Talk:Aimee Knight

Proposed change: allegations of systematic removal by Reddit
Since the article is locked, let me propose a small but important change here instead, concerning this sentence:

This led to allegations that Reddit was removing all mention of Knight and banning users who mentioned her.

I would add the following to the end:

This led to allegations that Reddit was removing all mention of Knight and banning users who mentioned her, which was later confirmed by an administrator for the website to be true.

The relevant citation for that last part, being "verge2021-03" ("Reddit activated standard processes to protect the employee from such harassment, including initiating an automated moderation rule to prevent personal information from being shared..." and subsequent text).

This is an important distinction to make because the text currently reads more as "these are unfounded allegations" rather than "this is true and confirmed by reddit itself after the site-wide protests emerged". It's a tiny change with no downside to it that shouldn't be controversial as the citation used is already in the article so if someone with edit access could make it, it would objectively improve accuracy here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:7F0:B1C0:4503:8C6B:C35A:6C01:3C01 (talk) 05:10, 19 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Agreed, because this was confirmed to have occurred the phrasing here implies that the allegations were unfounded, which is somewhat contradicted (although not enough since it still leaves this open to interpretation) by the later sentence "Huffman also stated that Reddit would review its relevant internal processes and attributed user suspensions to over-indexing on anti-harassment measures". Tsumugii (talk) 11:28, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The Verge does not saying that all mention of Knight was removed on Reddit, or that all users who mentioned her were banned, in the quote you have given. Therefore, I oppose the change. I do not agree that the text of the article takes any sort of position on whether the allegations were "unfounded". We simply don't comment on it. — Bilorv ( talk ) 13:17, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 5 June 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) C LYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (please mention me on reply) 04:33, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Aimee Challenor → Aimee Knight – WP:COMMONNAME, Knight is her legal surname and what she is most commonly known as. Google results show that "aimee challenor reddit" has 23,800 results, while "aimee knight reddit" has 2,150,000 results. GLORIOUSEXISTENCE (talk) 02:12, 5 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Support, but not for your reasoning... You realize "knight" is a much more common word than "challenor", right? The 2 million results isn't representative of this topic. Anyway, searching in quotes and searching both google and the news, I can't really tell which one is more popular. The number of articles that mention each are close, and the Knight articles seem newer on the whole, but only slightly. Per WP:NAMECHANGES we should change, since reliable sources are routinely using the new name and there is a strong preference to prefer the new name if the old one is not provably more common.  WP scatter  t/c 06:40, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per Wpscatter — PerfectSoundWhatever  (t; c) 22:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

POV Violations by user
Hello, I would like to point out possible WP:POV violations by User:Your_Friendly_Neighborhood_Sociologist. Said user has been 1RR restricted from WP:GENSEX pages for POV violations in the past since November 2023. Said user is attempting to skew the POV of the article using citations that do not match the conclusion taken in said user's edits, as well as falsely claiming that Knight had zero connections to CSA, despite the fact that Knight had a father who had sexually abused children and Knight themself had fantasies of CSA. This may be badly structured but my point is simple: YFNS is POV pushing on a contentious topic, and has been restricted from GENSEX topics in the past. Here are some citations used by YFNS to push false conclusions: https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/24/22348255/reddit-moderator-blackout-protest-aimee-knight-uk-green-party https://www.thepinknews.com/2021/03/25/reddit-aimee-knight-challenor-admin-subreddit-blackout-protest-backlash-transphobia/ The only "transphobia/doxing/harassment allegations" are by reddit themselves, demonstrated by quotes in said articles, which explicitly stated that reddit had faulty filters and failed to check Knight's background. Thank you. Please excuse me for some mistakes, I am new to WP. 74.142.15.155 (talk) 16:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Here are some citations regarding Knight's father:
 * https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/girl-kidnapped-raped-tortured-gang-13133251
 * https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sadistic-pervert-held-young-girl-13120115
 * https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sick-pervert-abused-10-year-15060652
 * https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-sick-torture-den-twisted-13128981
 * (unsure if mirror is a good source, but I am certain coventry is) 74.142.15.155 (talk) 16:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please focus on the article content. If you have a conduct complaint about another editor, take it to their user talk page. I'm not sure whether to respond to your conduct concerns or your article content concerns. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * this is about the article AND a conduct concern. The article is being affected and conduct is bad. 174.202.33.130 (talk) 17:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Firefangledfeathers, can we get most of this thread revdelled please. This is pretty egregious violation of BLP. TarnishedPathtalk 15:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi . I encourage you to reach out to an uninvolved active admin. I'm too involved here to take action. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @74.142.15.155
 * To start, I hope you realize you've been reverting to a version of the page that was midway through my fixes removing unsourced statements...
 * In terms of adding statements unsupported by references, detail specific ones here. I'll note that you keep re-adding in a sister the source doesn't actually mention. In terms of POV violations, you keep removing statements from the Verita report sympathetic to her. Finally, WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY - in the lead we summarize the entire body, the shortened lead doesn't do that.
 * Knight themself had fantasies of CSA. - this is a very serious accusation that not a single source supports. What I'm assuming you're referring to is tweets by her husband, or possibly if doubtfully a hacker, but not her.
 * Those sources are considered reliable, the ones you have provided are not, apart from the telegraph which is already in the article.
 * @Firefangledfeathers, I think this page might need protection to prevent further edit warring. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)