Talk:Thomas Baty

Pronoun
I was just skimming the article and didnt really notice "they" referred to the subject. After confusion arose I checked the infobox or the top of the article for the info, but there is none, the usage is implied only in the introduction sentence. Would it make sense to explicitly state it before the article in italic? I think the usage is totally legitimate, I don't think it can be taken for granted though. EnTerbury (talk) 17:51, 13 October 2020 (UTC)


 * See my new topic here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Thomas_Baty#c-Throughthemind-20240704164000-Updated_article_for_name_and_pronoun_consistency Throughthemind (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Pronoun usage
I understand that many (but not all) modern non-binary people prefer to be referred to as 'they', but surely it is anachronistic to impose 'they' on Baty without knowing what his preferences were. This appears to be less a reflection of Baty's preferences than an attempt to claim Baty for the non-binary movement.

I also noticed the following inconsistent use of pronouns:

following the death of Henry Willard Denison, a US citizen who served in that position until their death in 1914.

An important person in their life was their sister, who went with them to Japan in 1916, and lived with them until her death in 1944.

Since Henry Willard Denison isn't around to make a choice of pronoun, and doesn't appear to have been non-binary, isn't it rather presumptuous to use 'their' while using 'her' for Baty's sister?

59.153.112.147 (talk) 00:13, 4 November 2020 (UTC)


 * These are fair points, I've reverted back to he/him pronouns as Baty never stated a preference to use they/them. Throughthemind (talk) 10:12, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * See my new topic here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Thomas_Baty#c-Throughthemind-20240704164000-Updated_article_for_name_and_pronoun_consistency Throughthemind (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 28 September 2021

 * 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: No consensus. The participation was low and there was no explicit "oppose", so I hesitate to call it "no move". However, the raised concerns suggest that the sources mostly use "Thomas Batty" and that the proposer did not build a strong case for the move. No such user (talk) 12:32, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thomas Baty → Irene Clyde – Both Thomas Baty and Irene Clyde are used to refer to the individual. The name Thomas Baty is more commonly used when talking about their diplomatic and legal career serving the Empire of Japan, while Irene Clyde is more commonly used when talking about their contributions to the Urania magazine, science fiction, and the queer movement more broadly. As there is evidence that the individual preferred the name Irene Clyde and "longed to be a lady," and because the individual has a much stronger legacy as a queer activist and writer than as a public servant of the Empire of Japan, it would be appropriate to move the article to a page titled "Irene Clyde" out of respect for Clyde and to comply with Wikipedia's policies concerning transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. Sources: https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/lgbtq-heritage-project/activism-and-community-building/talking-back/; https://open.library.ubc.ca/soa/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0066742; https://www.jstor.org/stable/20719443?seq=4#metadata_info_tab_contents FactCheck105 (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:59, 5 October 2021 (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.
 * Question: Which aspects of their life are more notable and widely known? It seems that the Urania journal was published infrequently and had very low circulation and was thus not at all well known at the time of its production. (For the sake of clarity, I believe the vaguely referenced "policies" refers to MOS:GENDERID and MOS:S/HE.) —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 18:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: The article about Urania has been updated to correct its description of the publication frequency. It was published more often that what the article previously said, although still only 3–6 times per year. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 19:26, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I share the concerns of User:BarrelProof. The article's sources use mostly "Thomas Baty" and the nomination links are unconvincing.  "Respect for Clyde" cannot be asserted for someone who died long ago and cannot weigh in on the issue.  With "Irene Clyde" prominent in the first sentence of the article, I don't see a problem with the current title.  —  AjaxSmack  02:26, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Updated article for name and pronoun consistency
I've come up with a compromise to try and best reflect Baty/Clyde's identity and based on how Pepperell handles it in her thesis here. I don't think there's a perfect solution, but I hope this works at least for the time being. Throughthemind (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)