Talk:Graham Linehan - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dejvid (talk | contribs) at 18:34, 25 August 2021 (→Inaccurate description of his stance). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:34, 25 August 2021 by Dejvid (talk | contribs) (→Inaccurate description of his stance)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Graham Linehan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Screenwriters Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Screenwriters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of screenwriting, screenwriters, and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScreenwritersWikipedia:WikiProject ScreenwritersTemplate:WikiProject Screenwritersscreenwriter
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Inaccurate description of his stance

It would appear that Linehan's stance is best described as "anti-transgender-activist activism" (awkward as that sounds), and not "anti-transgender activism". He has not critiqued the act of being transgender or displayed any intolerance of it, but rather has criticized the behavior of a certain group of transgender activists. As much as those activists may wish to confound the two, they are vastly different things. It is analogous to the difference between being anti-Islam and anti-ISIS. It is very misleading to describe him as an "anti-transgender activist".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.234.107 (talk • contribs) 14:57, July 12, 2021 (UTC)

That's a common refrain of his and, as reliable sources show, no one believes this hair-splitting. His actions are against transgender rights in total, not just "anti-activism." — The Hand That Feeds You: 19:38, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

How Linehan labels his stance, and what his stance actually is, are in fact two different things. He is active against transgender *rights*, not just transgender *activism*. Newimpartial (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

This article seems to be extremely biased, even if he is an "anti-transgender-activist activist" I doubt he would self-identifies as such, isn't that what matters? He's primary well known for being a writer, after-all if he wasn't a writer it would be unlikely there would be an article here on him. 77.98.149.223 (talk) 11:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

As has been mentioned here before, it does not matter whether he considers himself an anti-transgender activist as per WP:MANDY DeputyBeagle (talk) 13:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

You can't half-apply a rule. If WP:MANDY says that "of course someone would say he's not X" then it also says that "of course opponents of someone would say he is X". Do the source using the term actually source it? The burden of proof is still on those making a claim. For example, source #30 says the protestors were 'anti-trans' but they were merely protesting a lobbying group, not trans people - the article is clearly barely aware of what the issues are or would be at stake and is repeating unnamed sources and their unproven claims. InverseZebra (talk) 02:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

The anon-IP is incorrect when they state "he has not... displayed any intolerance of it" - reading the relevant section and it's sources demonstrates quite the opposite. Apparently even a show featuring trans people is enough to have him boycott the entire network. Bastun 09:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Describing Linehan as an anti-transgender activist is not writing "from a neutral point of view". It is clearly a contentious claim. Shouldn't it be removed until there is clear consensus on it's use? I was told there was consensus on this page but I don't see it. Electricia (talk) 13:56, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Take a look at the Talk page archives, perhaps? Newimpartial (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

You can find a lot of discussion about this in the talk page archives, and when something has been discussed and a status quo stands for months, it musn't be undone by one individual, because that goes against how decisions are made on Misplaced Pages, by a community. If you want to then I think opening an RFC is a perfectly reasonable step, because that's a way to solve a protracted content dispute, but superimposing your own opinion onto the article directly when it goes against many others is not the right way to proceed. We got a weak but functional consensus for the status quo at this discussion and no consensus sufficient to overturn the status quo here.

The base problem is that everything is contentious. To not talk about it does a disservice to both supporters and opponents of Linehan. To use a misleading euphemism like "gender critical" is to assume correctness of Linehan's position. To use "transphobe" is to assume incorrectness. So "anti-transgender activist", a cold, flat description of what Linehan is doing, is the least contentious.

I think perhaps the issue with the phrase is that supporters of Linehan actually don't want people to know what Linehan's position is, because they would be alienated by that and less likely to listen to him. We see this a lot with the alt-right: they say "we're liberals actually" and so on and it's a propaganda tactic to draw people in. So we see this endless tide of supporters come in to contest the description. Like I've seen now on multiple occasions people who will argue for months and months and months that Linehan and similar figures are not anti-transgender, that this is just a slur against them and we're doing it because we hate women and so on, and when they're finally banned for crossing a line they leave a rude final message on their talk page calling us all tra**y and mentally ill and degen****e per***ts who are not actually the gender we say we are and so on. (I say "we" referring to all editors, not just trans ones, because that doesn't seem to matter to these trolls.) They were never actually in earnest disagreement that they are anti-transgender—what they're angry about is that stating the truth clearly and openly in the article works against their recruitment tactics. Such is, of course, not true of every editor who opposes the description, but it makes up a lot of complaints you'll find in the talk page archives. — Bilorv (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I’m not a supporter of Linehan. I just think it’s a contentious statement that goes against Misplaced Pages policies such as writing from a neutral point of view and removing contentious material. “He holds contentious views on trans issues” is a neutral statement, “anti-transgender activist” isn’t - it’s a statement that many people disagree with. Misplaced Pages is meant to be objective. Electricia (talk) 17:56, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

That doesn't tell you anything though—what are the nature of his views? You might as well say "he has opinions about politics". It's not neutral to whitewash. I also don't think it would stop the complaints flooding in. I, for one, don't believe his views are "contentious", because that implies there are two equal sides to the matter, or at least some valid support for his position. What reliable sources have you read that endorse Linehan's views? We can see others like PinkNews consistently condemn them. And you say that " a statement that many people disagree with"—who? You can't just assert that point: you need to name them and explain why they disagree, and why an encyclopedia would consider those views significant/reliable. — Bilorv (talk) 17:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

PinkNews is hardly a neutral source. LGB Aliance has a rather different view.Dejvid (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the opening statement "Graham Linehan (/ˈlɪnəhæn/, born 22 May 1968) is an Irish anti-transgender activist and television writer" to "Graham Linehan (/ˈlɪnəhæn/, born 22nd of May 1968) is a television writer and a pro-choice, political activist who campaigned, with Amnesty International, to change Ireland's abortion laws. He is also a controversial voice on transgenderism and believes a person cannot change sex." 81.109.229.147 (talk) 16:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Why would we do that? I don't see any RS supporting it. Newimpartial (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 15 August 2021‎

Yep, not a summary of the body of the article (WP:LEAD) and not even suitable for inclusion in the article without reliable sources and neutral rewording. — Bilorv (talk) 18:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

"Anti-transgender activist" was added to the lead sentence recently, and created a redundancy. That has been reverted now. Most sources describe him as a television writer, so, per WP:DUE and WP:LABEL, something like that doesn't belong there. As has been discussed before on this talk page, it is few sources that could be said to support the "anti-transgender activist" label. The activism stuff is already covered later in the lead and it is nonsensical to list it twice. The only reason he became notable and anyone paid attention to his views is for being a television writer. Crossroads 04:19, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I didn't see that the descriptor came first, which is ridiculous, but having it in the first sentence is not wrong as the first sentence often summarises the lead (and the lead summarises the body). Notice that the other descriptor, "television writer", is also completely redundant to the very text that follows: "He created or co-created the sitcoms ..." — Bilorv (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Categories: