents?

2474:

That would have to be done on Wikidata, so you'd probably be better off raising it at

130:

I don't personally see anything wrong with doing so, but I would recommend initiating

2894: 2758: 2733: 2691: 2591: 2404: 2378: 2329: 2303: 2273: 1964: 1932: 1880: 1866: 1836: 1767: 1738: 1703: 1658: 1643: 1568: 1553: 1391:

write lengthy screeds in response to every point that expresses disagreement with you

1300: 1249: 949: 845: 815: 785: 692: 408: 2993: 2979: 2964: 2950: 2930: 2903: 2887: 2866: 2838: 2823: 2804: 2780: 2761: 2742: 2725: 2699: 2676: 2654: 2634: 2600: 2584: 2487: 2461: 2427: 2412: 2397: 2362: 2343: 2318: 2287: 2266: 2249: 2218: 2203: 2195: 2183: 2159: 2144: 2125: 2108: 2088: 2079: 2064: 1981: 1942: 1915: 1896: 1874: 1859: 1844: 1828: 1809: 1775: 1761: 1746: 1729: 1711: 1670: 1651: 1590: 1576: 1561: 1543: 1530: 1515: 1494: 1476: 1447: 1422: 1403: 1373: 1355: 1337: 1308: 1284: 1257: 1238: 1186: 1142: 1112: 971: 957: 943: 923: 908: 890: 868: 853: 838: 823: 808: 793: 770: 756: 734: 728: 606: 579: 560: 535: 512: 453: 419: 397: 377: 361: 341: 327: 319: 312: 296: 288: 276: 253: 245: 239: 222: 201: 183: 167: 147: 131: 125: 93: 2525: 1273:

because he doesn't accept Alcorn as a female his op-ed cannot be a Reliable Source

214: 175: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

1063:, for both "view harassment of the bereaved as a legitimate form of politics". 935: 882: 571: 552: 353: 2563: 2937:

I'm not going to read all of this (and it's very unlikely anyone will), but

1931:

Agree with other opposes, in particular this seems like giving undo weight.

1174: 761:

I agree with Midnightblueowl that it is reasonable to include this content.

2939:

article titles use the the name by which the subject is most commonly known

2174:

to use the source, and there may be other good reasons for not doing so. –

1157:. Granted, it's not as extensive as the O'Neill sentence, but it is there. 2690:) they will be happy to point you to appropriate resources. Best wishes! 2325: 107:

articles and suicide is more specific. I can't think of a reason not to.

2055:

consistent with Soloway's pronouns, as listed on their Knowledge page.

1883:

works, Cpotisch. The text in question was in place for several years:

1752:

Best wait a month or so. That's how long these things often play out.

2559: 1269:

claiming that his views are not "mainstream" and thus can be removed

1265:

claiming that O'Neill needs to be removed because he's "far right"

287:, it's recommended to use language most familiar to most readers. 1950:. It's a thinkpiece in a not-very-high-profile source; it seems 1954:. These sort of chest-beating culture-war pieces veer towards 2017: 784:

that this gives undue weight to a fringe stance on the issue.

465: 25: 1529:

I am actually surprised that anyone considers Spiked to be a

2494:

Why is this person designated only in relation to suicide ?

352:

you'd see it is not meant to only apply to intersex people.

2230:

and that standard should be upheld for this page as well.

1360:

I would also argue that this does not in any way represent

2549: 2545: 2541: 2533: 2521: 2517: 2509: 2272:

recognise that they still refused to accept her identity.

2095:

Tumblr isn’t a reliable source read the rules on Knowledge

700:" pretty much confirms that (for what it's worth, neither 2165:

I also think you've misunderstood the applicable policy.

2150:

It really doesn’t matter. You can’t use it as a source.

2194:

Should I change it to leelah alcorn, born Josh alcorn?

1737:

So at what point should we say that we have consensus?

1272: 1268: 1264: 1009:

The consensus is against inclusion of this passage per

697: 665: 661: 547: 1082:"'Justice for Leelah': behold the new, PC intolerance" 719:

so I really don't see a strong case for removal here.

2845: 1046: 1007: 691:has been a part of this article since 2017, so 618: 462:Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2018 2135:something was posted on the site. No more. -- 2014:Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2019 1048:Writing for the United Kingdom-based website 662:was not in the article at the time of the FAC 8: 1634:From WP:NPOV (due and undue weight section), 698:few lines that just quoted far right sources 318:What wording would you like to see instead? 2916: 2753:There is a move discussion in progress on 2711: 2337: 2281: 2231: 153: 368:do acknowledge and appreciate your idea. 2771:Why in the world is her deadname shown. 1694:) How about remove the first part about 621: 2831:2600:1008:B01B:1D26:1921:F771:FF25:E3BD 2605:I hadn't -- now I have. But what about 2131:I think you misunderstand. The fact is 1720:A partial removal is acceptable to me. 1661:in an article about the postal system. 1072: 2857:, which is pretty self-explanatory. – 2850: 1699: 1695: 383:"she was given the name Joshua Alcorn" 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2476:wikidata:Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts 7: 2941:, which in this case is "Leelah". – 1030:The following discussion is closed. 922:, with PFLAG and Trevor Project, in 641:The following discussion is closed. 332:How about "born biologically male"? 2984:Also her dead middle name was Ryan 2688:Knowledge:Reference_desk/Humanities 1785:- Summoned by LegoBot - Oppose per 1080:O'Neill, Brendan (5 January 2015). 2910:its Leia Alcorn, not leelah alcorn 439:. We are here to reflect what the 24: 2755:Talk:Suicide of Blake Brockington 2209:Don't. see the above discussion. 2003:The discussion above is closed. 1990:The discussion above is closed. 1604:to extreme views. From WP:Fringe, 2328:, so as not to confuse readers. 2225:Removing the Dead Name of Leelah 2070: 2021: 1963:rely on the source to establish 1696:a new breed of illiberal liberal 518: 469: 29: 2846:discussed a couple of years ago 2613:there is also an article about 1227:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 1200:. The sentences are cited to a 660:The quote from Brendan O'Neill 99:I guess there's precedent with 2867:16:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC) 2839:17:53, 19 September 2021 (UTC) 2824:23:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC) 2805:23:24, 11 September 2021 (UTC) 2781:21:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC) 1023:) 01:22, 25 August 2019 (UTC) 742:O'Neill's opinion is actually 634:) 01:22, 25 August 2019 (UTC) 1: 2904:17:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC) 2888:17:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC) 2743:11:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC) 2726:08:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC) 2700:18:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC) 2677:13:29, 9 September 2020 (UTC) 2655:23:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC) 2344:22:20, 28 December 2019 (UTC) 2319:12:59, 28 December 2019 (UTC) 2288:11:17, 28 December 2019 (UTC) 2267:18:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC) 2250:19:53, 19 November 2019 (UTC) 2184:20:51, 20 November 2019 (UTC) 2160:20:19, 20 November 2019 (UTC) 2145:20:17, 20 November 2019 (UTC) 2126:20:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC) 2109:20:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC) 948:Should we just vote on this? 580:08:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC) 277:07:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC) 254:17:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC) 168:03:43, 28 December 2017 (UTC) 148:16:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 126:00:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 94:12:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC) 2951:17:34, 6 December 2021 (UTC) 2931:18:16, 4 December 2021 (UTC) 536:13:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC) 513:12:52, 11 October 2018 (UTC) 2994:00:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC) 2980:03:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC) 2965:03:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC) 2749:Move discussion in progress 2635:23:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC) 2601:10:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC) 2585:10:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC) 2488:22:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC) 2413:15:56, 1 January 2020 (UTC) 2398:15:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC) 2363:12:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC) 2089:01:38, 6 October 2019 (UTC) 2065:01:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC) 2048:to reactivate your request. 2036:has been answered. Set the 1982:16:46, 22 August 2019 (UTC) 1943:19:49, 14 August 2019 (UTC) 1916:16:57, 22 August 2019 (UTC) 1897:19:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC) 1875:18:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC) 1860:09:46, 14 August 2019 (UTC) 1845:19:28, 11 August 2019 (UTC) 1730:19:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC) 496:to reactivate your request. 484:has been answered. Set the 435:Remember that Knowledge is 313:05:51, 4 January 2018 (UTC) 297:02:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC) 240:11:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC) 223:18:09, 2 January 2018 (UTC) 202:11:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC) 184:18:11, 2 January 2018 (UTC) 3012: 2462:21:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC) 2428:15:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC) 2219:12:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC) 2204:02:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC) 1829:03:52, 8 August 2019 (UTC) 1810:19:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC) 561:06:05, 22 March 2019 (UTC) 342:21:29, 31 March 2018 (UTC) 262:Assigned male at birth.... 2557:Suicide of Leelah Alcorn: 2383:It's not so much that we 1776:16:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC) 1762:09:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC) 1747:20:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC) 1712:22:15, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1671:14:47, 27 July 2019 (UTC) 1652:14:10, 27 July 2019 (UTC) 1591:11:16, 27 July 2019 (UTC) 1577:03:59, 27 July 2019 (UTC) 1562:22:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1544:17:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1516:16:48, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1495:16:40, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1477:16:07, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1448:23:40, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1423:16:39, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1404:16:08, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1374:15:50, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1356:15:23, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1338:15:23, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1309:23:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1285:15:04, 26 July 2019 (UTC) 1258:23:36, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1239:17:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1187:18:02, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1143:16:40, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1113:16:40, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 1079: 972:16:41, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 958:15:10, 25 July 2019 (UTC) 944:10:13, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 930:in the NYT. That is what 909:09:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 891:07:33, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 869:05:08, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 854:02:37, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 839:00:47, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 824:00:45, 24 July 2019 (UTC) 809:23:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC) 794:17:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC) 771:03:38, 22 July 2019 (UTC) 757:22:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC) 729:16:25, 21 July 2019 (UTC) 678:16:03, 21 July 2019 (UTC) 666:added it six months later 378:16:23, 3 April 2018 (UTC) 362:09:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC) 328:01:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC) 2762:05:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC) 2034:Suicide of Leelah Alcorn 2005:Please do not modify it. 1992:Please do not modify it. 1033:Please do not modify it. 644:Please do not modify it. 607:14:24, 2 July 2019 (UTC) 482:Suicide of Leelah Alcorn 454:09:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC) 420:07:49, 5 July 2018 (UTC) 398:01:46, 5 July 2018 (UTC) 132:an official move request 2650:IseDaByThatEditsTheBoat 1223:Westboro Baptist Church 1218:The Cincinnati Enquirer 1126:Westboro Baptist Church 1061:Westboro Baptist Church 712:The Cincinnati Enquirer 1065: 1025: 928:Jennifer Finney Boylan 636: 213:put it in asterisks. 1698:and leave just this: 1438:per Midnightblueowl. 42:of past discussions. 2669:Freedomnowandforever 2644:Sustenance in Sonder 2502:Life is worth losing 1583:FreeKnowledgeCreator 1440:FreeKnowledgeCreator 901:FreeKnowledgeCreator 861:FreeKnowledgeCreator 831:FreeKnowledgeCreator 801:FreeKnowledgeCreator 763:FreeKnowledgeCreator 505:Ur Momma Non-Notable 2190:Should I change it? 2115:WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK 1177:self-appointed?) – 1154:The Washington Post 1002:Request for comment 717:WP:Reliable Sources 702:The Washington Post 612: 441:WP:RELIABLE SOURCES 2854: 2615:the perpetrator(s) 1344:WP:Reliable Source 1202:WP:Reliable Source 913:First sentence of 620:See the RfC close 548:short descriptions 18:Talk:Leelah Alcorn 2943:Arms & Hearts 2933: 2921:comment added by 2902: 2859:Arms & Hearts 2852: 2741: 2732:Fixed, thanks. -- 2728: 2716:comment added by 2599: 2480:Arms & Hearts 2390:Arms & Hearts 2346: 2311:Arms & Hearts 2290: 2252: 2236:comment added by 2176:Arms & Hearts 2052: 2051: 1692:Support Inclusion 1487:Arms & Hearts 1465:Arms & Hearts 1436:Support inclusion 1396:Arms & Hearts 1296:Oppose inclusion 1198:Support inclusion 1179:Arms & Hearts 1135:Arms & Hearts 1105:Arms & Hearts 964:Arms & Hearts 780:Arms & Hearts 749:Arms & Hearts 686:Arms & Hearts 670:Arms & Hearts 542:Short description 528:Arms & Hearts 500: 499: 418: 170: 158:comment added by 77: 76: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3003: 2898: 2849:are preceded by 2821: 2815: 2802: 2796: 2737: 2595: 2473: 2382: 2373: 2307: 2074: 2073: 2043: 2039: 2025: 2024: 2018: 1948:Oppose inclusion 1935: 1929:Oppose inclusion 1826: 1815:Oppose inclusion 1803: 1800: 1797: 1794: 1783:Oppose inclusion 1688:Partial removal? 1527:Oppose inclusion 1388: 1212:The New Republic 1118:Oppose inclusion 1097: 1096: 1094: 1092: 1077: 1054:, the columnist 1043:Alcorn's parents 1035: 783: 744:the only opinion 689: 659: 646: 604: 598: 591:3. No, it's not. 522: 521: 491: 487: 473: 472: 466: 434: 412: 139: 122: 119: 112: 86:MagicatthemovieS 73: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3011: 3010: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2912: 2875: 2819: 2813: 2800: 2794: 2769: 2751: 2708: 2665: 2623:suicide by cops 2607:Thích Quảng Đức 2496: 2467: 2450: 2376: 2370:Midnightblueowl 2367: 2355:Midnightblueowl 2293: 2227: 2192: 2097: 2071: 2041: 2037: 2022: 2016: 2011: 1998: 1970:WP:FALSEBALANCE 1933: 1889:Midnightblueowl 1879:That's not how 1852:Midnightblueowl 1819: 1801: 1798: 1795: 1792: 1754:Midnightblueowl 1722:Midnightblueowl 1508:Midnightblueowl 1469:Midnightblueowl 1415:Midnightblueowl 1385:Midnightblueowl 1382: 1366:Midnightblueowl 1348:Midnightblueowl 1330:Midnightblueowl 1277:Midnightblueowl 1231:Midnightblueowl 1159:Midnightblueowl 1130:reliable source 1102: 1101: 1100: 1090: 1088: 1078: 1074: 1056:Brendan O'Neill 1031: 1026: 1004: 920:Jessica Valenti 777: 721:Midnightblueowl 683: 656:Midnightblueowl 653: 642: 637: 615: 613:Brendan O'Neill 602: 596: 568: 544: 519: 489: 485: 470: 464: 446:Midnightblueowl 428: 385: 305:Internetprofile 269:Internetprofile 264: 210: 137: 120: 117: 110: 82: 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3009: 3007: 2999: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2967: 2953: 2911: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2874: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2827: 2826: 2807: 2786:Normally, per 2768: 2765: 2750: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2718:217.147.185.76 2707: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2664: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2637: 2574: 2558: 2556: 2508: 2507:Leelah Alcorn: 2506: 2495: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2470:Doomsday cloak 2454:Doomsday cloak 2449: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2351:WP:NOTCENSORED 2342:comment added 2286:comment added 2226: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2191: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2148: 2147: 2096: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2050: 2049: 2026: 2015: 2012: 2010: 2009: 1999: 1997: 1996: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1956:WP:EXCEPTIONAL 1945: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1832: 1831: 1812: 1779: 1778: 1764: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1715: 1714: 1690:(failing that 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1640: 1635: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1610: 1605: 1547: 1546: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1498: 1497: 1480: 1479: 1450: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1407: 1406: 1377: 1376: 1358: 1340: 1317:But Knowledge 1312: 1311: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1242: 1241: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1189: 1167: 1166: 1146: 1145: 1099: 1098: 1071: 1070: 1066: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1006: 1005: 1003: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 981: 980: 979: 978: 977: 976: 975: 974: 934:warns against. 811: 651: 650: 649: 617: 616: 614: 611: 610: 609: 592: 589: 586: 567: 564: 543: 540: 539: 538: 498: 497: 474: 463: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 437:WP:NOTCENSORED 423: 422: 384: 381: 365: 364: 350:sex assignment 346: 345: 344: 334:67.169.243.110 300: 299: 263: 260: 259: 258: 257: 256: 229:WP:NOTCENSORED 209: 206: 205: 204: 190:WP:NOTCENSORED 172: 171: 160:50.117.158.213 150: 128: 81: 78: 75: 74: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3008: 2995: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2982: 2981: 2977: 2973: 2968: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2952: 2948: 2944: 2940: 2936: 2935: 2934: 2932: 2928: 2924: 2920: 2909: 2905: 2901: 2896: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2885: 2881: 2872: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2847: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2836: 2832: 2825: 2822: 2817: 2816: 2808: 2806: 2803: 2798: 2797: 2789: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2778: 2774: 2766: 2764: 2763: 2760: 2756: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2735: 2731: 2730: 2729: 2727: 2723: 2719: 2715: 2705: 2701: 2697: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2682:This page is 2681: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2674: 2670: 2662: 2656: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2645: 2638: 2636: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2598: 2593: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2582: 2578: 2573: 2569: 2565: 2561: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2523: 2519: 2515: 2511: 2504: 2503: 2493: 2489: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2471: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2459: 2455: 2447: 2429: 2425: 2421: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2410: 2406: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2395: 2391: 2386: 2380: 2371: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2348: 2347: 2345: 2341: 2335: 2331: 2327: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2305: 2301: 2297: 2292: 2291: 2289: 2285: 2279: 2275: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2264: 2260: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2251: 2247: 2243: 2239: 2235: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2201: 2197: 2189: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2173: 2168: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2152:JaneciaTaylor 2146: 2142: 2138: 2134: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2118:JaneciaTaylor 2116: 2111: 2110: 2106: 2102: 2101:JaneciaTaylor 2094: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2081: 2077: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2047: 2044:parameter to 2035: 2031: 2027: 2020: 2019: 2013: 2008: 2006: 2001: 2000: 1995: 1993: 1988: 1987: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1971: 1966: 1961: 1957: 1953: 1949: 1946: 1944: 1940: 1936: 1930: 1927: 1926: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1872: 1868: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1830: 1827: 1825: 1823: 1821: 1816: 1813: 1811: 1808: 1805: 1804: 1788: 1784: 1781: 1780: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1702: 1697: 1693: 1689: 1686: 1685: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1639: 1636: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1611: 1609: 1606: 1603: 1599: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1532: 1528: 1525: 1524: 1517: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1496: 1492: 1488: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1478: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1451: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1434: 1433: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1392: 1386: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1363: 1359: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1339: 1335: 1331: 1326: 1322: 1321: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1297: 1294: 1293: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1270: 1266: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1240: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1220: 1219: 1214: 1213: 1208: 1203: 1199: 1196: 1195: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1155: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1144: 1140: 1136: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1110: 1106: 1087: 1083: 1076: 1073: 1069: 1064: 1062: 1057: 1053: 1052: 1044: 1037: 1034: 1028: 1027: 1024: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1012: 1001: 973: 969: 965: 961: 960: 959: 955: 951: 947: 946: 945: 941: 937: 933: 929: 925: 921: 916: 912: 911: 910: 906: 902: 897: 894: 893: 892: 888: 884: 880: 876: 872: 871: 870: 866: 862: 857: 856: 855: 851: 847: 842: 841: 840: 836: 832: 827: 826: 825: 821: 817: 812: 810: 806: 802: 797: 796: 795: 791: 787: 781: 774: 773: 772: 768: 764: 760: 759: 758: 754: 750: 745: 740: 736: 732: 731: 730: 726: 722: 718: 714: 713: 707: 703: 699: 694: 687: 682: 681: 680: 679: 675: 671: 667: 663: 657: 648: 645: 639: 638: 635: 633: 629: 625: 623: 608: 605: 600: 599: 593: 590: 587: 584: 583: 582: 581: 577: 573: 565: 563: 562: 558: 554: 549: 541: 537: 533: 529: 525: 517: 516: 515: 514: 510: 506: 495: 492:parameter to 483: 479: 475: 468: 467: 461: 455: 451: 447: 442: 438: 432: 427: 426: 425: 424: 421: 416: 411: 410: 405: 402: 401: 400: 399: 395: 391: 382: 380: 379: 375: 371: 363: 359: 355: 351: 347: 343: 339: 335: 331: 330: 329: 325: 321: 317: 316: 315: 314: 310: 306: 298: 294: 290: 286: 285:WP:COMMONNAME 281: 280: 279: 278: 274: 270: 261: 255: 251: 247: 243: 242: 241: 237: 233: 232:47.32.105.229 230: 227: 226: 225: 224: 220: 216: 207: 203: 199: 195: 194:47.32.105.229 191: 188: 187: 186: 185: 181: 177: 169: 165: 161: 157: 151: 149: 146: 144: 140: 133: 129: 127: 124: 123: 114: 113: 106: 102: 101:Suicide of... 98: 97: 96: 95: 91: 87: 79: 72: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2923:24.164.69.53 2917:— Preceding 2913: 2876: 2828: 2814:freshacconci 2812: 2795:freshacconci 2793: 2770: 2752: 2712:— Preceding 2709: 2706:Joey Soloway 2666: 2648: 2647: 2643: 2627:Abolibibelot 2618: 2577:Abolibibelot 2500: 2497: 2451: 2384: 2232:— Preceding 2228: 2193: 2171: 2167:WP:ABOUTSELF 2149: 2137:Gerda Arendt 2132: 2112: 2098: 2078: 2075: 2053: 2045: 2030:edit request 2004: 2002: 1991: 1989: 1960:WP:RSOPINION 1947: 1928: 1884: 1833: 1818: 1814: 1791: 1782: 1736: 1691: 1687: 1637: 1607: 1602:undue weight 1526: 1452: 1435: 1319: 1318: 1295: 1267:(he isn't); 1216: 1210: 1206: 1197: 1152: 1117: 1091:December 28, 1089:. Retrieved 1085: 1075: 1067: 1049: 1047: 1032: 1029: 1015: 1008: 924:The Guardian 743: 739:undue weight 710: 705: 701: 652: 643: 640: 626: 619: 597:freshacconci 595: 569: 545: 523: 501: 493: 478:edit request 431:Yamcultperse 407: 404:Yamcultperse 390:Yamcultperse 386: 370:FYI bookgirl 366: 301: 265: 211: 173: 154:— Preceding 135: 116: 111:freshacconci 109: 105:Murder of... 104: 100: 83: 80:Title change 70: 43: 37: 2873:Southbound? 2788:WP:DEADNAME 2684:not a forum 2338:—Preceding 2282:—Preceding 1041:Should the 709:restricted 566:Length, BLP 36:This is an 2986:QoopyQoopy 2972:QoopyQoopy 2957:QoopyQoopy 2880:QoopyQoopy 2621:committed 2300:Gaybabyxan 2296:Alexis2049 2259:Gaybabyxan 2238:Alexis2049 2038:|answered= 1701:politics". 1663:Bonusballs 1536:Bonusballs 1271:; or that 1175:vigilantes 1068:References 486:|answered= 138:fourthords 2844:This was 2611:the event 2420:Troutleap 2211:Mgasparin 2057:Ripleelah 1974:Aquillion 1908:Aquillion 1659:Unabomber 1461:WP:FRINGE 1362:WP:FRINGE 932:WP:FRINGE 915:WP:FRINGE 896:WP:FRINGE 875:WP:FRINGE 208:Swearing. 71:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 2919:unsigned 2895:Equivamp 2855:Alcorn". 2767:Deadname 2759:RMCD bot 2734:Equivamp 2714:unsigned 2692:Marnanel 2592:Equivamp 2405:Amekyras 2379:Amekyras 2330:Amekyras 2326:Deadname 2304:Amekyras 2274:Amekyras 2246:contribs 2234:unsigned 1952:WP:UNDUE 1934:PaleAqua 1867:Cpotisch 1837:Cpotisch 1787:WP:UNDUE 1768:Galestar 1739:Cpotisch 1704:Galestar 1644:Cpotisch 1569:Cpotisch 1554:Galestar 1457:WP:UNDUE 1453:Comment: 1301:Cpotisch 1250:Cpotisch 1122:WP:UNDUE 1011:WP:UNDUE 950:Cpotisch 879:WP:UNDUE 846:Cpotisch 816:Cpotisch 786:Cpotisch 409:mattbuck 156:unsigned 2955:?????? 2448:Merging 2340:undated 2302:, and 2284:undated 2196:New3400 2172:obliged 2080:Sceptre 1904:WP:BOLD 1504:WP:NPOV 1459:and/or 1325:WP:NPOV 588:2. Why? 585:1. Why? 320:Codyorb 289:Codyorb 246:Codyorb 39:archive 2773:Bbymtl 2538:zh-yue 2113:Read: 1965:WP:DUE 1881:WP:BRD 1807:(talk) 1598:fringe 1207:Spiked 1086:Spiked 1051:Spiked 1017:Cunard 706:Spiked 693:WP:BRD 664:; you 628:Cunard 215:Danni8 176:Danni8 2385:can't 2042:|ans= 2028:This 1531:WP:RS 1320:isn't 936:Rab V 883:Rab V 735:WP:RS 622:below 572:Zezen 553:-sche 490:|ans= 476:This 354:Rab V 121:to me 16:< 2990:talk 2976:talk 2961:talk 2947:talk 2927:talk 2900:talk 2884:talk 2863:talk 2853:Josh 2835:talk 2777:talk 2739:talk 2722:talk 2696:talk 2673:talk 2663:Help 2631:talk 2619:then 2597:talk 2581:talk 2484:talk 2478:. – 2458:talk 2424:talk 2409:talk 2394:talk 2359:talk 2334:talk 2315:talk 2278:talk 2263:talk 2242:talk 2215:talk 2200:talk 2180:talk 2156:talk 2141:talk 2133:that 2122:talk 2105:talk 2085:talk 2076:Done 2061:talk 1978:talk 1939:talk 1912:talk 1902:was 1893:talk 1885:that 1871:talk 1856:talk 1841:talk 1772:talk 1758:talk 1743:talk 1726:talk 1708:talk 1667:talk 1648:talk 1587:talk 1573:talk 1558:talk 1540:talk 1512:talk 1491:talk 1473:talk 1444:talk 1419:talk 1400:talk 1370:talk 1352:talk 1334:talk 1305:talk 1281:talk 1254:talk 1235:talk 1183:talk 1163:talk 1139:talk 1120:per 1109:talk 1093:2017 1021:talk 968:talk 954:talk 940:talk 905:talk 887:talk 877:and 865:talk 850:talk 835:talk 820:talk 805:talk 790:talk 767:talk 753:talk 725:talk 704:nor 674:talk 632:talk 576:talk 557:talk 532:talk 524:Done 509:talk 450:talk 415:Talk 394:talk 374:talk 358:talk 338:talk 324:talk 309:talk 293:talk 273:talk 250:talk 236:talk 219:talk 198:talk 180:talk 164:talk 118:talk 103:and 90:talk 2820:(✉) 2801:(✉) 2640:--> 2336:) 2280:) 2040:or 2032:to 1802:Fir 1799:een 1796:rgr 1793:Eve 1215:or 926:or 603:(✉) 546:Do 488:or 480:to 143:=Λ= 2992:) 2978:) 2963:) 2949:) 2929:) 2897:- 2886:) 2865:) 2837:) 2779:) 2736:- 2724:) 2698:) 2675:) 2646:- 2633:) 2594:- 2583:) 2575:-- 2572:zh 2570:- 2568:uk 2566:- 2564:tr 2562:- 2560:de 2554:he 2552:- 2550:cs 2548:- 2546:no 2544:- 2542:eo 2540:- 2536:- 2534:tr 2532:- 2530:ru 2528:- 2526:ko 2524:- 2522:it 2520:- 2518:gl 2516:- 2514:fa 2512:- 2510:es 2486:) 2460:) 2426:) 2411:) 2396:) 2361:) 2317:) 2298:, 2265:) 2248:) 2244:• 2217:) 2202:) 2182:) 2158:) 2143:) 2124:) 2107:) 2087:) 2063:) 2046:no 1980:) 1941:) 1914:) 1895:) 1873:) 1858:) 1843:) 1774:) 1760:) 1745:) 1728:) 1710:) 1669:) 1650:) 1589:) 1575:) 1560:) 1542:) 1514:) 1493:) 1475:) 1446:) 1421:) 1402:) 1394:– 1372:) 1354:) 1336:) 1307:) 1283:) 1256:) 1237:) 1185:) 1141:) 1133:– 1111:) 1103:– 1084:. 970:) 956:) 942:) 907:) 889:) 881:. 867:) 852:) 837:) 822:) 807:) 792:) 769:) 755:) 747:– 727:) 676:) 578:) 559:) 534:) 526:– 511:) 494:no 452:) 396:) 376:) 360:) 340:) 326:) 311:) 295:) 275:) 252:) 238:) 221:) 200:) 192:. 182:) 166:) 141:| 92:) 2988:( 2974:( 2959:( 2945:( 2925:( 2882:( 2861:( 2833:( 2775:( 2720:( 2694:( 2671:( 2629:( 2579:( 2482:( 2472:: 2468:@ 2456:( 2422:( 2407:( 2392:( 2381:: 2377:@ 2372:: 2368:@ 2357:( 2332:( 2313:( 2306:: 2294:@ 2276:( 2261:( 2240:( 2213:( 2198:( 2178:( 2154:( 2139:( 2120:( 2103:( 2083:( 2059:( 1976:( 1937:( 1910:( 1891:( 1869:( 1854:( 1839:( 1835:- 1770:( 1756:( 1741:( 1724:( 1706:( 1665:( 1646:( 1585:( 1571:( 1556:( 1538:( 1510:( 1489:( 1471:( 1442:( 1417:( 1398:( 1387:: 1383:@ 1368:( 1350:( 1332:( 1303:( 1279:( 1252:( 1233:( 1181:( 1165:) 1161:( 1137:( 1107:( 1095:. 1019:( 1013:. 966:( 952:( 938:( 903:( 885:( 863:( 848:( 833:( 818:( 803:( 788:( 782:: 778:@ 765:( 751:( 723:( 696:" 688:: 684:@ 672:( 658:: 654:@ 630:( 624:. 574:( 555:( 530:( 507:( 448:( 433:: 429:@ 417:) 413:( 392:( 372:( 356:( 336:( 322:( 307:( 291:( 271:( 248:( 234:( 217:( 196:( 178:( 162:( 145:| 88:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index