![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
User:Thomas.W says that PNL (politically neutral language) is more important than GNL. Anyone have any thoughts on whether GNL or PNL is more important??
(For clarification, politically-neutral language contrasts with politically correct and politically incorrect.) Georgia guy ( talk) 17:12, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with using the term man-made as it implies made by mankind which is gender neutral.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk)
13:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
He
posted it there.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk)
16:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I've said many times that the MOS says to use GNL. However, many Wikipedians think that GNL is not important and should be used only where it can be done without causing ambiguity. Otherwise, it's best to just use generic male language. We need to change the GNL section of the MOS to saying either gender-neutral or generic male language is acceptable. Any thoughts?? Georgia guy ( talk) 12:26, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
"Gender-neutral language does not inherently convey a particular viewpoint, political agenda or ideal." This is obviously not true, it conveys the idea that traditional stereotypes are not priviliged and should not be reinforced, which is not neutral at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.77.73.7 ( talk) 06:40, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
In a related essay, Wikipedia:Writing about women, it says:
The order in which groups are introduced—man and woman, male and female, Mr. and Mrs., husband and wife, brother and sister, ladies and gentlemen—has implications for their status, so consider alternating the order as you write.
The phrase "he or she" naturally belongs to this category. It's easy to see that "he (or she)" (that is, using the parentheses around "or she") should be avoided.
This suggests that I support that it's okay to use the singular they as long as there's no ambiguity. Any thoughts here??
There is no article maintenence template available along the lines of "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's standards on gender-neutral language". Should such a template be created? See vintage (design) for an example of where it could be applied (in that case, for overuse of the term "manmade"). 121.45.118.58 ( talk) 05:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
Copy edit|for=[[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Gender-neutral language|gender-neutral language]]}}
. Someone might disagree (for reasons which aren't invalid – see thread above about "mankind") and remove it, though. Your best bet is to simply rewrite the article instead of tagging it. For a tiny copy-editing issue like this, tagging it (and talking about tagging it) wastes far more time than just improving the article would take. (In this case, I did both.) —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼
19:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC)I was hoping to receive some clarification on the rationale behind not using "students" instead of "girls" when referring to a single gender academic institution. It is not out of the realm of possibility to have a gender non-binary individual at an historically single gendered school. Arosati ( talk) 14:34, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia talk:Gender-neutral language/Archive 1#Actor vs. Actress, the consensus appeared to lean towards using "actor" over "actress" in most articles. (This discussion is 10 years old.)
Yesterday, an IP user changed "actor" to "actress" in the infobox on Violett Beane per this diff. I simply reverted it without comment. Today, it was reverted by User:IJBall as part of another edit here, with the comment "There is absolutely nothing wrong with "Actress". I reverted again, with the comment "Reverted to previous stable wording". That editor has since opened a discussion at Talk:Violett Beane#"Actress".
In researching this, I've been unable to find a clear guideline as to whether or not actress should be used for female actors. GNL implies that "actor" should be used in most cases. However, most of the articles on female actors that I have looked at since the issue came up all appear to use "actress" in both the infobox and lede sentence. I also consulted Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, but could find no specific page on content guidelines. Has this issue been resolved elsewhere? Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 19:16, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Acthually, Berean Hunter, the term "mankind" is NOT gender-neutral, as it clearly has the letters of the word "man" in it. Where do women (or even boys and girls) fit in this word if it only has the letters of the word "man"? -- Fandelasketchup ( talk) 13:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
It seems worthwhile to post here a note of the discussion over the use of "man-made" on the Main Page. Eventually the word was changed to "artificial", although I am unsure whether this really was the consensus. Personally I appreciated Swarm's discovery there of this earlier Village-Pump discussion. The consensus from that was that the " generic he" should be prohibited, but a policy to favour gender-neutral terms over "-man" as a suffix was simultaneously rejected. There is a risk here that changes in the direction of GNL get accepted piecemeal, because we can all live with an isolated piece of clear but clunky language, without there being any overall consensus that this is what we want. Jmchutchinson ( talk) 12:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
It's 50 years since 1969. So are all the Apollo articles now having "manned" replaced by "crewed"? This is ridiculous: it's anachronistic, it's superfluous (no women on Apollo) and it does absolutely zero to improve any real gender issues on WP. Still, there's no article on the women selected as astronauts at this time (and then passed over for Apollo). Clarice Phelps has been deleted and salted, lest any of these pesky women scientists think they deserve any record on WP, but let's have a nonsense wording change like this and then pat ourselves on the back for righting great historical wrongs. Andy Dingley ( talk) 16:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation#RfC on mass changing "maiden flight" to "first flight". –
Leviv
ich
01:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race § Hatnote to explain pronouns. ---
C&
C (
Coffeeandcrumbs)
16:15, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Watchers of this page may be interested in the following discussion: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Template:Multiple pronouns. --- C& C ( Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
User:Thomas.W says that PNL (politically neutral language) is more important than GNL. Anyone have any thoughts on whether GNL or PNL is more important??
(For clarification, politically-neutral language contrasts with politically correct and politically incorrect.) Georgia guy ( talk) 17:12, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with using the term man-made as it implies made by mankind which is gender neutral.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk)
13:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
He
posted it there.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk)
16:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I've said many times that the MOS says to use GNL. However, many Wikipedians think that GNL is not important and should be used only where it can be done without causing ambiguity. Otherwise, it's best to just use generic male language. We need to change the GNL section of the MOS to saying either gender-neutral or generic male language is acceptable. Any thoughts?? Georgia guy ( talk) 12:26, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
"Gender-neutral language does not inherently convey a particular viewpoint, political agenda or ideal." This is obviously not true, it conveys the idea that traditional stereotypes are not priviliged and should not be reinforced, which is not neutral at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.77.73.7 ( talk) 06:40, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
In a related essay, Wikipedia:Writing about women, it says:
The order in which groups are introduced—man and woman, male and female, Mr. and Mrs., husband and wife, brother and sister, ladies and gentlemen—has implications for their status, so consider alternating the order as you write.
The phrase "he or she" naturally belongs to this category. It's easy to see that "he (or she)" (that is, using the parentheses around "or she") should be avoided.
This suggests that I support that it's okay to use the singular they as long as there's no ambiguity. Any thoughts here??
There is no article maintenence template available along the lines of "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's standards on gender-neutral language". Should such a template be created? See vintage (design) for an example of where it could be applied (in that case, for overuse of the term "manmade"). 121.45.118.58 ( talk) 05:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
Copy edit|for=[[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Gender-neutral language|gender-neutral language]]}}
. Someone might disagree (for reasons which aren't invalid – see thread above about "mankind") and remove it, though. Your best bet is to simply rewrite the article instead of tagging it. For a tiny copy-editing issue like this, tagging it (and talking about tagging it) wastes far more time than just improving the article would take. (In this case, I did both.) —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼
19:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC)I was hoping to receive some clarification on the rationale behind not using "students" instead of "girls" when referring to a single gender academic institution. It is not out of the realm of possibility to have a gender non-binary individual at an historically single gendered school. Arosati ( talk) 14:34, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia talk:Gender-neutral language/Archive 1#Actor vs. Actress, the consensus appeared to lean towards using "actor" over "actress" in most articles. (This discussion is 10 years old.)
Yesterday, an IP user changed "actor" to "actress" in the infobox on Violett Beane per this diff. I simply reverted it without comment. Today, it was reverted by User:IJBall as part of another edit here, with the comment "There is absolutely nothing wrong with "Actress". I reverted again, with the comment "Reverted to previous stable wording". That editor has since opened a discussion at Talk:Violett Beane#"Actress".
In researching this, I've been unable to find a clear guideline as to whether or not actress should be used for female actors. GNL implies that "actor" should be used in most cases. However, most of the articles on female actors that I have looked at since the issue came up all appear to use "actress" in both the infobox and lede sentence. I also consulted Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, but could find no specific page on content guidelines. Has this issue been resolved elsewhere? Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 19:16, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Acthually, Berean Hunter, the term "mankind" is NOT gender-neutral, as it clearly has the letters of the word "man" in it. Where do women (or even boys and girls) fit in this word if it only has the letters of the word "man"? -- Fandelasketchup ( talk) 13:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
It seems worthwhile to post here a note of the discussion over the use of "man-made" on the Main Page. Eventually the word was changed to "artificial", although I am unsure whether this really was the consensus. Personally I appreciated Swarm's discovery there of this earlier Village-Pump discussion. The consensus from that was that the " generic he" should be prohibited, but a policy to favour gender-neutral terms over "-man" as a suffix was simultaneously rejected. There is a risk here that changes in the direction of GNL get accepted piecemeal, because we can all live with an isolated piece of clear but clunky language, without there being any overall consensus that this is what we want. Jmchutchinson ( talk) 12:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
It's 50 years since 1969. So are all the Apollo articles now having "manned" replaced by "crewed"? This is ridiculous: it's anachronistic, it's superfluous (no women on Apollo) and it does absolutely zero to improve any real gender issues on WP. Still, there's no article on the women selected as astronauts at this time (and then passed over for Apollo). Clarice Phelps has been deleted and salted, lest any of these pesky women scientists think they deserve any record on WP, but let's have a nonsense wording change like this and then pat ourselves on the back for righting great historical wrongs. Andy Dingley ( talk) 16:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation#RfC on mass changing "maiden flight" to "first flight". –
Leviv
ich
01:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race § Hatnote to explain pronouns. ---
C&
C (
Coffeeandcrumbs)
16:15, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Watchers of this page may be interested in the following discussion: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Template:Multiple pronouns. --- C& C ( Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)