![]() | Pauli Murray has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 1, 2017, July 1, 2020, and November 20, 2020. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article and Talk page has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Pauli Murray could be formally referred to as Rev. Pauli Murray or Dr. Pauli Murray. However, the reference Rev. Dr. Pauli Murray is incorrect.
Dr. Murray received a Doctorate of Juridical Science from Yale University in 1965. Rev. Murray received a Master of Divinity from the General Theological Seminary in 1976. (emphasis mine)
My understanding of the honorific Reverend Doctor would require that one receive a doctorate in divinity or theology. That is not the case and that reference should be reverted.
Mikeylito
07:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I've updated this section to correct some vocabulary usage on my part.
--
Mikeylito (
talk)
18:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
According to Beverly Guy-Sheftall's book Gender Talk, Murray was a lesbian who did not disclose it to the public.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.231.249.141 ( talk • contribs) (an edit from the US House of Representatives)
Pauli was not a woman. Mybromyworld ( talk) 00:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Image:PauliMurrayCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 01:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to add a courtesy note here that I'll be revising and expanding this article in the coming days to try to reach Good Article status. If anyone's watching this page who would like to pitch in, I'd be glad to have your help! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 14:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: North8000 ( talk · contribs) 13:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I am starting a review of this article North8000 ( talk) 13:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry that this section will be short because the article is so well done. This article could pass now as it is, but perhaps I might give feedback on and discuss two areas. Possibly it might be because it wasn't in the sources, but I finished the article feeling very curious abotu two aspects that weren't covered:
What do you think? Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 21:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Well-written
Factually accurate and verifiable
Broad in its coverage
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
Illustrated, if possible, by images
One of the easiest review that I've done because the article is so well done. I think that future expansions in the two areas I raised in "review discussion" would be a nice future additions, but there is nothing there of the magnitude that would impact passing Good article. This article passes. Nice work! North8000 ( talk) 00:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Reviewer
(this is "duplicate" here for when the review is no longer transcluded.)
This has passed as a Wikipedia God Article. Nice work and congratulations! North8000 ( talk) 00:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Reviewer
Wouldn't it be better to replace the photos of Ginsberg and Roosevelt with images of Murray? Totorotroll ( talk) 10:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Can you at least take down the photos of Ginsberg and Roosevelt?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.226.204 ( talk) 06:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
In response to the person who claimed that "the honorific Reverend Doctor would require that one receive a doctorate in divinity or theology": this is incorrect. Anyone who is an ordained minister and also has a doctorate (PhD or any other doctoral degree) in any field is properly titled "The Rev. Dr. So-and-so." A quick google search will confirm this. Also, the title "Rev." should have a definite article in front of it. I updated the "Death and Legacy" section to state "The Rev. Dr. Pauli Murray."
I deleted the sentence in the opening section referring to Murray as an "Episcopal saint." Firstly, it was out of place. It fell in the middle of a paragraph describing her process of becoming a priest; it's awkward to mention something that didn't occur until several decades after her death. Secondly, it was redundant. Her inclusion among the collection "Holy Women, Holy Men" is already (and more appropriately) mentioned in the "Death and Legacy" section of the wiki page. Thirdly, the Episcopal Church does not make "saints." Churches in the Anglican Communion (including the Episcopal Church) have not canonized anyone since the time of the Reformation. The only "saints" in its calendar are those who were recognized as such before the Reformation (biblical saints such as St. Paul, and later figures such as St. Catherine of Sienna). The proper term here is not "sainthood" or "saint's day," but "commemoration." All new additions to "Holy Women, Holy Men" are considered commemorations. For example, John Calvin was added to the calendar, but he is not considered "St. John Calvin" in the Episcopal Church. Anyway, Murray's inclusion in HWHM is still referenced in the article; I just wanted to clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngloShmanglo ( talk • contribs) 01:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Pauli Murray. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:27, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
In https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/17/the-many-lives-of-pauli-murray, there is the line "(Following Murray’s own cue, Rosenberg uses female pronouns to refer to her subject, as have I.)". FWIW. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Khazar2, Parkwells, Ivarahsa, Perspective, Jweaver28, Indyweek, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Proscribe, M.j.f.inkbo, The Rambling Man, and Meowverique: I am pinging you because Pauli Murray - Page History - XTools has you as either one of the Top 10 by added text, Top 10 by edits, or both. I will also notify several relevant WikiProjects, most notably WT:LGBT.
I am going to try & frame this as well as I can. Among M.j.f.inkbo's very first edits, this editor made some brave WP:BOLD edits. Specifically, these were pronoun changes. I reverted the edits because I thought that they required discussion first. This article has had the previous version of the pronouns since its inception over 15 years ago & since obtaining GA status in April 2013.
Much has changed since Murray died in 1985. The terms gender fluidity &
non-binary gender did not exist then, and
transgender &
transsexual awareness has changed. To paraphrase the article (avoiding pronouns), Murray struggled throughout adult life with issues related to sexual and gender identity, and acknowledged having an "inverted sex instinct".
I think I agree with M.j.f.inkbo, when I state that if Murray were alive today, Murray would probably use he/him/his or they/them/their pronouns. The question is do we have a right, or an obligation, to apply these retroactively? Is it okay to be anachronistic in this matter? I do not have answers to these questions, which is why I am calling attention to this. I am aware of my privilege at being cisgender & am saddened at the problems that cisnormativity has caused in our society. This too, is another reason I am seeking collective intelligence, on this, as I seek here other perspectives beyond my own.
This is not the first article that has to deal with pronoun issues. James Barry (surgeon) is an article where it was unknown exactly whether as a woman by birth Barry masqueraded as a man to be a doctor in the British medical system and to serve in the British army (both exclusive male at the time), or because Barry truly identified as a man. The consensus for that article was to eliminate pronouns & solely use Barry's surname. I do not think that would work for this article, but perhaps it might inform our discussion. Please mention other articles that might bring light to this matter.
Please weigh in. I will support whatever consensus at which we arrive. Peaceray ( talk) 05:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
forgive me, but this sounds more some TERF trans erasure to me. They had themselves opened up to see if they had gonads and dated "straight women."
I vote to reopen this and settle it. 2601:14D:8300:6C70:998B:10CA:7D47:DBBD ( talk) 01:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
With a, now changed, edit, I suggest a comprmise. If the pronoun is refering to Murray as the subject of the article, or the pronoun refers to Murray with scope of their entire lifetime; then use 'they'. Otherwise, use the pronoun that Murray presented in that time period (as per sources). Using Murray or Pauli is preferrable as is writing in a manner that avoids pronouns. I have not touched this page before, have a WP account, but will not sign in, and am an androgynous queer. I prefer people always use my name, no gender pronouns, once they know my name and I wonder if there is evidence in the literature how Pauli felt about this? The Pauli Murray center has switched to neutral pronouns throughout [1] 47.233.68.106 ( talk) 02:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
It says that Murray's father started having emotional problems as a result of typhoid fever. Typhoid fever is a bacterial illness that people get from swallowing fecal contaminated food or water that has the bacteria (Salmonella typhi) present. It causes high fever and sometimes septicemia which can kill the patient. It does not cause emotional problems that would lead to a person being institutionalized. It is not like the tertiary stage of syphilis. This needs to be changed b/c it is incorrect. Completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.248.13.32 ( talk) 19:07, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
This article states that Irene Barlow does not appear in her memoir and that is not correct. She discusses her friendship with Barlow on pages 408-411 of the recent paperback reprint. 2601:446:8101:B150:759B:34D0:369B:BFFE ( talk) 15:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
The WP:Shortdesc had a focus only on the priesthood and not on the important, submerged accomplishments, we now know of. Here is the new sentence:
Anna Pauline "Pauli" Murray (November 20, 1910 – July 1, 1985) was an American lawyer, civil rights activist, gender equality advocate, author and Episcopal priest who's works influenced the civil rights movement and expansion of the Equal Protection Clause.
I would like to have it read (emphasis to point out the change):
Anna Pauline "Pauli" Murray (November 20, 1910 – July 1, 1985) was a transgender American lawyer, civil rights activist, gender equality advocate, author and Episcopal priest who's works influenced the civil rights movement and expansion of the Equal Protection Clause.
but this may yet be controversial and WP:shortdesc says to avoid this. If you think the sources are strong enough to add transgender then we can add it. 47.233.68.106 ( talk) 05:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
Short description}}
. The corresponding source for the short description of this article is the first line: {{Short description|American writer and activist (1910–1985)}}
. WP:SHORTDESC covers none of the part you edited.
Nardog (
talk)
22:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)The paragraph about Murray's early life says that her father had "emotional problems" and that some (who?) had attributed it to typhoid fever. Typhoid fever is a gastro-intestinal disease caused by the bacterium Salmonella typhi. It can cause delirium due to the high fever but it has no other neurological complications and does not cause damage to the central nervous system. If her father had emotional problems, it was because of something else, NOT caused by a pathogen of the digestive system. Really, who writes this stuff? 47.138.89.140 ( talk) 01:44, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Pauli Murray has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 1, 2017, July 1, 2020, and November 20, 2020. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article and Talk page has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Pauli Murray could be formally referred to as Rev. Pauli Murray or Dr. Pauli Murray. However, the reference Rev. Dr. Pauli Murray is incorrect.
Dr. Murray received a Doctorate of Juridical Science from Yale University in 1965. Rev. Murray received a Master of Divinity from the General Theological Seminary in 1976. (emphasis mine)
My understanding of the honorific Reverend Doctor would require that one receive a doctorate in divinity or theology. That is not the case and that reference should be reverted.
Mikeylito
07:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I've updated this section to correct some vocabulary usage on my part.
--
Mikeylito (
talk)
18:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
According to Beverly Guy-Sheftall's book Gender Talk, Murray was a lesbian who did not disclose it to the public.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.231.249.141 ( talk • contribs) (an edit from the US House of Representatives)
Pauli was not a woman. Mybromyworld ( talk) 00:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Image:PauliMurrayCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 01:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to add a courtesy note here that I'll be revising and expanding this article in the coming days to try to reach Good Article status. If anyone's watching this page who would like to pitch in, I'd be glad to have your help! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 14:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: North8000 ( talk · contribs) 13:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I am starting a review of this article North8000 ( talk) 13:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry that this section will be short because the article is so well done. This article could pass now as it is, but perhaps I might give feedback on and discuss two areas. Possibly it might be because it wasn't in the sources, but I finished the article feeling very curious abotu two aspects that weren't covered:
What do you think? Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 21:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Well-written
Factually accurate and verifiable
Broad in its coverage
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
Illustrated, if possible, by images
One of the easiest review that I've done because the article is so well done. I think that future expansions in the two areas I raised in "review discussion" would be a nice future additions, but there is nothing there of the magnitude that would impact passing Good article. This article passes. Nice work! North8000 ( talk) 00:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Reviewer
(this is "duplicate" here for when the review is no longer transcluded.)
This has passed as a Wikipedia God Article. Nice work and congratulations! North8000 ( talk) 00:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Reviewer
Wouldn't it be better to replace the photos of Ginsberg and Roosevelt with images of Murray? Totorotroll ( talk) 10:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Can you at least take down the photos of Ginsberg and Roosevelt?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.226.204 ( talk) 06:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
In response to the person who claimed that "the honorific Reverend Doctor would require that one receive a doctorate in divinity or theology": this is incorrect. Anyone who is an ordained minister and also has a doctorate (PhD or any other doctoral degree) in any field is properly titled "The Rev. Dr. So-and-so." A quick google search will confirm this. Also, the title "Rev." should have a definite article in front of it. I updated the "Death and Legacy" section to state "The Rev. Dr. Pauli Murray."
I deleted the sentence in the opening section referring to Murray as an "Episcopal saint." Firstly, it was out of place. It fell in the middle of a paragraph describing her process of becoming a priest; it's awkward to mention something that didn't occur until several decades after her death. Secondly, it was redundant. Her inclusion among the collection "Holy Women, Holy Men" is already (and more appropriately) mentioned in the "Death and Legacy" section of the wiki page. Thirdly, the Episcopal Church does not make "saints." Churches in the Anglican Communion (including the Episcopal Church) have not canonized anyone since the time of the Reformation. The only "saints" in its calendar are those who were recognized as such before the Reformation (biblical saints such as St. Paul, and later figures such as St. Catherine of Sienna). The proper term here is not "sainthood" or "saint's day," but "commemoration." All new additions to "Holy Women, Holy Men" are considered commemorations. For example, John Calvin was added to the calendar, but he is not considered "St. John Calvin" in the Episcopal Church. Anyway, Murray's inclusion in HWHM is still referenced in the article; I just wanted to clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngloShmanglo ( talk • contribs) 01:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Pauli Murray. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:27, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
In https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/17/the-many-lives-of-pauli-murray, there is the line "(Following Murray’s own cue, Rosenberg uses female pronouns to refer to her subject, as have I.)". FWIW. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Khazar2, Parkwells, Ivarahsa, Perspective, Jweaver28, Indyweek, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Proscribe, M.j.f.inkbo, The Rambling Man, and Meowverique: I am pinging you because Pauli Murray - Page History - XTools has you as either one of the Top 10 by added text, Top 10 by edits, or both. I will also notify several relevant WikiProjects, most notably WT:LGBT.
I am going to try & frame this as well as I can. Among M.j.f.inkbo's very first edits, this editor made some brave WP:BOLD edits. Specifically, these were pronoun changes. I reverted the edits because I thought that they required discussion first. This article has had the previous version of the pronouns since its inception over 15 years ago & since obtaining GA status in April 2013.
Much has changed since Murray died in 1985. The terms gender fluidity &
non-binary gender did not exist then, and
transgender &
transsexual awareness has changed. To paraphrase the article (avoiding pronouns), Murray struggled throughout adult life with issues related to sexual and gender identity, and acknowledged having an "inverted sex instinct".
I think I agree with M.j.f.inkbo, when I state that if Murray were alive today, Murray would probably use he/him/his or they/them/their pronouns. The question is do we have a right, or an obligation, to apply these retroactively? Is it okay to be anachronistic in this matter? I do not have answers to these questions, which is why I am calling attention to this. I am aware of my privilege at being cisgender & am saddened at the problems that cisnormativity has caused in our society. This too, is another reason I am seeking collective intelligence, on this, as I seek here other perspectives beyond my own.
This is not the first article that has to deal with pronoun issues. James Barry (surgeon) is an article where it was unknown exactly whether as a woman by birth Barry masqueraded as a man to be a doctor in the British medical system and to serve in the British army (both exclusive male at the time), or because Barry truly identified as a man. The consensus for that article was to eliminate pronouns & solely use Barry's surname. I do not think that would work for this article, but perhaps it might inform our discussion. Please mention other articles that might bring light to this matter.
Please weigh in. I will support whatever consensus at which we arrive. Peaceray ( talk) 05:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
forgive me, but this sounds more some TERF trans erasure to me. They had themselves opened up to see if they had gonads and dated "straight women."
I vote to reopen this and settle it. 2601:14D:8300:6C70:998B:10CA:7D47:DBBD ( talk) 01:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
With a, now changed, edit, I suggest a comprmise. If the pronoun is refering to Murray as the subject of the article, or the pronoun refers to Murray with scope of their entire lifetime; then use 'they'. Otherwise, use the pronoun that Murray presented in that time period (as per sources). Using Murray or Pauli is preferrable as is writing in a manner that avoids pronouns. I have not touched this page before, have a WP account, but will not sign in, and am an androgynous queer. I prefer people always use my name, no gender pronouns, once they know my name and I wonder if there is evidence in the literature how Pauli felt about this? The Pauli Murray center has switched to neutral pronouns throughout [1] 47.233.68.106 ( talk) 02:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
It says that Murray's father started having emotional problems as a result of typhoid fever. Typhoid fever is a bacterial illness that people get from swallowing fecal contaminated food or water that has the bacteria (Salmonella typhi) present. It causes high fever and sometimes septicemia which can kill the patient. It does not cause emotional problems that would lead to a person being institutionalized. It is not like the tertiary stage of syphilis. This needs to be changed b/c it is incorrect. Completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.248.13.32 ( talk) 19:07, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
This article states that Irene Barlow does not appear in her memoir and that is not correct. She discusses her friendship with Barlow on pages 408-411 of the recent paperback reprint. 2601:446:8101:B150:759B:34D0:369B:BFFE ( talk) 15:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
The WP:Shortdesc had a focus only on the priesthood and not on the important, submerged accomplishments, we now know of. Here is the new sentence:
Anna Pauline "Pauli" Murray (November 20, 1910 – July 1, 1985) was an American lawyer, civil rights activist, gender equality advocate, author and Episcopal priest who's works influenced the civil rights movement and expansion of the Equal Protection Clause.
I would like to have it read (emphasis to point out the change):
Anna Pauline "Pauli" Murray (November 20, 1910 – July 1, 1985) was a transgender American lawyer, civil rights activist, gender equality advocate, author and Episcopal priest who's works influenced the civil rights movement and expansion of the Equal Protection Clause.
but this may yet be controversial and WP:shortdesc says to avoid this. If you think the sources are strong enough to add transgender then we can add it. 47.233.68.106 ( talk) 05:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
Short description}}
. The corresponding source for the short description of this article is the first line: {{Short description|American writer and activist (1910–1985)}}
. WP:SHORTDESC covers none of the part you edited.
Nardog (
talk)
22:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)The paragraph about Murray's early life says that her father had "emotional problems" and that some (who?) had attributed it to typhoid fever. Typhoid fever is a gastro-intestinal disease caused by the bacterium Salmonella typhi. It can cause delirium due to the high fever but it has no other neurological complications and does not cause damage to the central nervous system. If her father had emotional problems, it was because of something else, NOT caused by a pathogen of the digestive system. Really, who writes this stuff? 47.138.89.140 ( talk) 01:44, 19 October 2023 (UTC)