Forum:Pronouns in Infobox Person

Opening post
I think we should introduce a pronouns field in. I feel that this should go in the top section, perhaps under "Other names" (although I'm not steadfast on this). I feel that this would potentially help people to use the correct pronouns and reduce misgendering. I originally got this idea from Wookieepedia and one thing I like about their implementation is that, as explained at their Template:Person (the equivelant to our ), the field is called "listedpronouns" and can only be filled in if the person "has publicly self-identified their pronouns and a valid source is provided" (valid source, in this context, presmubaly referring to a real world source such as a Twitter bio or public statement). While, somewhat ironically, the only example I could find with my pretty much non-existant Star Wars knowledge of this field in use does not include a citation, I feel that the idea is very sound in principal and should help keep potentially harmful incorrect statements to a minimum. Therefore, I suggest that we apply a similar policy and require citations. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Bongo50  ☎  17:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion
I agree with this, makes sense. We could also perhaps do something similar for, as we don't really have anything like that for in universe individuals either. Or perhaps that's a bad idea? Aquanafrahudy  📢   18:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * This is for real world people? I think, so long as the people we're writing about are comfortable, sounds like a good idea. (I really gotta write the OP for the pronoun fields in soon...)  19:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I was originally planning on proposing this for in-universe individuals as well but, when thinking through the details, I realised it was more complex so decided to wait until after this thread. As it's been brought up, I'll now go into my thoughts. The first complication is that our in-universe citation format just wouldn't work in this situation. Even if it did, I don't know of any scenario where we have an explicit statement of what a character's pronouns are so we'd have to get it from dialogue and narration, which I think is fine, but then we have the question of what source we would actually cite how of the potentially hundreds available. Perhaps it would actually just be better to not cite at all for IU characters? There's then the issue of characters who change pronouns in a story, such as Dorothy. Which do we use? I'm thinking that we list both with parentheticals giving brief explanation, using to explain in more depth when necessary. What are other people's thoughts on these questions?  Bongo50   ☎  22:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * How would we cite this? And I assume we're allowing neopronouns in this proposal? I worry about the potential for abuse. Najawin ☎  22:35, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * We'd cite it like so:
 *  |pronouns=X/Y 
 * As such, we'd allow whatever pronouns the person in question lists, be that traditional pronouns, neopronouns or otherwise. Bongo50   ☎  22:39, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I'd support this for real wofld people, but not for IU individuals. or at least, id be more hesitant there.Cousin Ettolrahc ☎  22:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * So to clarify, would they have to state their specific pronouns, or would, say, a news article referring to them count? Najawin ☎  23:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ideally yes this would be useful, practically as other have said. Both out of universe and in universe could be good (however the only two characters I think who have explicitly given their pronouns are some of the ones in head of state and the 10,000 Dawns crossovers. Out of universe I am currently unaware.) of course we could go with what is implied to be their pronouns? But that could be a bit risky. And then we get to people like me who have pronouns they are comfortable with, pronouns they hate being called, and pronouns they love being called. So would you put both the comfortable and loved as preferred? Anastasia Cousins ☎  06:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)


 * At the moment we're talking about the infobox for irl people, not characters, so IU and OOU aren't relevant. But I think if we do add this field, things like news articles should be fine as a source, of course they should also be superseded by self-declared pronouns. So for example if an actor or crew member is announced in an article or something we could reference that for their pronouns, but if they later make a post or bio or what have you that lists different pronouns or something like that is discovered, we would then change the listed pronouns to match that. Also, do we have anything in our policy about how to write pages for people who use multiple sets of pronouns? Sure for many such cases using they/them would be fine. But for example if someone uses he/him and she/her, but not they/them, what pronouns do we use? As for extending this to the version for characters, I'm not opposed to it, though I understand that it could be complicated for characters like Time Lords, who we sometimes use they/them to refer to a collective of forms regardless of whether they've been referred to in that way officially. Also I feel like that's a chance that it'll result in a page listing the Doctors by pronouns, but I don't think those are really problems that should interfere with that. Also I support adding a pronoun field to Time God Eon  ☎  19:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I think I agree that using news articles would be fine until/unless a better source comes along. I'm pretty certain we don't have an official policy on writing pages on people who use multiple sets of pronouns, but I do remember seeing an article about someone fitting that description where the article switched between their different pronouns randomly. I don't remember what article this was, though. Bongo50   ☎  22:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, news articles are really sketchy to me, which is why I asked. Often they just assume things - especially if it's not a direct interview, (and even if it is, you're still getting someone else's interpretation of that person) and having these fields justifiable through news articles rather than pure self reporting could easily lead to citogenesis. I'm also pretty wary about this generally because there are some figures in the community that have attracted very passionate detractors, and it could easily prompt vandalism. (There's a certain figure who I disagree with in basically all respects wrt their Who opinions, but I've had to repeatedly edit their page in order to remove very personal information from.) I'd be much more amenable to an IU version of this. But I've seen the vandalism that happens on this site against people, and the vitriol that happens against certain people, and it leads me to just be so skeptical. Personally. Najawin ☎  23:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)