Revision as of 13:25, 22 August 2013 editMorwen (talk | contribs)Administrators56,993 edits →This is why Misplaced Pages is such a sad, pathetic joke← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 19:30, 3 January 2025 edit undoSpookyaki (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,688 edits Assessment: banner shell, Biography, Freedom of speech (Low), Human rights (High), Gender studies (Low), Law (Low), Military history (Rater) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{skip to talk}} |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{talk header|noarchives=yes|search=no}} |
|
{{Talk header|search=no|bottom=yes|noarchives=yes}} |
|
|
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
|
{{ArticleHistory |
|
|
|
{{Round in circles|topic=article name and gender|search=no}} |
|
|
{{Notice|Editor behavior around the article title discussion was brought to Misplaced Pages's ]:<br /> |
|
|
*] |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{MOS-TW}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|collapsed=yes|blp=activepol|vital=yes|listas=Manning, Chelsea|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|military-work-group=yes|military-priority=Mid|politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Freedom of speech|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Human rights|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Gender studies |importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies|person=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Media|importance=high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Military history|class=GA|Biography=yes|US=yes|Post-Cold-War=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Oklahoma|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Women}} |
|
|
{{Wiki Loves Pride talk|2017}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Banner holder|collapsed=yes|1= |
|
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Chelsea Manning}} |
|
|
{{Connected contributor|User1=Adrian~enwiki|U1-declared=yes|U1-EH=yes|User2=Brian Manning|U2-declared=yes|U2-EH=yes}} |
|
|
{{Article history |
|
|action1=GAN |
|
|action1=GAN |
|
|action1date=05:58, 11 May 2012 |
|
|action1date=05:58, 11 May 2012 |
|
|action1link=Talk:Bradley Manning/GA2 |
|
|action1link=Talk:Chelsea Manning/GA2 |
|
|action1result=listed |
|
|action1result=listed |
|
|action1oldid=491886566 |
|
|action1oldid=491886566 |
|
|
|action2=GAR |
|
|
|action2date=16:24, 23 August 2013 |
|
|
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Chelsea Manning/1 |
|
|
|action2result=Kept |
|
|
|action2oldid=569874529 |
|
|currentstatus=GA |
|
|currentstatus=GA |
|
|topic=Politics and government}} |
|
|topic=socsci |
|
|
|otd1date=2019-02-18|otd1oldid=883922681 |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography |living=yes |class=GA |listas=Manning, Bradley |military-priority=Low |military-work-group=yes }} |
|
|
{{WPMILHIST|class=GA|Middle-Eastern=yes|US=yes|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|class=GA|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject LGBT studies|class=GA}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Oklahoma|class=GA|importance=low}} |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Press|collapsed=yes |
|
{{archives|search=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=30|index=/Archive index|}} |
|
|
|
|title=Misplaced Pages Beats Major News Organizations, Perfectly Reflects Chelsea Manning's New Gender |
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Bradley Manning}} |
|
|
|
|author=Mark Joseph Stern |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|
|date=August 22, 2013 |
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
|
|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/08/22/chelsea_manning_wikipedia_perfectly_reflects_new_gender_of_whistleblower.html |
|
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|
|
|
|org=] |
|
|counter = 4 |
|
|
|
|accessdate=August 22, 2013 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 0 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Bradley Manning/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Bradley Manning/Archive index|mask=Talk:Bradley Manning/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|title2=Bradley Manning wants to live as a woman named Chelsea Manning |
|
== Blanket? == |
|
|
|
|url2=http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-bradley-manning-woman-chelsea-manning-20130822,0,7620376.story#ixzz2lg3aFF6G |
|
What is a blanket that cannot be shredded and how is it different from a normal blanket? ] (]) 05:51, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Dodo |
|
|
|
|date2=August 22, 2013 |
|
== Infobox == |
|
|
|
|author2=Robin Abcarian |
|
|
|accessdate2=August 23, 2013 |
|
|
|org2=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|title3=Misplaced Pages Changed Its Entry To Properly Reflect Chelsea Manning's Name |
|
I've updated the infobox to reflect the convictions but some of the non-standard formatting used in the other infobox aren't carried through. We should preserve the info about his awards and stuff. Please help update the new (now more appropriate) infobox. ] <small>(])</small> 22:13, 30 July 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|author3=Justine Sharrock |
|
|
|date3=August 22, 2013 |
|
|
|url3=http://www.buzzfeed.com/justinesharrock/wikipedia-changed-its-entry-to-properly-reflect-chelsea-mann |
|
|
|org3=] |
|
|
|accessdate3=August 23, 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url4=http://www.usnews.com/news/newsgram/articles/2013/08/22/bradley-manning-real-me-is-a-woman-named-chelsea |
|
:Hi Todd, I've restored the previous custom-built box (instead of using infobox criminal), because it means we can add whatever parameters we want. I've retained the old parameters and included the new ones you added. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 00:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|title4=Bradley Manning: 'Real Me' Is a Woman Named Chelsea |
|
::Great - thanks! It looks good. ] <small>(])</small> 00:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|author4=Steven Nelson |
|
|
|date4=August 22, 2013 |
|
|
|org4=] |
|
|
|accessdate4=August 27, 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url5=http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114418/bradley-manning-chelsea-now-wants-hormone-therapy |
|
== Date formats == |
|
|
|
|title5=He Is Not Bradley Manning. She Is Chelsea Manning. Deal With It. |
|
|
|author5=Ryan Kearney |
|
|
|date5=August 22, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate5=August 27, 2013 |
|
|
|org5=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url6=http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2013/08/22/wikipedia-joins-supporters-in-quick-embrace-of-mannings-transition-from-bradley-to-chelsea/ |
|
I'd like at some point to go through the dates and change to day first, as in 30 July 2013. It saves extra commas, e.g. "He was convicted on 30 July 2013 of 17 of the 22 charges," instead of "He was convicted on July 30, 2013, of 17 of the 22 charges." We're supposed to check before doing this, so does anyone mind? ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 00:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|title6=Bradley Manning: 'I am a female' |
|
|
|org6=] |
|
|
|date6=August 22, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate6=August 29, 2013 |
|
|
|author6=Barbara Kollmeyer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|title7=Behind the Misplaced Pages wars: what happened when Bradley Manning became Chelsea |
|
:An excellent idea. ] (]) 17:33, 14 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|author7=Alex Hern |
|
|
|org7=] |
|
|
|date7=August 23, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate7=August 23, 2013 |
|
|
|url7=http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech/2013/08/behind-wikipedia-wars-what-happened-when-bradley-manning-became-chelsea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url8=http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/wikipedia-battle-chelsea-bradley-manning-gender/ |
|
::Done. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 16:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|title8=Misplaced Pages battle rages over Chelsea Manning's gender identity |
|
:::Bad idea. Normal US date format is DMY. The military date format should not apply to individual people. Should be changed back per ] {{unsigned| Jojhutton| 21:27, 21 August 2013}} |
|
|
|
|author8=Tim Sampson |
|
|
|date8=August 23, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate8=August 28, 2013 |
|
|
|org8=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|title9=What's in a name? Chelsea Manning and Muhammad Ali |
|
::::I've restored the date formats. I checked on 31 July and waited until 16 August to change it, which is long enough for someone to have objected. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|url9=http://www.salon.com/2013/08/24/what%E2%80%99s_in_a_name_chelsea_manning_and_muhammad_ali/ |
|
:::::Why switch to this format? Because it will mean less comas? Shouldn't it be US date format since he is an American, or is there something different for military personel? Also, somebody did object above, I'll try to find out who. Thanks, --] (]) 23:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|accessdate9=November 25, 2013 |
|
::::::Yes it should. It should be reverted back to the DMY version per ]] ]</font> 23:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|org9=] |
|
|
|author9=Andrew O'Hehir |
|
|
|date9=August 24, 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url10=http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2013/0825/Bradley-or-Chelsea-What-to-call-Pvt.-Manning-video |
|
{{od}} Some points: |
|
|
|
|title10='Bradley' or 'Chelsea' – What to call Pvt. Manning? |
|
|
|org10=] |
|
|
|author10=Brad Knickerbocker |
|
|
|date10=August 25, 2013 |
|
|
|acccessdate10=August 28, 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url11=http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/28/media-makes-the-manning-switch/ |
|
#] says: "Articles on topics with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the more common date format for that nation. For the United States, this is month before day ..." |
|
|
|
|title11=Media Makes the Manning Switch |
|
#But it also says: "Sometimes the customary format differs from the usual national one: for example, articles on the modern US military use day before month, in accordance with military usage." |
|
|
|
|author11=Katy Steinmetz |
|
#And: "The date format chosen by the first major contributor in the early stages of an article should continue to be used ..." Looking back at the earlier versions, both formats were used, e.g. : "As of June 7, Manning had not yet been formally charged," but "Wired released apparent excerpts from the chat logs between Manning and Lamo on 10 June 2010." |
|
|
|
|date11=August 28, 2013 |
|
#Furthermore, there is an international dimension via Bradley's mother and the significant international interest. |
|
|
|
|accessdate11=August 31, 2013 |
|
|
|org11=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url12=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-chelsea-bradley-manning-transgender-debate/ |
|
Therefore, because of the above, and because DMY is easier to write, I asked if there were objections, and waited over two weeks before changing it (which was quite a bit of work, by the way, for anyone thinking of changing it back). ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 23:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|title12=Misplaced Pages decides Chelesa Manning will remain 'Bradley' for now |
|
:ok, asked and answered. I like working on bios even though my copy editing sucks and usually American bios follow MDY dating. I don't really care though. Thank you, --] (]) 00:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|author12=Jay Hathaway |
|
|
|date12=August 31, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate12=August 31, 2013 |
|
|
|org12=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url13=http://www.newstatesman.com/alex-hern/2013/09/chelsea-manning-gets-put-back-closet-wikipedia |
|
== Reaction section in the lead seems to take a POV == |
|
|
|
|title13=Chelsea Manning gets put back in the closet by Misplaced Pages |
|
|
|author13=Alex Hern |
|
|
|date13=September 4, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate13=September 4, 2013 |
|
|
|org13=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url14=http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/chelsea-manning-name-row-wikipedia-editors-banned-from-trans-pages |
|
<s>That section emphasizes the pro-manning view point pretty strongly.</s> I think it should be rewritten in a much more neutral way. ] <small>(])</small> 20:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|title14=Chelsea Manning name row: Misplaced Pages editors banned from trans pages |
|
|
|author14=Alex Hern |
|
|
|date14=October 24, 2013 |
|
|
|accessdate14=October 24, 2013 |
|
|
|org14=] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|url15=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-chelsea-manning-trans-edits/ |
|
:I don't see how it is pro or anti, Todd. It says he was "viewed as both a 21st-century Tiananmen Square Tank Man and an embittered traitor," and that he was an apparently very unhappy Army private with access to classified material. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:29, 2 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|title15=After Chelsea Manning row, Misplaced Pages bans transphobic editors |
|
::Well, now that you point it out, both portrayals are highly POV, both positive and negative. Calling him a tank man is every bit as POV as calling him a traitor. He was convicted of theft, espionage and other criminal issues, not of being a traitor. I think it would be better to say that reaction has been highly polarized with those examples. ] <small>(])</small> 22:25, 2 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|author15=Kevin Collier |
|
|
|
|
|
|accessdate15=October 29, 2013 |
|
:::We do start the paragraph by saying that reaction was mixed, and the examples from Nicks illustrate just how polarized it was. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 22:34, 2 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|date15=October 26, 2013 |
|
::::OK. I agree. ] <small>(])</small> 22:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|org15=] |
|
::::: The POV is still off as per what Nicks write - the way it reads currently is that Nicks is comparing him to the Tiananmen Square man, where as in the book he just uses it to contrast the opposing views on what Manning has done. http://books.google.com/books?id=GE_yDipSkYQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Top 25 Report|Aug 18 2013|Jan 15 2017|May 14 2017|Apr 7 2019}} |
|
The reaction section graph starting "Manning and WikiLeaks were credited as catalysts for the ]" is duplicative of the introduction. One or the other should be removed. IMO, it should be the second, which is so POV it adopts a fawning tone. The references there are extensive, but there is no balance.] (]) 17:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{Old moves |
|
|
|
|
|
|title1=Bradley Manning|title2=Chelsea Manning|title3=Breanna Manning|title4=Arrest of Bradley Manning |
|
:The last paragraph of the lead summarizes the reaction, so it's okay to say it twice. As for balance, it's a fact that they were credited as catalysts, so I'm not sure what it could be balanced with, or why would we would need to try to balance it. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 20:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|list= |
|
::unless these views as a "catalyst" etc are widely held (something along the lines of ] at a minimum we would need to say "credited by X as a catalyst" since the nature of the claim is somewhat dubious and POV. Peopel such as Manning are easy targets for people to use both positively and negatively for propaganda/rehtorical purposes - people using such rhetorical devices should be viewed with a critical eye unless the viewpoint is widely held. ] (]) 20:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
*RM, Arrest of Bradley Manning → Bradley Manning, '''Moved''', 3 September 2010, ] |
|
|
|
|
|
*RM, Bradley Manning → Alleged leaks of Bradley Manning, '''No consensus to move''', 8 Dec 2010, ] |
|
{{od}} The viewpoint is widely held. Some sources used for this in the article: |
|
|
|
*Move/revert, Bradley Manning → Breanna Manning, '''Move was reverted''', 5 May 2012, ] |
|
|
|
|
|
*RM, Chelsea Manning → Bradley Manning, '''initial move of the article to "Chelsea Manning" is reverted, returning the article to the original title, "Bradley Manning"''', 31 August 2013, ] |
|
*Nicks, Denver. ''Private: Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks, and the Biggest Exposure of Official Secrets in American History''. Chicago Review Press, 2012, pp. 212–216. |
|
|
|
*RM, Bradley Manning → Private Manning, '''Not moved''', 4 September 2013, ] |
|
*Walker, Peter. , ''The Guardian'', 13 May 2011. |
|
|
|
*RM, Bradley Manning → Chelsea Manning, '''Moved''', 1 October 2013, ] |
|
*Horne, Nigel. , ''The Week'', 15 January 2011. |
|
|
|
*RM, Chelsea Manning → Manning (U.S. Army), '''Not moved''', 14 March 2014, ] |
|
*, ''The Irish Times'', 24 December 2011. |
|
|
|
}} |
|
*Rosenbach, Marcel and Schmitz, Gregor Peter. , ''Der Spiegel'', 15 December 2011. |
|
|
|
{{Merged-from | Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage| 18 September 2013}} |
|
* Malinowski, Tom. , ''Foreign Policy'', 25 January 2011. |
|
|
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
*, ''The New York Times''. |
|
|
|
}} |
|
* Black, Ian. , ''The Guardian'', 7 December 2010. |
|
|
|
{{Archives|bot=lowercase sigmabot III|age=180|units=days|index=/Archive index}} |
|
*, ''Time'' magazine, 14 December 2011. |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|
|
|
|
|
|counter = 17 |
|
== Overuse of Nicks source == |
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
I have no issue with the source per se, other than I wouldn't necessarily put it in the same category as a more traditional RS> However, we seem to rely on this one source a lot. This is a widely covered story, and regardless of the quality of the Nicks source, relying on one source for some much of the content/references seems less than ideal. Even if the Nicks source is absolutely fantastic, it's one perspective. Just as undue weight to perspectives in the article in general is a concern, undue weight to any one given source is concerning as well. I'm not suggesting we go on a Nicks pogram, but we should be looking to replace some of the content with other RS, even if it's supporting the same thing. |
|
|
|
|algo = old(180d) |
|
|
|
|
|
|archive = Talk:Chelsea Manning/Archive %(counter)d |
|
Some of the Nicks stuff, especially the unnecessarily hyperbolic bit about Tank man and traitor in the lede, is unencyclopedic. I would recommend removing that bit. You don't need to use his terms to reference him. It would be much more encyclopedic to summarize reaction in general in the lede...the majority of that section is given over just to Nicks in the lede, including far greater detail on that one assertion than is necessary. The fact that he is showing a balance of inflammatory rections doesn't mean we have the use his same inflammatory language. I would suggest simplifying it to something like, "reaction varied widely, etc." The language used may be great for an autobiography; I don't think it's appropriate for an encyclopedic entry. ] (]) 20:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Chelsea Manning/Archive index|mask=Talk:Chelsea Manning/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}} |
|
:Nicks's book is the most informed journalistic source on Manning, so it would be odd to replace it with a less informed one. As for the lead, the Tank man/traitor juxtaposition sums up well the wide range of opinion, and how it has veered from one extreme to another. I couldn't think of a more succinct way to do that. The problem with expressing it in general terms without in-text attribution is that someone else will come along and ask whose opinion it is. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 20:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== "a former United States Army soldier" == |
|
|
|
|
|
Is he not still a private in the United States Army? --] (]) 23:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I assume not because he was discharged, but the person to check with is ]. He is our in-house expert on these matters. :) ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 00:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Several reports I'm reading talk about discharge in the future tense. When does the discharge take effect? Now or on release? --] (]) 00:10, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Thank you, SV, but I'm really more of the ]. At the moment Manning is still in the Army. His sentencing gets reviewed by high level judge advocates (JAGs) and then approved by the convening authority -- the commanding general of the Washington area military district. Once approved, written orders are "cut" which say "you are hereby reduced in rank to Private E-1." I'm not sure when his dishonorable discharge paperwork gets cut, because the military will retain jurisdiction over him until his sentence is completed. Perhaps when he completes his full term. (I will research this.) But the proper way to address him will be "Manning", not "Private Manning". So for WP purposes we can say (''shortly'') he ain't in the Army no more. – ] (]) 00:30, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::Thanks, Srich. Someone added "former" to "Manning ... is a United States Army soldier" in the first sentence. Do you think we should we retain "former" or remove it for now? ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 00:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::...or sidestep the question, for example by saying he "...was a Specialist in the United States Army..." thereby avoiding saying what he is now. --] (]) 00:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::"Is a former US Army soldier who ...." His sentence might be reduced (unlikely), but the reduction in rank and dishonorable discharge are sure to be upheld by the GCMCA. – ] (]) 01:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::In any case, his rank has been diminished and he is no longer allowed to wear the uniform he is pictured in. Anyone have a neutral headshot sans uniform? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 05:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Time to move the article to Chelsea Manning == |
|
|
|
|
|
She's made a statement that her name is Chelsea Manning, so the pronouns should be changed to she and the article renamed Chelsea. The FAQ about Brenna no longer applies. 11:59, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, appears to be pretty unambiguous. What do we think? ] (]) 12:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I also agree based on the evidence. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;background-color: white;color: blue;">] (]•])</span></small> 12:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:If nothing else, we need an immediate redirect. A search on Chelsea Manning doesn't yield this article, it yield an article about football club Chelsea FC. ] (]) 12:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Well, I tried a move. Disappointingly, ] has reverted immediately back, using a highly gendered term in their edit summary! I'm assuming this is some kind of misunderstanding over not having read the reference, so will not put it back just yet. ] (]) 12:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
It's pretty confusing to see Manning described with female pronouns for the time in which they served as a male soldier. I recommend to use the male pronoun for the time prior to their recent declaration concerning their identity. As to the article title, that should follow the predominant usage in reliable sources, as everything else. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 12:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:That would go against long-established practice, and ] |
|
|
|
|
|
:Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman"), pronouns, and possessive adjectives that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life. |
|
|
|
|
|
:] (]) 12:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Political prisoner == |
|
I have sent Morwen a message about this stating I was unaware of any potential change and as such I thought it was a scam. In the article itself it didn't mention any gender change so I assumed it was spam, which it clearly isn't ] (]) 12:46, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/chelsea-mannings-original-revelations-still-need-investigating |
|
:I did cite the article in my edit summary! ] (]) 12:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amnesty has campaigned for Manning’s release since 2013, when she was sentenced to 35 years’ imprisonment - a jail term much longer than for military personnel convicted of murder, rape and war crimes - for leaking classified government material. Amnesty believes the sentence was excessive and should have been commuted to time served (over three years at the time of sentencing), not least because Manning was overcharged using antiquated legislation aimed at dealing with treason, and denied the opportunity to use a public interest defence at her trial. |
|
It appears that ] has moved the page to Chelsea Manning for a second time. The move is hasty and without proper consultation with editors. I think this article should be moved back to Bradley Manning until it is confirmed the subject has legally changed his/her name and a majority of reliable sources start referring to this subject as "Chelsea Manning". --] 12:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, the whistleblower was held for 11 months in pre-trial detention conditions that the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendez deemed to be cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. She was placed in solitary confinement as punishment for a suicide attempt last year, and was denied appropriate treatment related to her gender identity during her incarceration. In a podcast for Amnesty in 2016 (), Manning recounted the draconian nature of her pre-trial detention at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia: ] (]) 22:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
Maybe I'm missing something but AFAIK Bradley '''wants''' to be a woman but '''isn't yet'''. Also, I don't believe his name has been officially changed to Chelsea. I find this move extremely premature, not to say ridiculous. This is not a ] situation. Yet. ''']''' 12:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:@], I'm unsure about your intentions. Do you think something needs to be added to the article? <b style="font-family:Monospace">-- ] (])</b> 22:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
:I'm just happy he didn't decide to self-identify as Jesus Christ could you imagine the redirects. SMH. This dude is named Bradley Manning until officially recognized by the courts. ''Chelsea'' is what we would call a nickname. ]<u>]</u> 13:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::I think it should be added to the article that Amnesty International considered Manning a political prisoner and demanded his release and regularly published articles about her. However, Amnesty International argued that not every political prisoner is given the special status of "prisoner of conscience", which is designed to draw maximum attention to a particular political prisoner. ] (]) 00:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
::"Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman"), pronouns, and possessive adjectives that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. " from ]. ] (]/]) 13:02, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::The term "political prisoner" is not used in either of the sources listed above, that I can find. -- ] (]) 02:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
:::Many sources are still reporting the name as Bradley Manning. For instance: , , , , , , and . Sources even referrer to the person as "he". I think article move was hasted. <b>]</b> ] 13:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: "Self-identification". What other sources refer to her as is irrelevant. She has self identified as female, and by MOS:IDENTITY that means the article should use female pronouns. ]<sup>]</sup> 13:09, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::After reading ], I think we should use female gender nouns, pronouns and possessive adjectives, because that's her ''latest'' expressed gender self-identification. <b>]</b> ] 13:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::In other words, we have to follow whatever a person decides to call his/herself this week? No. ] says "Any person whose gender '''might be questioned''' should be referred to (etc)". There is, as yet, no question about Manning's gender at all. ''']''' 13:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::We wouldn't be having this discussion if there was no question about her gender. <b>]</b> ] 13:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::You're absolutely right, of course - there is no longer a question about Manning's gender. She is female without doubt. I'm glad you agree. ]<sup>]</sup> 13:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
:"I also request that starting today you refer to me by my new name and use the feminine pronoun."--] (]) 13:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::He can request all he likes, Bdel555, that doesn't make it true. Or factual. ''']''' 13:08, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2023 == |
|
He signed his...I mean (no kidding intended) ... she signed her name "Chelsea E. Manning" on the Today Show statement, but indicated that his name in official mail to the detention facility is still Bradley Manning. Here is the statement: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit semi-protected|Chelsea Manning|answered=yes}} |
|
<blockquote> Subject: The Next Stage of My Life |
|
|
|
Remove the phrase “and perhaps to study for a PhD in physics” as it is purely speculative. Manning had no higher education at the time of enlisting, and her GI Bill would have run out of money before reaching the doctorate level, so claiming she would have been acquiring a PhD with her GI Bill is inaccurate. Saying she enlisted in order to be eligible for GI Bill benefits is far more accurate. ] (]) 03:22, 13 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done for now:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> The statement appears well-sourced – see ref 72 – is there some reason to assume the author of the reference was misinformed? ] (]) 07:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Who is Casey Manning? == |
|
I want to thank everybody who has supported me over the last three years. Throughout this long ordeal, your letters of support and encouragement have helped keep me strong. I am forever indebted to those who wrote to me, made a donation to my defense fund, or came to watch a portion of the trial. I would especially like to thank Courage to Resist and the Bradley Manning Support Network for their tireless efforts in raising awareness for my case and providing for my legal representation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who is Casey Manning? |
|
As I transition into this next phase of my life, I want everyone to know the real me. I am Chelsea Manning. I am a female. Given the way that I feel, and have felt since childhood, I want to begin hormone therapy as soon as possible. I hope that you will support me in this transition. I also request that, starting today, you refer to me by my new name and use the feminine pronoun (except in official mail to the confinement facility). I look forward to receiving letters from supporters and having the opportunity to write back. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are two mentions of this individual but no links or explanation about who this person is or how he/she/it are related to Chelsea/Bradley Manning. |
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The main article only says: "Manning has an older sister". |
|
Chelsea E. Manning</blockquote>] (]) 13:09, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
So I assume Casey is Chelsea's older sister, but this should be stated explicitly, otherwise further refernces to this appelation has no grounding in fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 14:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Chelsea's statement is very clear and seems almost designed to invoke ], which is also very clear. I regard this matter as a ] area. ] (]) 13:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Fixed. I added the name to the statement she has an older sister.However, we may need to address how she is refered to later in the text, as at least one source gives her name as Casey Manning Majors, in which case she should be refered to once by that name and later by Majors during the testimony portion. -- ] (]) 14:51, 18 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
==Time for New Secton on Gender Identity Issues?== |
|
|
|
:Thank you for the reply and the edit. |
|
I created a subsection for the BACKGROUND part of the article for his gender reassignment. This may only be a temporary thing. Should there be a seperate section collecting information on his gender issues? (I seem to be having an issue with his gender as I just realized I used the masculine pronoun for Chelsea.)] (]) 13:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:As to the naming, I am of the opinion that one should use the name of a person AT THE TIME of the event being discussed. |
|
|
:IF the event is at birth, then the birth name should be used. |
|
|
:In the case of the trial of "Bradley Manning" and prior events, it is wrong to distort history by speaking of "Chelsea Manning". If this becomes a requirement of "political correctness" then we are on a very slippery slope. ] (]) 11:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::This was already a requirement; see ] and supplementary essay {{slink|Misplaced Pages:Gender_identity#Retroactivity}}. It is not common in written English to treat the names of people, places, or things as temporally fixed in the way you suggest (in fact it would be extremely confusing). Correctly naming living biography subjects is an act of basic decency and respect. |
|
|
::If you have further comments or concerns on how Misplaced Pages writes about transgender people, please take them to a more general forum. Such a change would affect many more pages than this (and has been discussed to death hundreds of times and is never going to happen). –] (] • ]) 14:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== This is why Misplaced Pages is such a sad, pathetic joke == |
|
== why is her deadname literally in the first sentence == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
do better ] (]) 18:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
Bradley Manning is the person's name, legally. I have no idea what is going on here, and assumed the article was vandalized, until I read all the nonsense above. I would have expected a speedy revert until a *reliable source* indiciated otherwise. Can an adult editor please step in? ] (]) 13:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:According to the policy, since she was also notable under her previous name, it goes in the lead section (See ]. In fact, her situation is even used as an example).--] (]) 19:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::cringe and transphobic ] (]) 19:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::@] How is it transphobic? It is a legit guideline, did you not even bother to read MOS:DEADNAME before you baselessly called someone cringe and transphobic? ] (]) 02:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== My removals == |
|
:Hello. Admin of ten years standing here. today.com is a reliable source. ] (]) 13:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I made quite a few removals so I'm opening a discussion. My concern is that the military service section was wandering way off topic. A lot of the content there should be in a different section. ] (]) 10:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Page moved to Chelsea Manning without sufficient consensus == |
|
|
With all due consideration to MOS:IDENTITY and the page mover's talk page posts, this was not a noncontroversial page move, and as such requires consensus under Request to Move discussion and vote. --] <sup>]</sup> 13:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
|
Amnesty has campaigned for Manning’s release since 2013, when she was sentenced to 35 years’ imprisonment - a jail term much longer than for military personnel convicted of murder, rape and war crimes - for leaking classified government material. Amnesty believes the sentence was excessive and should have been commuted to time served (over three years at the time of sentencing), not least because Manning was overcharged using antiquated legislation aimed at dealing with treason, and denied the opportunity to use a public interest defence at her trial.
In addition, the whistleblower was held for 11 months in pre-trial detention conditions that the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendez deemed to be cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. She was placed in solitary confinement as punishment for a suicide attempt last year, and was denied appropriate treatment related to her gender identity during her incarceration. In a podcast for Amnesty in 2016 (www.amnesty.org.uk/chelsea), Manning recounted the draconian nature of her pre-trial detention at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia: TimurMamleev (talk) 22:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Remove the phrase “and perhaps to study for a PhD in physics” as it is purely speculative. Manning had no higher education at the time of enlisting, and her GI Bill would have run out of money before reaching the doctorate level, so claiming she would have been acquiring a PhD with her GI Bill is inaccurate. Saying she enlisted in order to be eligible for GI Bill benefits is far more accurate. 2600:6C46:6B00:297:1C39:E471:36B6:43B2 (talk) 03:22, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
There are two mentions of this individual but no links or explanation about who this person is or how he/she/it are related to Chelsea/Bradley Manning.
The main article only says: "Manning has an older sister".
So I assume Casey is Chelsea's older sister, but this should be stated explicitly, otherwise further refernces to this appelation has no grounding in fact.
I made quite a few removals so I'm opening a discussion. My concern is that the military service section was wandering way off topic. A lot of the content there should be in a different section. Jozsefs (talk) 10:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)