User talk:216.26.203.220

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 20:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Chaz Bono
Hi!

I would like to welcome you and ask you to please visit Talk:Chaz Bono when you get a moment. On the talk page, a consensus was reached some time ago as to whether to refer to the subject as male or female. Please read those discussions and join in rather than reverting again.

Thanks and, again, welcome!

Happy editing! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 20:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 16:59, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Chaz Bono
Please stop. The consensus is that we will indeed follow the manual of style on this article, as there is no good reason not to. If you would like to change the manual of style, you should open a discussion at the talk page at WP:MOS, but first, search the manual's archives and review the discussions that have already happened regarding this guideline- then, feel free to open a new discussion if you think you have a new insight that has not yet been considered on the question of pronoun use. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:02, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I can respect the need for some order of consistency within Wikipedia, but that particular aspect of the MOS opens up a can of worms. You and I both know that the governing bodies of Wikipedia will pay no attention to any request I might submit for change, regardless of its validity.  By the rule employed here in the Chaz Bono article, we could change any person's gender on Wikipedia based on any wild assertion by that person.  If you will permit the example: Let's say Mike Tyson or Robin Williams have a brief exchange with the press.  At the end of this exchange, they say "Oh, and incidentally, I'm a female."  I'm sure in such a case anyone editing the Mike Tyson or Robin Williams articles would come under scrutiny if they changed that individual's gender throughout the article based solely on a statement made by the celebrity.  It's an odd example, maybe, but entirely valid in the case of the Chaz Bono article.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Woogee (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I can respect the need for some order of consistency within Wikipedia, but that particular aspect of the MOS opens up a can of worms. You and I both know that the governing bodies of Wikipedia will pay no attention to any request I might submit for change, regardless of its validity.  By the rule employed here in the Chaz Bono article, we could change any person's gender on Wikipedia based on any wild assertion by that person.  If you will permit the example: Let's say Mike Tyson or Robin Williams have a brief exchange with the press.  At the end of this exchange, they say "Oh, and incidentally, I'm a female."  I'm sure in such a case anyone editing the Mike Tyson or Robin Williams articles would come under scrutiny if they changed that individual's gender throughout the article based solely on a statement made by the celebrity.  It's an odd example, maybe, but entirely valid in the case of the Chaz Bono article.
 * Is Mike Tyson transgendered? I didn't know that.  Can you please give me a link to the newspaper article that reported on his transition?  I'd be happy to go and make the necessary changes to the article on Mike Tyson, and move it to the new appropriate name. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No need for cockiness. That will only serve to eliminate any progress in this discussion.  Being transgendered doesn't enter into the equation.  Chaz was born female and is in the process of becoming male.  All fine and dandy, but until that process has completed, she is still female, or unclassifiable at best.  If an elephant undergoes surgery to become a mouse and self-identifies as a mouse, BUT he's still 12 feet tall and has a long trunk, he's certainly not yet a mouse.  Forgive once again the exaggerated example, but it seems necessary sometimes to use such a blatantly over-the-top example in order to instill any sense of logic in these discussions.
 * It sounds as if you don't understand very much about transgender people- you might be interested in reading Wikipedia's article on the subject. Many transgender people never do get surgery, which is painful and expensive.  Wikipedia's guidelines are simply the same as the way you relate to people in your personal life- we accept that people are the gender which they identify as, and do not require genital evidence.  It would be my guess that you have never seen the genitals of your grandmother or your employer, and you use the pronouns with which they identify themselves, because that is the polite thing to do.  The same rule of good manners applies in this case.  You are not unusual in being unfamiliar with the details of transgendered people's lives, and I hope you'll be open to learning more, so that you won't be rude in the future.  After all, you may well have transgendered friends and co-workers, and learning more will help you keep from inadvertently hurting their feelings.  The basic rule- on Wikipedia and in real life- is to simply call people by the names and pronouns that they want to be called by.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I apologize if I've caused any offense. I can see how such a delicate subject can easily be misunderstood by the simple misuse of words.  I have gay, lesbian, and transgendered friends, which may surprise you.  They are all my equals.  My employer (funny you should mention it) is a gay male.  I don't ever wish to appear rude to any demographic, regardless of sexual identity, race, or whatever factors come into play.  You seem like a very accepting and open person, and I respect that.  My basis for my changes to this article are based on science and biology rather than statements and opinions (I realize that sounds arrogant, but it's the simplest way I can put it).  So, please understand that I'm not defiling this article with anti-LGBT slogans and hate-speech.  I'm merely trying to be as accurate as possible since this IS an encyclopedia.  Though my "accuracy" may partly or entirely neglect the feelings and beliefs of the subject, it is nonetheless more accurate to describe things as they are, not as they're perceived to be.  I can sense that a continuation of this discussion will only foster discontent between us, which I have no desire of pursuing.  I will leave the Chaz Bono article alone in respect to gender identification.  But please don't dismiss my reasoning.  A solid and respectable encyclopedia should pay at least some respect to the fundamentals of proven science and biology rather than heeding to protect the opinions and viewpoints of a few.
 * Please read WP:CONSENSUS and get consensus for your edits on the article's talk page. Until such a time as you do, you are violating WP:3RR and you will be blocked from editing.  Woogee (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, there are no 'governing bodies' of Wikipedia- just editors like you and me, discussing things and reaching consensus. Consensus in this case does not agree with your view- Wikipedia, like most newspapers, uses the pronouns that people use to describe themselves.  To do otherwise would be promoting a point of view regarding transgendered people, which we try to avoid doing- we try not to write bias into our grammar. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Please understand. I'm not trying to promote any particular point of view.  But facts are facts.  Perhaps the term "self-identified male" would be best in these circumstances, rather than flat-out "male" which implies a definite sex rather than an attitude or an ideology.
 * There is a very long discussion on the use of gender in Chaz' article on the article's talk page. Last time i looked it spanned four different section headings. The discussion is from June 2009. Please review that before you revert the edits of your fellow users any further. The term "self-identified male" is offensive and divisive; see transphobic. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 21:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The term "self-identified male" should not, under any circumstances, be misconstrued as offensive. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, that's a term I made up...in an attempt to quench the appetites of the politically correct among us.  Look at the term and then tell me that it's "offensive".  To be a self-identified male is to be an entity with some degree of consciousness, who perceives him- or herself to possess predominant masculine attributes.  It's entirely politically correct (though this should have no bearing as political correctness is a crutch to free speech).  How can you justify pigeon-holing me as transphobic when the very crux of your suggestion relies on your own heterophobia?  Why...the fuck....can't we be equal and love each other for who we are?  Why must you Wikipedians polarize all discussion to the point of contention and verbal dissonance?
 * The rules you broke are WP:3RR and WP:CONSENSUS. And... WP:SOCK?  None of what you just said is relevant to those. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I can't exactly say that you have my salute as you continue to censor the free speech of the world around you. I hope that your life is fulfilling and happy within the confines of the walls you can't seem to escape from.  I'll be having picnics under waterfalls, taking pictures of smiling faces, caressing the people I love, and enjoying this relatively short life and all the nature that surrounds it.  I hope someday you can pry yourself away from the discrimination and restriction that is Wikipedia.  I've witnessed you for a few years now, FisherQueen.  I believe there's some good in you.  A whole lot of good.  But, it's not to be found online in a remote sub-community.  Step outside.  The air is inviting :)
 * Thanks for your concern, but I have a rich and rewarding life outside of Wikipedia, including family, friends, and several engaging and interesting hobbies. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Then consider me your friend. Peace and love, swamilive. :)

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at Chaz Bono. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Slp1 (talk) 01:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.