Talk:Margot (activist)/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Identity

This person appears as a man in the identity document, so writing about him as her would be biased and ideologically oriented. We try to avoid such bias on Wikipedia

• No, we use preferred pronouns here on WP. Please respect Margot's preference. Malick78 (talk) 17:08, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia so we call things as they are and not as we would like them to be. We can write that He defines himself as a woman but the facts are that he's a man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prince1882 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• • I'm sorry, could you give a link to the policy you are referring to? Here it clearly says we give preference to the person's latest preferred gender identity. I will revert your edits accordingly. Malick78 (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia so we call things as they are. We could write about him as "her" if he underwent an actual gender reassignment, and he had it in the papers. Polish police call him a man so we should also do same thing. https://twitter.com/PolskaPolicja/status/1292089658659217415 Wikipedia is also not a place for activists to express their views. Policy can't change the facts, for example, we cannot write about someone that He was a professor because he he personified himself as professor, the facts are the facts. Its not right to modify basic biology rules and his ID documents because he's got something different in this mind. Wikipedia articles should be impartial. I don't know if you're familiar with that policy but you can read it here. We obviously can say that he claims that he's a woman but nothing more. Changing male form into female form in this arcticle is an act of vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prince1882 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

What was her previous name prior to “Malgorzata”? Do you know? - GizzyCatBella🍁 08:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, I got it - “Michał”. Is this her legal name? - GizzyCatBella🍁 08:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, this is her legal name and her legal gender is male. This article from Wyborcza, which appears as a citation in the article, confirms her legal name. Kubi718 (talk) 08:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Prince1882, per English Wikipedia guidelines (MOS:GENDERID), we should use the pronouns preferred by an individual, regardless of what their legal id says. Certainly we shouldn't defer to the Polish police. Gbear605 (talk) 15:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

This is a man!! Bartek384848 (talk) 09:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Not only it is a legal name, but she does not mind being called Michal. Quote from the ref: " bo jej to wcale nie obraża - mówi Łania, partnerka słynnej Margot" https://warszawa.wyborcza.pl/warszawa/7,54420,26204578,przed-aresztowaniem-poprosila-o-biblie-kim-jest-slynna-margot.html Zezen (talk) 11:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Zezen, per Wikipedia policy (MOS:MULTINAMES), we should still use her preferred name of Margot or Małgorzata, since that's her preferred name even if she doesn't mind being called other names. She is not notable under those names in English sources, so that is what we should use on English Wikipedia. Gbear605 (talk) 15:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

"formerly known as Michał Szutowicz" - not formerly, but officially and legally. There are no information or even claims the person has ever changed that name or made any attempt to do so.178.43.39.172 (talk) 12:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)Bartłomiej Andrzejewski

Not formely/officialy/legally, just "known". Except of her close friends and fellow activists, she is widely known as Michal Szutowicz, and she is widely recognizable by her legal and official name. First and foremost Wikipedia should be written for regular people, who may not be interested in left-wing activism, but saw the name in a newspaper and want to find a biogram of that person. People who refer to Margot as Malgorzata will already know more about her than they could learn from this article. Dinth (talk) 15:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

She did, in fact, call herself Małgorzata, as far as I could read from her own publications: https://archive.is/ZZtrU

Zezen (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Zezen, Margot and Margo are nicknames that she is referred to in reliable English sources, such as the Time article, so we should include those to help English users find the article. Meanwhile, her birthname is not notable in English sources, so there isn't a reason to include it. Gbear605 (talk) 17:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

1. You may be answering the wrong person. I agree she is calling herself Małgorzata, by now, see above.

2. In fact, for the record only, her birthname is notable, and mentioned as such verbatim: https://www.womenarehuman.com/anger-as-transgender-identifying-activist-is-held-in-male-detention/

and

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/lgbt-protesters-decry-rising-homophobia-arrests-in-poland/story-s4oVLmcWsbywTBnRKiaL1I.html

Life is too short for more Google searches tho, especially on mobile.

Bows to all,

Zezen (talk) 17:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The first source seems to be biased and shouldn't count as a RS, see [1]

The second source mentions her birthname, but only in passing, not enough to make it notable.

Gbear605 (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I actually agree re 1. I am thus removing the first source from the current version of the article. Zezen (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh, you have removed it already! Thanks. Zezen (talk) 18:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I think we should mention that person legal (male) name, no objections to any note or clarification that the subject prefers another name. But generally we do mentions alt names, old names and so on in our biographies. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:32, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

User @Gbear605: repeatedly reverts changes introducing Margot's official name into the article, saying that Wikipedia uses the name preferred by the subjects of articles. Maybe true. But the article should also contain other names referring to the subject, otherwise it's not fully informative. BasileusAutokratorPL (talk) 12:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

• Sorry, there is no need to include her previous name. That is WP's policy and if you want to change it, take it up on the appropriate page. Not here. Malick78 (talk) 12:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Recheck these policies Malick, do you need links? - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I went through the talk page before and I have seen that no rational argumentation of other users did suceed before with this issue. Still, I will write my opinion. I strongly oppose unscientific prioritizing of personal own feelings over the biological and legal reality. As you have seen, I did not change the he/she pronouns in the text. I only assume that legally he is a man named Michal Szutowicz, he did not changed his sex/gender from male to female, neither did he change his name from Michal to Malgorzata. It is erroneus to prioritise any fluctuating personal statements when there is real evidence about these characteristics of person that opposes the feelings. Wikipedia should bring real knowledge and full information, this approach is absurd and goes totally against the scientific purpose of description of the world. Tomorrow he can decide that he is a man again, next week he might be a dolphin named Rudolph, and so on. By that time, de iure he still will be a man Michal Szutowicz and this should be definitely included in the very first sentence of the article, as it is his real name and real sex/gender. As soon as he undergoes the needed surgery or legally changes his gender to female and legally changes his name, then it will be ok to include female Malgorzata into the first sentence. All these information about his current personal feelings of self-identification should be included in the article as well, but not in the heading. Heading should be brief and accurate and should not misinform. If you will follow the heading and look for some Malgorzata Szutowicz, you won't find any, as there is no one with such a name (who would correspond to activist Margot) living in Poland, just ask the authorities. Thus, I see no point currently in edit warring, the only solution that makes sense is to change this absurd Wikipedia rules. I will campaign for it firstly in our national level, then globally. I hope that now you understand the reasons of my actions. Best regards--Belisarius~skwiki (talk) 05:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Belisarius~skwiki, it seems that your disagreement here is with Wikipedia policy generally, not with this article. Wikipedia policy is MOS:GENDERID, which says Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman") that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification, along with MOS:DEADNAME, which says In the case of transgender and non-binary people, birth names should be included in the lead sentence only when the person was notable under that name (which we are debatable not correctly following here, depending on whether we define Margot as being notable under her masculine name). Obviously, Margot's latest expressed gender self-identification is the name "Malgorzata" and she/her pronouns, so per Wikipedia policy, we should use those. Do you disagree that that's what Wikipedia policy says or implies here?

If you don't disagree that that is what Wikipedia policy says and implies for this page, then you likely want to bring this discussion to Wikipedia talk:Manual_of_Style, where you can discuss changes to the Manual of Style (which is where those policies are defined). I doubt you'll find much traction here on English Wikipedia (and personally I think you're completely wrong), but you're free to attempt to change this.

Gbear605 (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Of course, we can respect the guidelines of MOS:GENDERID "Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (...)". However, information for Malik78 in connection with its edition [2]:

1. name of "Michał" did not replace the name of "Małgorzata", name of Michał is mainly added near the "born" informations. Does not break the MOS:GENDERID in any way.
2. official, this is Michał Szutowicz, this person did not change their name, gender or any other! This is not the same situation like the person who changed their gender (sex reassignment surgery) and changed first name to female.
3. moreover, you broke the idea/pillar/genesis of encyclopedia. The encyclopedia should not hide the official facts because someone doesn't like them.
4. very many sources show name "Michał" referring to the Margot. In Poland, very many peoples know this person as Michał Sz. pseudonym Margot. This is meets the requirements of MOS:GENDERID.

PS. In many coutries, including Poland (Margot is Pole) pseudonym of "Margo" is not known at all. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 18:27, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

1. That doesn't break MOS:GENDERID, but it could break MOS:DEADNAME, depending on whether or not Margot "was notable under that name" of "Michał". The past tense here indicates that this is a scenario where a person used to be notable under a previous name and then the name was changed, such as Wendy Carlos. This is not relevant here, since Margot only became notable after identifying as "Małgorzata" and not as "Michał."

2. the key phrase is latest expressed gender self-identification, indicating that undergoing gender affirming surgery or changing legal name isn't important.

3. There are many facts that Wikipedia doesn't include. WP:BLP specifically says Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively.

4. MOS:GENDERID specifically is about referring to a person by their self-identification, which means that we should ignore what name people know Margot as and go with Margot's self-identified name.

And yes, "Margo" doesn't seem to be used in many sources, but it isn't a detriment in any way to *also* have it, since it doesn't disagree with MOS:GENDERID or with MOS:DEADNAME and it is used in some sources.

Gbear605 (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

1. Your wrote: "That doesn't break MOS:GENDERID, but it could break MOS:DEADNAME" - you wrong. Not break also MOS:DEADNAME. Michał is still active name, everywhere - not only in documentation, but also in sources.

2. latest expressed gender self-identification? Ok, does not mean that the encyclopedia is supposed to hide the facts.

3. It's not an argument. This is a moot point, this is debatable who or what, what can be shown and what not.

4. Please read my point #1: name of "Michał" did not replace the name of "Małgorzata", name of Michał is mainly added near the "born" informations.

"Margo" is used in some sources and it's good? 100 more sources used name of Michał. You pseudo-interpret the guelines for own opinion. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Summary: information about Michał in article not breaking any rules of Wikipedia and it is supported by many sources. The name of Michał is still active, everywhere - not only in official documents, but also everywhere else, in these sources the same type as they use the names Małgorzata and Margot. In article, name of "Michał" did not replace the name of "Małgorzata", name of Michał is mainly added near the "born" informations. So, you want to delete correct data (name), name in common use in everywhere, name supported by many sources. For me, this is trolling. And I repeat for the tenth time: in article name of "Michał" did not replace the name of "Małgorzata", name of Michał is mainly added near the "born" informations. So, stop trolling. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 19:26, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Subtropical-man, by my understanding MOS:DEADNAME is meant to refer to when a person was notable under the birth name BEFORE the person changed their name. Since Margot changed her name (and the preferred name is relevant here, not the legal name) before becoming notable, MOS:DEADNAME says that we should not include her birth name in the lead sentence, since birth names should be included in the lead sentence only when the person was notable under that name. That doesn't mean we should exclude it from the rest of the article, but just from the lead sentence.

As for "Margo" being included, it is different since it isn't against any policies while including "Michał" would be. I'm sure that you understand that different policies can apply to different names.

Gbear605 (talk) 19:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I understand what you are writing about. However, I found the crux of the problem. You wrote: "by my understanding MOS:DEADNAME (...)" - yes, by your understanding, just your understanding. You misunderstood the MOS:DEADNAME. Your text above is a funny interpretation. No offence. I'll explain it differently: there is a person (born in 1995 as Michał), in 2015 called himself as Malgorzata and Margot, in 2020 press made a stupid scandal. If (I repeat IF) the name of Michał ended "career" in 2010 and this person was famous only with the name Małgorzata or Margot - MOS:DEADNAME works here. However, it's different. In 2020, all names of this person (Małgorzata, Michał, Margot, eventually Margo) are used by the sources. This is not DEADNAME. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 20:05, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, it seems that our disagreement is around the specific wording of MOS:DEADNAME, which I don't think we'll reach an agreement on. I'll give other people some time to add their thoughts, but we might want to make an RFC about this. Gbear605 (talk) 20:21, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Clearly Subtropical-man is not a native speaker and has not understood the WP policy. The policy is quite clear. Also, Margot's preference for Malgorzata/Margot is clear too. Subtropical just doesn't seem to care. Malick78 (talk) 22:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

He says "In 2020, all names of this person (Małgorzata, Michał, Margot, eventually Margo) are used by the sources." It's not whether they use them, it's what RS say she prefers. Malick78 (talk) 22:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you understand what the discussion is about? The discussion is no longer about whether to use Michał instead of Małgorzata. The current discussion concerns the issue of entering the commonly used name of Michał near birth informations. There are no guidelines or rules that prohibit this. User:Gbear605 thing, I quote: "That doesn't break MOS:GENDERID, but it could break MOS:DEADNAME". It's just his opinion and interpretation. Always, you can create an RfC's topic, but I think before the RFC is done, the article will be integrated/merge or removed (new AfD). So. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 22:10, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Malik, if you are going to make the change like this [3] please also make change to the “other names” and change it to “Michał” in other names. Saying all that, I still think that Subtropical-man is right in this dispute with you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 22:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC) PS. I also requested page protection, so you fellows can cool off a bit. - GizzyCatBella🍁 22:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

GizzyCatBella, your "make the change like this" it is extremely poor wording. Malik have no right to delete data with sources without consensus. The data complies with Wikipedia policy. If Malik have a different opinion then present arguments + evidences and wait for consensus. Deleting data with sources without consensus and based on your own opinion is vandalism. Especially when there is an active discussion about this. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 22:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Summary:

• I'll explain it differently: there is a person (born in 1995 as Michał), in 2015 called himself as Malgorzata and Margot, in 2020 press made a stupid scandal. If (I repeat IF) the name of Michał ended "career" in 2010 and this person from 2020 was famous only with the name Małgorzata or Margot - MOS:DEADNAME works here. However, it's different. This person was known as Michał from the very beginning.
• The interpretation of MOS:DEADNAME may be debatable. If someone have a different opinion then present arguments + evidences and wait for consensus. Or even can create RfC, but I think before the RFC is done, the article will be integrated/merge or removed (new AfD). So. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 22:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Per WP:BLP we are to edit *conservatively* and misgendering is a no go option. Her birth name is not notable nor in any way instrumental in understanding her. It’s not needed, and may cause harm. Gleeanon409 (talk) 01:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)(blocked sockpuppet)

Her birth name is notable, according to the many sources. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 02:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

::That’s far cry from actual notability by Wikipedia standards. Perhaps others agree with you though. Gleeanon409 (talk) 02:37, 23 September 2020 (UTC)(blocked sockpuppet)

I agree with them. Some sources use Małgorzata and some use Michał so I think both should be mentioned. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 13:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

One of Margot's partners said that Margot is not offended by being referred to as their birth name Michał, so it's not causing harm (source). Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 13:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

IMHO an RFC should be started on this, I personally don't see a problem with both names being mentioned seeing as sources have been using both[4], RFC is the best way forward. –Davey2010^Talk 15:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

This is folly. We have the birth name of pretty much every other transgender person on Wikipedia, and on the one who doesn't mind hearing it, we have activists deleting it? Her former name is information, not an insult. I'll put it in a pretty standard format, but I have no doubt some SJW will immediately revert it as "offensive". complainer 11:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

::::No, we don’t. For BLPs we only publish Deadnames if the person was notable under that name. In Margot’s case consensus is that she wasn’t notable enough under her birth name to justify its inclusion, anywhere. Glee^anon 17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)(blocked sockpuppet)

Following up on RfC, removed sources with deadnaming

[5] Following the RfC, extreme right-wing sources that DEADNAME Margot were removed, and the naming issue in extreme right-wing media was trimmed down to appropriate size. Juliett Tango Papa (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2020 (UTC)<-- (blocked sockpuppet)

Thank you! Glee^anon 17:42, 30 October 2020 (UTC) - (blocked sockpuppet)

The RfC discussion

The RfC discussion decided that there appears to be a clear consensus favouring eliminating Margot's deadname from both the lead and infobox. There is no clear consensus regarding the controversy section and whether it should be kept or removed. I'm recovering general data missing entirely, which is her initial masculine name. - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:42, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

GizzyCatBella, MOS:DEADNAME was actually updated recently. Per the new policy, In the case of a living transgender or non-binary person, the birth name should be included only if the person was notable under that name; it should then appear in the lead, and may be used elsewhere in the article where contextually appropriate. ... If such a subject was not notable under their former name, it usually should not be included in that or any other article, even if some reliable sourcing exists for it. Treat the pre-notability name as a privacy interest separate from (and often greater than) the person's current name. We definitely decided above that Margot was not notable under her deadname, which I believe makes the MOS policy on this clear. Gbear605 (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, and the changes seem to have been the product of a formally-closed RfC that was open for 51 days: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography § RfC: To broaden MOS:Deadname. The closing admin's comment notes, There's a very clear majority against gratuitous deadnaming... So, seems pretty clear, altogether, that Margot's deadname should not appear in this article. --‿Ꞅtruthious 𝔹andersnatch ͡ |℡| 15:09, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

This ugly deadnaming needs to stop. Juliett Tango Papa (talk) 15:48, 30 October 2020 (UTC) <-- (blocked sockpuppet)

• @ Gbear605 I wasn’t aware of the update. It’s okay to eliminate entirely the masculine former name then. - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Margot or Margo

The sources use only the form "Margot". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.9.169 (talk) 12:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Our source from Time Magazine calls her Margo. [6] Gbear605 (talk) 15:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2021

Name of that person is Michał not Małgorzata. He didn't change name in legal way. Source: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Bzdurom (check uwagi/comments) SteelMike (talk) 22:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

As discussed previously on this page, English Wikipedia uses the name chosen by a person, regardless of whether it has been legally changed. MOS:DEADNAME is the relevant Wikipedia policy here. In addition, Wikipedia can't be a source for itself, regardless of what languages are involved (see WP:CIRC). So we should continue to keep the article as it is. Gbear605 (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)