Talk:Liv Hewson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 2018[edit]

According to Liv Hewson, they are one of all Australian residents who started acting in 2013. Their breakout role is the Netflix television series, Santa Clarita Diet.

Keep the closed case in mind. Rectify 54 14:14, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter as source[edit]

User:Atlantic306: Where does it say that Twitter is WP:RS for "uncontroversial information"? Even if the subject uses "us" and them" pronouns that doesn't mean that WP has to adopt this formulation and referring to them by their surname is perfectly acceptable and not contrary to their gender identification. Mztourist (talk) 03:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:RSN if you search the archive under twitter shows that is acceptable for some information and the MOS:GENDERID says that they pronouns should be used if the subject uses them, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
See also WP:SELFSOURCE. --ChiveFungi (talk) 12:07, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Liv Hewson is gay[edit]

Liv Hewson is gay.They have said so many times. I am not sure what certain users problems are with gay people, but it sure is weird.R.A Huston (talk) 12:25, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There need to be multiple independent high-quality reliable sources for this kind of claim about them. Twitter and abeautifulperspective.com are not obvious reliable sources.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter is appropriate for some information per WP:SELFSOURCE. However without secondary sources, it's hard to establish whether them being gay is a notable fact. If you'd stop edit warring and baselessly accusing people of homophobia for one second we could discuss whether it's relevant to include in the article. --ChiveFungi (talk) 12:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
pretty much all gay actorshave their orientation on thier pages, as do straight actors. And its not a "claim," some opinion or hypothesis, is a fact that Hewson has stated multiple times on their verified social media accounts. The fact that you both seem so adamant in keeping this info off their page is very strange and telling, and my basis for calling out homophobia.R.A Huston (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you appear to have stopped edit warring for the moment, but you need to cease the personal attacks immediately. I won't engage with the arguments presented by somebody who's being uncivil, and you will probably get banned. --ChiveFungi (talk) 15:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, then what is the problem with putting their orientationon this article?Because I'm not seeing any rational reason, hence my "personal attack" (which wasn't at all). R.A Huston (talk) 10:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It needs reliable sources - not Twitter, etc. The Wikipedia policy Wikipedia:Verifiability is rational and unbiased. Alleged self-published sources are questionable - both in terms of whether they are true, and in terms of whether the entries are by the person concerned or by their publicist. Sometimes what they say is what is thought to be good for the person's career at the moment, or to preserve their privacy. For example, if you claim to be a lesbian, people will not ask too many questions about your boyfriend.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:57, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes because all the major stars are out homosexuals, thats always a boon to a career. And besides, if Twitter is unreliable then why is it acceptable for the they/them pronouns reference?R.A Huston (talk) 09:11, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Thanks.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:GENDERID we should mention when the subject's pronouns are they/them: "When a person's gender self-designation may come as a surprise to readers, explain it without overemphasis on first occurrence in an article." And per WP:SELFSOURCE their Twitter is an appropriate source for a statement such as this. --ChiveFungi (talk) 14:23, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ChiveFungi, please explain why a self published source like Twitter is reliable when it comes to a person's gender identity, but not sexual orientation. Sro23 (talk) 14:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I never said Twitter can't be used for sexual orientation. If User:R.A Huston had engaged rather than been disruptive, that might have been added to the article already. I have no strong opposition to including a self-sourced statement about them being gay. In fact I'm in favor of including it. What does everybody who isn't being disruptive (or defending their own disruptive behavior) think? Should we mention it in the personal life section? --ChiveFungi (talk) 18:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Engaged like edited the section to include tweets in place of an instagram post? Apparently editing without reading new sources is acceptable wiki usage? R.A Huston (talk) 11:51, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we should. It doesn't make sense to edit war to remove the sexual orientation bit and yet retain the gender ID bit when both can be cited to the same self published source (subject's twitter). Sro23 (talk) 19:19, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A formula such as "Hewson has stated that..." would be OK. It is true that Hewson's Twitter account has statements that would back that up. That way we are not endorsing a claim made (apparently by Hewson) on a flaky source.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:48, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources Four sources were provided for the claim that they are gay.

  1. [1]
  2. [2]
  3. [3]
  4. [4]

Only the first of these explicitly states that they are gay. The second says that they "came out" at 16. The other two merely state that it is good to be gay.

Given that we seem to be agreed a citation to Twitter might be acceptable for some things. I have attempted to a solution.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:45, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I happened to run into Liv Hewson at an airport shortly after reading this page. I mentioned that Wikipedia was having a hard time deciding whether they were verifiably gay. I can't remember the exact response, but it was something like: "Gay is just a word for sound bites, I hope Wikipedia can do better. Am I allowed to edit my own page?" I suggested that it's easiest to just ask on the talk page, rather than to try to figure out all the policies. Nothing may come of this (they may have forgotten the conversation, or asked their publicist and immediately been told "No, stay off Wikipedia", or just decided the page is fine), but a heads up just in case Liv does show up here. --157.131.246.136 (talk) 06:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Use of they/them in Personal life section[edit]

Hi, I noticed by looking in the edit history that a couple months ago every instance of they/them in the personal life section was removed and replaced with "Hewson." Long time Wikipedia user, but I've never been an editor on Wikipedia so I don't know the protocol/style when it comes to individuals using they/them pronouns, but this feels like a malicious edit to me, similar to when there was someone who changed all the pronouns to she/her but that got reverted. I mean their IMDB page has nearly the same content of this section as their bio, but with they/them in it like it was a couple months ago. Can this be reverted? Thanks Fiveprisma (talk) 04:06, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fiveprisma, I agree that the changes might be vexatious and malicious, I have made an update which I hope is an improvement. Best wishes, SunnyBoi (talk) 12:41, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are all insane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.148.94.151 (talk) 00:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, 151. The individual is a she. Academicskeptic9 (talk) 14:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody's personal speaking quirks and verbal choices DO NOT affect the rules of the English language[edit]

They just don't. 99.203.11.154 (talk) 10:16, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • They do on Wikipedia Atlantic306 (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Singular they has been in use since the 14th century. So, I agree - your personal issue with the "they" pronoun should not affect the rule that it's valid. 142.162.134.17 (talk) 00:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2019[edit]

Change "they-and-them pronouns" to "they/them pronouns" (in first paragraph). Fuyopo (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done aboideautalk 00:24, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what is a playwright?[edit]

They're not a playwright. You can't find any title written by them!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.5.114.245 (talk) 09:55, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly! If they're a playwright, then so am I. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:1A10:7821:D5A:BDA3:2B80:D09A (talk) 03:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Change main pic to be more modern[edit]

They've come out as non-binary somewhat recently and changed their appearance heavily, I think the main picture should be changed to one matching their current look, rather than having an old one from when they were still publicly identifying and presenting as a woman. BubuMC69 (talk) 22:06, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They/Them[edit]

Politics do NOT rule the English language. I was very confused reading the intro paragraph because it’s used they/them making it appear the page was about a group of people. 2600:1017:B016:AA32:9F8:A4CB:7302:565D (talk) 05:47, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Get used to it, it is very common now Atlantic306 (talk) 02:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your personal ignorance does not rule the English language either. Singular they has been in use since Shakespeare. It's time to get over it. 68.204.218.104 (talk) 23:53, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The english language has changed somewhat since Shakespeare and it's still evolving, Atlantic306 (talk) 02:18, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your feelings are irrelevant to the facts and your personal politics do not dictate Wikipedia policy. Singular they is grammatically correct and no amount of reactionary whining will change that. I'm sorry if that makes you upset but you need to be an adult and get over it. 02:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia policy accepts he, she or they and please read the link you posted properly which states "Though some early-21st-century style guides described it as colloquial and less appropriate in formal writing, by 2020 most style guides accepted the singular they as a personal pronoun.In the early 21st century, use of singular they with known individuals emerged for people who do not identify as male or female, as in, for example, "This is my friend, Jay. I met them at work."[16] They in this context was named Word of the Year for 2015 by the American Dialect Society,[17] and for 2019 by Merriam-Webster.[18][19][20] In 2020, the American Dialect Society also selected it as Word of the Decade for the 2010s.[21]." Atlantic306 (talk) 22:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree--it should be she/her because she is female. Academicskeptic9 (talk) 14:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This person is a women. Therefore she is appropriate 2A00:23C5:4E30:8400:A497:3ADB:582C:2D8F (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Singular they is used for persons unknown, not a named individual. They is still overwhelmingly used to mean multiple people. So, yes, it does make for an awkward read, as each time you have to mentally unpack what is being said.

Language changes over time and non-specific gender designation is modern usage for people who do not self-identify as male or female. Check a new dictionary, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 21:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to agree with a couple of suggestions above: Indeed the person is a woman and therefore "she" is appropriate. And yes, using "they" involves the reader having to go back and unpack whether there are several people involved. Academicskeptic9 (talk) 21:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FAMILY[edit]

Does her sister play in The Last of Us? 2601:5C8:280:3840:E064:635D:274:B67B (talk) 03:48, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2023[edit]

Please add the following to their television credits:

2023 | Party Down | Escapade | "Once Upon a Time Proms Away Prom-otional Event"

76.141.2.142 (talk) 17:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 April 2023[edit]

I would like to just add in the topmost section that since their breakout role in Santa Clarita Diet, they have played the young role of Van Palmer in the Showtime series, Yellowjackets. Mothgoth (talk) 23:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Hello Mothgoth, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm afraid that you are unable to ask for permission to personally edit this page as an administrator has applied semi-protection. This is generally done when non-registered or newly registered users cause disruption. The criteria to edit pages in this level of protection is to become autoconfirmed, which will happen automatically for you once your account has 10 edits and exists for 4 days.
If you have a vested interested in another editor adding this content for you, please provide the prose you want inserted into the article specifically, where it should go, and provide a reliable source to support the addition. Cheers, and happy editing! —Sirdog (talk) 00:59, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liv_Hewson&oldid=1220591114"