Talk:Alexis Arquette

message: It seems to me that we are digressing in our efforts to construct this article based on how/when/why certain pronouns are preferred.  If the pronoun is ambiguous or uncertain, then let's just write around it.  Change he/she to "Arquette" and brother/sister to "sibling." etc, and be done with it.   Ditch ∝ 01:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, some of us are better writers, and that's why we don't write around it. In some cases that might work, but pronouns have a purpose in writing. They are used to make writing smoother so that the nouns they represent don't have to be endlessly repeated. "Writing around it" can result in very bad writing. Changing every he/she to Arquette would be poor writing. MOS:GENDERID is clear on this issue: use pronouns that "reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification". In this case the latest expressed gender identity is female (unless or until a reliable source is provided to the contrary). So we use she, her, woman, etc. Sundayclose (talk) 01:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: So gender has to be assigned in all biographies in order to make the writing smoother?  Ditch ∝ 02:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Pronouns make writing smoother. If we want biographies (or any article) to be written better, we use pronouns. To select the pronoun, we use the gender that the person identifies with (e.g., he for males, she for females). Wikipedia does not "assign" gender; gender is self-assigned. Most biographies on Wikipedia are not about transgender people, but if the subject is transgender, Wikipedia says we use their latest expressed gender identify. It's really not complicated. Sundayclose (talk) 02:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should to be slave to pronouns and smooth writing to sacrifice neutrality, one of the 5 pillars of the project. Ditch ∝ 02:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but I find nothing in your last comment that makes sense. People use pronouns quite effectively on Wikipedia thousands (if not millions) of times every day. There is nothing non-neutral about using pronouns and following what Wikipedia says about pronoun use with transgender people. Again, this is not at all complicated. If you disagree with what Wikipedia says regarding transgenders, the appropriate place to challenge that is at WT:MOS, not the talk page of one article. Sundayclose (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am challenging the way pronouns are used in this specific article, under these specific circumstances, surrounding the notability of this specific person, which is why I am posting here.  I have no desire to challenge, nor do I disagree with, Wikipedia's policy of pronoun usage as it applies to transgenders. (Please do not jump to conclusions regarding my motives.)  My position is that, in this specific case, the preferred form of address is in question, and, until that is resolved, using "he" and/or "she" at this time is inaccurate, potentially inappropriate, and could be best resolved- albeit, temporarily- by avoiding gender specific terminology until the matter is resolved.  Ditch ∝ 23:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The preferred form of address is very clear according to MOS:GENDERID: the latest gender identity expressed by Arquette in a reliable source is female, so we use she, her, woman, etc. That supersedes anything her family might state because MOS:GENDERID states that we "give precedence to self-designation as reported in the most up-to-date reliable sources" (italics added). The latest self-designation is female, regardless of what siblings say or how some Wikipedia editors interpret what siblings say, unless or until someone produces a more recent reliable source to the contrary.  Let me try to understand your point. Are you challenging MOS:GENDERID for this article and only this article? Or do you have a recent reliable source in which Arquette stated that she did not identify as female? There are no other options that I can think of. Sundayclose (talk) 00:56, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with that policy, and I agree that sources in the article support your position.  Do you dispute that Arquette's preference for gender identity is now in question?  Ditch ∝ 02:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Now in question" by whom? By some Wikipedia editors, obviously, but Wikipedia editors are very good at creating much ado about nothing, so that's no indication of dispute in the real world. I doubt there will be a reliable source in which Arquette stated that she no longer identifies as female, so the only way it will change in her Wikipedia article is if some folks want to battle it out in a consensus discussion. Sundayclose (talk) 02:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember that this is no longer a BLP.  A statement has been made publicly by a primary source, and reported on by numerous secondary sources, that indicate Arquette's preference had changed prior to death.  How do we handle that in the article?  Ditch ∝ 22:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:BLP is beside the point (although I will point out that BLP still applies to some who has recently died). MOS:GENDERID still applies. The only way to change the pronouns and other feminine references is with a reliable source that Arquette changed her gender identity (very unlikely) or by consensus. Also note that even the comments by family members contradict each other on that matter. Consensus is the only way to change it. That's the usual way to settle differences of opinion. I think our discussion has gone beyond pronouns per se. The issue of gender identity in general is discussed elsewhere on this page. Probably best to make further comments there. Sundayclose (talk) 23:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is a better place on this page for this specific discussion, I don't see it.  However, I take your point that our discourse has become a bit of a back and forth, and consensus will not be reached between two editors.  So I will post a new thread at the bottom of the page (with a clear-er title) in the hopes that perhaps an RFC, or some such consensus building mechanism, will resolve this.  Thanks for your candor and well thought-out replies.  Sorry if I seemed "testy" at any point.  It was not intentional, if so.   Ditch ∝ 01:19, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. But before you create a new discussion, look immediately above at the section "Detransitioned?", which raised the question of whether her gender identity should be changed. More discussion is great, but I'd like to avoid the same topic scattered in different places on this talk page. Sundayclose (talk) 01:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aren't we better writers than this? 

message: .  Are we gendering this person properly per MOS?  It appears from the statement that Alexis identified as male at the end but I'm not sure how to convey a life of such a complex identity.   The family sttement is binary.  Do we have any sources that are not binary in nature or that support feminine pronouns?  Arquette's family used masculine pronouns and identity in their statement.  --DHeyward (talk) 07:38, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not discuss the same topic in several places. Look above at Talk:Alexis Arquette#Detransitioned?. Sundayclose (talk) 16:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This family statement needs someone more aware than I to parse it. 

message: In this edit,  removed the line “She was well known for her transition from male to female, and for supporting other people making similar transitions.” with the edit summary “Trivial info removal and redundancy cleanup”. In the same edit, Partyclams also removed the line “Arquette was a vocal supporter of other transgender people, including Chaz Bono, who transitioned from female to male between 2008 and 2010.” As far as I can tell, her transition was quite possibly the most notable aspect of her life, more than her relatively minor acting roles, and I think it belongs in the lead. I don't know how well known she was for her trans activism, so maybe that part shouldn't be in the lead, but I certainly don't think her support for Chaz Bono is “trivial”, and I don't think it should be removed from the article. -- Irn (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I would change "other transgender" to just "transgender" and add that her latest gender expression was genderfluid.  "Transgender" seems like it can be perceived as either broad category that includes genderqueer or narrower binary categories like "transgender woman."  She ceased identifying as a transgender woman when she started expressing herself as genderfluid.  --DHeyward (talk) 06:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Known for her transition and support of other trans people? 

message: I can see why the fact that she was surrounded by family at her time of death and them singing “Starman” might seem trivial, but I think it's more important than it might appear. This sort of detail actually gives a lot of information regarding the circumstances of her death. We don't know how she died or what she died from, but knowing that she was serenaded by her family at the moment she died gives us a lot of useful context. For example, it shows that her death was anticipated by her family who had clearly accepted it before it happened, so it wasn't a surprise or a sudden tragedy. -- Irn (talk) 23:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family's presence at her death 

message: Is there a better source than People magazine for this? The one listed cites People magazine and that it will update when further info is available (which may have happened?), but I'd think People magazine is not a RS. Hollth (talk) 07:40, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that People article is not very reliable - it gives one anonymous source and that's it. However, I just found this article. I'm not familiar with Radar, but it looks like a gossip rag. That said, the article does name its source, and if a close friend is confirming that Arquette had AIDS, I think that's pretty solid. I would ideally like better sourcing on this, but I think it might suffice for the AIDS claim, at least. -- Irn (talk) 17:21, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call, PinkAmpers&.  You did the right thing.  63.92.255.201 (talk) 23:14, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

text: "Cardiac arrest" seems fine to me. -- Irn (talk) 15:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Cardiac arrest is insufficient considering ALL deaths are essentially caused by cardiac arrest (which is why "deaths by cardiac arrest" is no longer a category on here). Why would we leave out what caused the cardiac arrest? It's puzzling to me. Someone her age doesn't just die of cardiac arrest, surrounded by family of friends, without an underlying cause.  The underlying cause of the cardiac arrest was the heart infection caused by HIV. Again, this is not a feel-good obituary paid for by the family. —МандичкаYO 😜 16:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: My biggest concern with this is sourcing. I hadn't looked into the article from The Independent, but doing so now, it looks good to me, so I'll put that part back in. Cheers, -- Irn (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aids related death? 

message: The brother's statement reads: "Our brother Robert, who became our brother Alexis, who became our sister Alexis, who became our brother Alexis, passed this morning September 11, at 12:32 am.  Is this accurate or is this a typo?  The clause that reads who became our brother Alexis is listed (repeated) twice.  I am not sure if that was some intentional repetitive message or a typo.  Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:39, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Accurate. Alexis stopped identifying as a transgender woman and started identifying as genderfluid.  Discussed above.  Alexis was not identifying as distinctly male or female at the time of her death. --DHeyward (talk) 05:47, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK.  Thanks.  So, what exactly does this quote mean?  Why did they repeat the same phrase twice?  Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 12:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think they are just recognizing that Alexis' gender was no longer exclusively female.  It's part of a larger context that Alexis was both brother and sister at the time of her death.  There's not a lot of detail given but the gist seems to be that "transgender woman" was much too binary a definition for the gender Alexis expressed to her family.  Alexis repudiated "transgender" for genderfluid and it seems her brother is trying to reflect Alexis is both brother and sister at the time of her death though at other times she identified as one or the other.  To me it reads as if Alexis needed to be his sister to realize that she was also a brother and not simply transgender.  Whatever he meant, he described it previously that Alexis was both brother and sister and how she felt was expressed by how she dressed.  It's probably a bit to convoluted to parse the language beyond "genderfluid" and I don't pretend to understand it beyond what they have said.  MOS says to use the latest expressed gender and that appears to be genderfluid and not male, transgender female or anything that would imply a "detransition."  More of an evolution of understanding rather than contradiction, repetition or repudiation. --DHeyward (talk) 13:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

text: I cannot find any source of the quote, including the insistence of using he/him/his pronouns, in the cited Facebook page. All instances of the quote on the internet belong to secondary sources(slate.com, People magazine, etc.) Should the quote be updated to reflect the current wording in the Facebook post? WenCOB (talk) 20:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I liked the way Richmond's statement allowed the article to communicate so much about her gender fluidity and the circumstances of her death without having to make any claim explicitly, but keeping it as is strikes me as a violation of WP:BDP. -- Irn (talk) 00:41, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The brother's statement 

message: I have just made this edit to the xHamster page about their purchase and destruction of a sex tape alleged to show Alexis Arquette.  xHamster's reasoning was to avoid Arquette being smeared.  Not sure if this is worth adding to her bio, but I mention it for others to consider.  Note that this Huffington Post piece also describes her death as from HIV/AIDS complications.  EdChem (talk) 12:27, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[xHamster]] 

message: There's nothing other than the trans stuff. There's no mention of her sexual orientation, relationships, friendships etc. Jim Michael (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: Alexis Arquette began identifying again as a man before her death. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/final-days-alexis-arquette-a-928507
This should be noted in Arquette's personal info and journey with transgender life. i.e. From the article above, "Living in low-income housing and resistant to treating a rapidly progressing HIV, the transgender trailblazer, who died Sunday at age 47, spent her last days living as a man and struggling to make ends meet. Says one of her closest friends: "She was rightfully angry that she should have had the success and notoriety that comes with being such a talented actor and being born into a family that presents the opportunity."
173.71.97.28 (talk) 18:31, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Exactly what text do you want changed? Additionally, the article only says she was living as a man, not that she was identifying as a man. Additionally, I see numerous discussions above concerning this topic, and consensus seems to be against this statement. -- ferret (talk) 22:14, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2016 

message: I just noticed that the infobox says "aortic dissection" while the prose doesn't mention that at all.  Can someone more acquainted with this subject reconcile this?  Thanks. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 19:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency in cause of death 

message: Source: MSN
Patricia Arquette was disappointed to find that her sister, Alexis, was not recognized in the In Memoriam portion of the 89th Academy Awards. 
The Oscar-winning actress spoke with ET's Carly Steel at Vanity Fair's Oscars after-party on Sunday night about Alexis -- who died on Sept. 11 at 47-- being snubbed at the awards show. "Alexis was a great actor, and had 70 credits, and was really brave to live her truth as a trans woman, and they didn't include her in the memorial," Patricia said of her sibling. "I think that was a real slight to the trans community, especially at this time, when trans kids can't even go to the bathroom in the United States of America at school. It says a lot about the lack of inclusion." 
"Trans kids can really never look at anyone and see their heroes, and I think that was a big mistake," the 48-year-old actress continued. 
Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/oscars/exclusive-patricia-arquette-calls-alexis-oscars-in-memoriam-snub-a-real-slight-to-the-trans-community/ar-AAnzQNL?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.51.116 (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patricia Arquette Calls Alexis' Oscars 'In Memoriam' Snub 'a Real Slight to the Trans Community