![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It got added to the lead (it is out now) that "some" have accused ES of making a false accusation of rape. WP:ASTONISHME, what would be astonishing would be if nobody tried to turn a contested rape claim into a (statistically-rare) example of a false claim. Statistically-rare events do sometimes occur, of course. But this article is a Wikipedia BLP and should not become a WP:COATRACK for the general controversy. HouseOfChange ( talk) 13:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Mx. Granger: the only BLP violation is against Paul Nugesser who was found not guilty of all charges. The university cleared him of all charges. She attempted to press charges with the NYPD but that was dropped due to lack of suspesion. Nugesser highlighted the Facebook messages in his lawsuit Lawsuit line 27.
Two days later on August 29, 2012, Paul Facebook messaged Emma to invite herto a gathering in his room, stating, "small shindig in our room tonight bring cool freshmen." Emma messaged back four minutes later, "lol yussss also ifeel like we need to have some real time where we can talk about life and thingz." Paul immediately agreed, writing "word." Emma continued, "because we still haven’t really had a paul-emma chill sesh since summmerrrrr." Paul responded "when are you guys coming through." Emma wrote, "I’ll probs come at 10:45. Is that cool?0." Paul wrote back "sweet - yeah - you at the fencing thing." Emma wrote back "Yeah I’m just gonna chill with them for a bit haha is ado a rager?" 3 Paul wrote back "naah - a little too many guys right now haha - so bring some peepz." Emma wrote back "Okay let them know I’ll be der w dafemales spon." At 11:06 p.m., she messaged Paul "Ack are people still there? Heading over now."
the messages continue in 28 and 29.
This lawsuit was settled, then I highlighted six additional sources which believe there was a lie. It is absolutely notable is a founding moment of their career is the likelihood of a false accusation. This is again backed by mainstream sources. Opinion and responses are included in Wikipedia articles when covered by mainstream sources. @ Nblund: I am a neutral editor and I know exact what should be included. Adding information regarding controversy in her career is not a BLP violation especially when it has been so widely covered. The question are you using an encyclopedia which strives for neutrality as a political platform? Valoem talk contrib 17:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Hippo43 Hi! Re this edit- do we have a reason to believe that Sulkowicz would be lying about this? Why do we have to attribute it as Sulkowicz saying that they had done something, rather than just stating that they have done something? PeterTheFourth ( talk) 12:38, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
This article is a blatant NPOV violation against Paul Nungesser in its current form. When I read article I get the impression that Sulkowicz is a victim and that her "alleged rapist" got away with a crime. This article suggests she is an uncontroversial activist. The reality is evidence provided shows Nungesser is the likely victim and controversy is the accusation yet this article refuse any mention even after reliable sources have been provided. Mona Charen and Cathy Young both notable commentator have stated Sulkowicz likely made a false accusation, we don't need to provide the FB messages here, but must mention as to why she is controversial. It is the defining moment in this person's career. The only other option is to delete is article as a blatant NPOV violation. Valoem talk contrib 07:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Also lets look at James DeenPresident Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh on July 9, 2018, to replace retiring Associate Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. During the confirmation process, Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of having sexually assaulted her in the early 1980s. Over the next few days, two other women accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. Kavanaugh "categorically and unequivocally" denied that the event Ford described occurred and strongly denied all allegations.
Neither have been legally charged. Based on these article's precedence the information regarding the rape controversy certain belongs in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valoem ( talk • contribs)In late 2015, multiple women came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct including rape.
The State's Attorney never filed charges, Nungesser won his suit against the University, wy is her "version" of events presented with so much credibly here? FoLandra ( talk) 14:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
How many more do you want? FoLandra ( talk) 15:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Emma Sulkowicz's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "VanSyckle20January2015":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
This nickname some newspapers coined for them seems undue. Should it be in the lede? PeterTheFourth ( talk) 06:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
In the lead it says that Sulkowicz "first received media attention for the performance artwork Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)". I could not find evidence of this claim in the source provided ( New York Times). Moreover, I found several news articles about Sulkowicz's rape allegations from April ( CBS New York) and May 2014 ( New York Times; TIME), several months before the start of Mattress Performance (September 2014). These sources do not mention the (upcoming) Mattress Performance.
Since this relates to the discussion below (and I'm not a regular editor) I leave it up to others to change this. I suggest to mention both that Sulkowicz first received media attention for their rape allegations and complaints against the university's handling, and that they also received media attention for their performance artwork starting several months later. 87.214.67.83 ( talk) 17:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
A biographical article has been (re)created based on consensus at Talk:Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)#RfC:_Should_there_be_an_article_on_Emma_Sulkowicz?. This talk page previously redirected to that one. I place the link here so that the discussion is findable by people perusing this talk page (now that it is no longer a redirect). -sche ( talk) 23:00, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Hippo43 ( talk · contribs), in e.g. [3] and [4], you removed pronouns from the article en masse (in addition to editing against [small but so far only extant] consensus and the RS description with regard to Sulkowicz's dropping of criminal charges, discussed in an earlier section of this page). I suggest you try to seek consensus for your changes here rather than continue to revert me and other editors who have pointed out problems with your edits. -sche ( talk) 23:15, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
It appears that this user (Hippo43)
has been arguing that "usual English grammar, and most reliable sources, consider 'woman', 'she' and 'her' correct for Sulkowicz
". This is wrong. English grammar recommends using the appropriately gendered pronouns when referring to a person. (I.e. you would not say 'she is correct' when referring to me, Peter, but 'he is correct'.) Additionally, reliable sources have covered Sulkowicz's status as non-binary and
WP:GENDERID clearly states that we use the self identification given in the most recent sources.
PeterTheFourth (
talk)
23:49, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I am neither courageous nor diligent enough to change all the pronouns in this article. Brec ( talk) 13:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)Since 2016, Sulkowicz has identified as gender fluid, and she sometimes uses they/them pronouns. When I ask what to use for this article, she texts me, "Lol I’m not clear about it either," before settling on she/her. [1]
References
I realize that Sulkowicz identifies as "non-binary" but, since actual sexual activity is inseparable from the story, shouldn't the subjects biological sex be mentioned? — Dutchman Schultz
In the article that is listed as source 17 ( https://www.thecut.com/2019/10/did-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-performance-get-redpilled.html), Sulkowicz instructed the author to use the pronouns she/her. This article is from 8/28/19. The article is quoted below:
"Since 2016, Sulkowicz has identified as gender fluid, and she sometimes uses they/them pronouns. When I ask what to use for this article, she texts me, “Lol I’m not clear about it either,” before settling on she/her."
Unless there is more current information available, this should put the question of which pronouns to use for Sulkowicz to bed. Not only do she and her clarify the article by clearing the confusion on plurality, the very person who we are referring to chose them. Phafner ( talk) 03:11, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
"politically active types"but abidance by language prominently found in sources should provide reasonable guidance on the question we are addressing. Bus stop ( talk) 16:25, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Presumably because of her gender and political status, there is no mention of critical media analyses of her accusations and subsequent behavior. There is also no mention of Sylvie McNamara's 2019 article about Sulkowicz's “political journey” which had her mingling with conservatives and libertarians. About the article Sulkowicz tweeted, "Huge props to Sylvie — a true gem and really, really f’in good at writing." Nicmart ( talk) 01:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Unexplained removal of sourced content: The removed sourced content is a statement made in 2014, their statement in 2016 regarding their police report is more recent and touches on the "main reason" of their filing in the first place, my edits made the article more concise.
Not only that, it was incredibly difficult to justify citing a specific part of the article that claims the ONE police officer was dismissive to their situation, but simultaneously, that same officer was cognizant of how painful the process of reporting the crime would be for them and made sure to stress that point?? There is no way to put BOTH of those things in the article as they clearly contradict one another.
POV editing: I have no clue how you've come to this conclusion, I would like elaboration if possible please.
edit warring to force one's point of view: "responsibility" has been removed a few times, I added "not responsible" in quotations as this is the diction that Columbia has used in every statement made regarding the situation, and it was found in the source, I figured showing that it is a quote would put an end to that edit war.
And as I said in my first point regarding my other edits, I noticed that the there were bits of the article that did not reflect the further statements made not only by Columbia, but by Sulkowicz. 2001:56A:7BE1:F200:A930:AE85:E5C6:7E09 ( talk) 00:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It got added to the lead (it is out now) that "some" have accused ES of making a false accusation of rape. WP:ASTONISHME, what would be astonishing would be if nobody tried to turn a contested rape claim into a (statistically-rare) example of a false claim. Statistically-rare events do sometimes occur, of course. But this article is a Wikipedia BLP and should not become a WP:COATRACK for the general controversy. HouseOfChange ( talk) 13:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Mx. Granger: the only BLP violation is against Paul Nugesser who was found not guilty of all charges. The university cleared him of all charges. She attempted to press charges with the NYPD but that was dropped due to lack of suspesion. Nugesser highlighted the Facebook messages in his lawsuit Lawsuit line 27.
Two days later on August 29, 2012, Paul Facebook messaged Emma to invite herto a gathering in his room, stating, "small shindig in our room tonight bring cool freshmen." Emma messaged back four minutes later, "lol yussss also ifeel like we need to have some real time where we can talk about life and thingz." Paul immediately agreed, writing "word." Emma continued, "because we still haven’t really had a paul-emma chill sesh since summmerrrrr." Paul responded "when are you guys coming through." Emma wrote, "I’ll probs come at 10:45. Is that cool?0." Paul wrote back "sweet - yeah - you at the fencing thing." Emma wrote back "Yeah I’m just gonna chill with them for a bit haha is ado a rager?" 3 Paul wrote back "naah - a little too many guys right now haha - so bring some peepz." Emma wrote back "Okay let them know I’ll be der w dafemales spon." At 11:06 p.m., she messaged Paul "Ack are people still there? Heading over now."
the messages continue in 28 and 29.
This lawsuit was settled, then I highlighted six additional sources which believe there was a lie. It is absolutely notable is a founding moment of their career is the likelihood of a false accusation. This is again backed by mainstream sources. Opinion and responses are included in Wikipedia articles when covered by mainstream sources. @ Nblund: I am a neutral editor and I know exact what should be included. Adding information regarding controversy in her career is not a BLP violation especially when it has been so widely covered. The question are you using an encyclopedia which strives for neutrality as a political platform? Valoem talk contrib 17:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Hippo43 Hi! Re this edit- do we have a reason to believe that Sulkowicz would be lying about this? Why do we have to attribute it as Sulkowicz saying that they had done something, rather than just stating that they have done something? PeterTheFourth ( talk) 12:38, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
This article is a blatant NPOV violation against Paul Nungesser in its current form. When I read article I get the impression that Sulkowicz is a victim and that her "alleged rapist" got away with a crime. This article suggests she is an uncontroversial activist. The reality is evidence provided shows Nungesser is the likely victim and controversy is the accusation yet this article refuse any mention even after reliable sources have been provided. Mona Charen and Cathy Young both notable commentator have stated Sulkowicz likely made a false accusation, we don't need to provide the FB messages here, but must mention as to why she is controversial. It is the defining moment in this person's career. The only other option is to delete is article as a blatant NPOV violation. Valoem talk contrib 07:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Also lets look at James DeenPresident Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh on July 9, 2018, to replace retiring Associate Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. During the confirmation process, Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of having sexually assaulted her in the early 1980s. Over the next few days, two other women accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. Kavanaugh "categorically and unequivocally" denied that the event Ford described occurred and strongly denied all allegations.
Neither have been legally charged. Based on these article's precedence the information regarding the rape controversy certain belongs in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valoem ( talk • contribs)In late 2015, multiple women came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct including rape.
The State's Attorney never filed charges, Nungesser won his suit against the University, wy is her "version" of events presented with so much credibly here? FoLandra ( talk) 14:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
How many more do you want? FoLandra ( talk) 15:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Emma Sulkowicz's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "VanSyckle20January2015":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
This nickname some newspapers coined for them seems undue. Should it be in the lede? PeterTheFourth ( talk) 06:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
In the lead it says that Sulkowicz "first received media attention for the performance artwork Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)". I could not find evidence of this claim in the source provided ( New York Times). Moreover, I found several news articles about Sulkowicz's rape allegations from April ( CBS New York) and May 2014 ( New York Times; TIME), several months before the start of Mattress Performance (September 2014). These sources do not mention the (upcoming) Mattress Performance.
Since this relates to the discussion below (and I'm not a regular editor) I leave it up to others to change this. I suggest to mention both that Sulkowicz first received media attention for their rape allegations and complaints against the university's handling, and that they also received media attention for their performance artwork starting several months later. 87.214.67.83 ( talk) 17:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
A biographical article has been (re)created based on consensus at Talk:Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)#RfC:_Should_there_be_an_article_on_Emma_Sulkowicz?. This talk page previously redirected to that one. I place the link here so that the discussion is findable by people perusing this talk page (now that it is no longer a redirect). -sche ( talk) 23:00, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Hippo43 ( talk · contribs), in e.g. [3] and [4], you removed pronouns from the article en masse (in addition to editing against [small but so far only extant] consensus and the RS description with regard to Sulkowicz's dropping of criminal charges, discussed in an earlier section of this page). I suggest you try to seek consensus for your changes here rather than continue to revert me and other editors who have pointed out problems with your edits. -sche ( talk) 23:15, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
It appears that this user (Hippo43)
has been arguing that "usual English grammar, and most reliable sources, consider 'woman', 'she' and 'her' correct for Sulkowicz
". This is wrong. English grammar recommends using the appropriately gendered pronouns when referring to a person. (I.e. you would not say 'she is correct' when referring to me, Peter, but 'he is correct'.) Additionally, reliable sources have covered Sulkowicz's status as non-binary and
WP:GENDERID clearly states that we use the self identification given in the most recent sources.
PeterTheFourth (
talk)
23:49, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I am neither courageous nor diligent enough to change all the pronouns in this article. Brec ( talk) 13:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)Since 2016, Sulkowicz has identified as gender fluid, and she sometimes uses they/them pronouns. When I ask what to use for this article, she texts me, "Lol I’m not clear about it either," before settling on she/her. [1]
References
I realize that Sulkowicz identifies as "non-binary" but, since actual sexual activity is inseparable from the story, shouldn't the subjects biological sex be mentioned? — Dutchman Schultz
In the article that is listed as source 17 ( https://www.thecut.com/2019/10/did-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-performance-get-redpilled.html), Sulkowicz instructed the author to use the pronouns she/her. This article is from 8/28/19. The article is quoted below:
"Since 2016, Sulkowicz has identified as gender fluid, and she sometimes uses they/them pronouns. When I ask what to use for this article, she texts me, “Lol I’m not clear about it either,” before settling on she/her."
Unless there is more current information available, this should put the question of which pronouns to use for Sulkowicz to bed. Not only do she and her clarify the article by clearing the confusion on plurality, the very person who we are referring to chose them. Phafner ( talk) 03:11, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
"politically active types"but abidance by language prominently found in sources should provide reasonable guidance on the question we are addressing. Bus stop ( talk) 16:25, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Presumably because of her gender and political status, there is no mention of critical media analyses of her accusations and subsequent behavior. There is also no mention of Sylvie McNamara's 2019 article about Sulkowicz's “political journey” which had her mingling with conservatives and libertarians. About the article Sulkowicz tweeted, "Huge props to Sylvie — a true gem and really, really f’in good at writing." Nicmart ( talk) 01:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Unexplained removal of sourced content: The removed sourced content is a statement made in 2014, their statement in 2016 regarding their police report is more recent and touches on the "main reason" of their filing in the first place, my edits made the article more concise.
Not only that, it was incredibly difficult to justify citing a specific part of the article that claims the ONE police officer was dismissive to their situation, but simultaneously, that same officer was cognizant of how painful the process of reporting the crime would be for them and made sure to stress that point?? There is no way to put BOTH of those things in the article as they clearly contradict one another.
POV editing: I have no clue how you've come to this conclusion, I would like elaboration if possible please.
edit warring to force one's point of view: "responsibility" has been removed a few times, I added "not responsible" in quotations as this is the diction that Columbia has used in every statement made regarding the situation, and it was found in the source, I figured showing that it is a quote would put an end to that edit war.
And as I said in my first point regarding my other edits, I noticed that the there were bits of the article that did not reflect the further statements made not only by Columbia, but by Sulkowicz. 2001:56A:7BE1:F200:A930:AE85:E5C6:7E09 ( talk) 00:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)