Talk:Greta Thunberg

Tweet

Should there be a mention of her recent Twitter response to Andrew Tate? Considering that it was only posted yesterday and is already the 8th-most liked tweet. ForeverStamp (talk) 05:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Is it WP:DUE? What secondary sources are covering it? Elizium23 (talk) 05:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

NBC News and The Hill are two. --ForeverStamp (talk) 05:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes. It is the 7th most liked tweet on the platform. Appu (talk) 06:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

My default assumption is no per WP:PROPORTION and WP:NOTNEWS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

The fallout resulted in the arrest of a person (with general NOTABILITY) for human trafficking. The causal chain is not that complex, and her first Twitter response is on the most like tweets top list on Wiki and rising. Her follow up got a million likes in 3 hours as of now and dominating reddit. While it doesn't carry the same weight as her climate work it rates up there enough to get a mention in other work just since she tied it back into environmentalism with her "this is what happens when you don't recycle" tweet made from in front of Parliament while protesting on her Friday event and which is going to end up one of the most viewed tweets in history. It's not NOTNEWS and quickly rising past the PROPORTION threshold in this editor's opinion. 2603:8090:1200:E00:617E:45F2:3A0:82C3 (talk) 12:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Citations are needed for your alleged "causal chain". Elizium23 (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes. It mentions her changing her twitter bios to match what people have said about her, but something this notable isn’t getting put on the page? Be for real. This will get added to the page eventually Helpingpeopleyay (talk) 00:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

The event was added to his page and some of the edits became viral. I think it's poetic that her page, full of awards and nominations, has no mentions. Arosa (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Note: the Andrew Tate article says: ".. Thunberg's reply is currently the 7th most-liked tweet." That wording needs to be adjusted e.g. "By 29 December 2022, Thunberg's reply was the 7th most-liked tweet". But I can't even edit Talk:Andrew Tate to suggest that. Perhaps you can. Thanks. 86.187.234.59 (talk) 12:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Done. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Certainly worth a mention. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure where this would fit into her page, but reaching the top-10 most-liked tweets isn't a flash-in-the-pan moment. So here's at least a source someone can use to reliably insert something about this: [1] (Addendum: ugh, apologies for forgetting to sign; not sure why the bot didn't catch and sign for me). --Pinchme123 (talk) 01:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, at least it fits on this page: List of most-liked tweets. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:04, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

According to that page, it's now risen to be the 5th most-liked tweet. --ForeverStamp (talk) 21:29, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Andrew Tate page now just refers to it as "one of the most-liked tweets" to deal with the improving position. I do think it's worthy of mention here on her own page. --Pinchme123 (talk) 01:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Another of her tweets has now been added to the list of most like tweets. He tried to troll her, and her response burned him to the ground. Some RS are speculating that his reply to her tweet provided the evidence needed for the authorities to locate and arrest him. Many RS beyond the ones listed below cover this story, and we should give it a blurb. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 01:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok, that was pretty funny. Fwiw, added List of most-liked tweets to See also. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2022

Johnmax20 (talk) 19:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Please let me edit this page. 🙏

This isn't an edit request - you haven't said what changes you want to make. Girth Summit _(blether) 19:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Edit needs to be made

Challenge global leaders needs to be replaced with eco terrorist and Marxist as she has stated her goal is to bring down western governments. Below is a link supporting why this change is necessary https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/02/greta-thunberg-time-overthrow-wests-oppressive-racist-capitalist/ 2601:543:C880:AC0:643A:72D2:82F8:E6F (talk) 19:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

•  Not done. Biographies of living persons are required to have explicit support for such controversial labels. Your link to an opinion piece by India McTaggart is not enough. What you need to do is show multiple WP:SECONDARY sources calling her an ecoterrorist and/or Marxist. Explicitly—not by inference. Binksternet (talk) 20:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Why does the article claim that she was nominated for Nobel Prize? Source of this claim? The committee keeps nominations secret for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:644:8E7F:47E0:C52D:478A:6B85:B5E8 (talk) 22:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

There's literally three sources cited in the lede. DonQuixote (talk) 22:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Andrew Tate and Greta Thunberg

This needs to be added to the page for a wide variety of reasons. Number 1: Andrew tate has it on his page Number 2: she now has two of the most liked tweets on the platform, which I would argue is more relevant than her changing her twitter bio which is included Number 3: Multiple sources exist proving it’s notability

https://www.mamamia.com.au/what-did-andrew-tate-say/amp/

https://www.msn.com/en-au/sport/unknown/swedish-activist-greta-thunberg-mocks-the-arrest-of-streamer-andrew-tate-«this-is-what-happens-when-you-dont-recycle-your-pizza-boxes»/ar-AA15OyTl

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/small-dk-energy-greta-thunberg-burns-andrew-tate-on-twitter/news-story/5aba9e0260cc1b62ccd28cedb0f1f6d3?amp

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8034698/thunberg-tweet-linked-to-tates-arrest/

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/video/environmental-activist-greta-thunberg-shuts-down-andrew-tate-with-viral-response/ao10wfzyl

https://www.ndtv.com/feature/greta-thunberg-takes-another-swipe-at-ex-kickboxer-andrew-tate-over-his-detention-in-romania-3650853/amp/1

https://www.news.com.au/world/owned-so-hard-how-a-pizza-box-landed-tate-in-custody/news-story/6c67b8384ffbd62ae65c07f37242f5d3

There are more which I can provide but this obviously needs to be added as she’s basically the main reason for his arrest inadvertently

Helpingpeopleyay (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

No, disagree, this is just a flash in the pan moment as far as Thunberg is concerned,and of no ongoing relevance to her life or career. Which contrasts with Tate, who's apparently been arrested with the tweets forming a part of his story.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

No one said it had to be more than one paragraph though. It could be a sentence. Whether it has any impact on her career in the future is irrelevant, it still happened and is notable. Helpingpeopleyay (talk) 03:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

This is classic recentism. It's amusing. It's entertaining. But please try applying the ten year test. HiLo48 (talk) 03:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Once again, irrelevant. Apply the ten year test to the will smith Chris rock smack? Yet that exists. I would understand the contention if it was some thing that got 100,000 likes but this is obviously a big thing, shown by it now being the 3rd most liked tweet on the platform and rising. Helpingpeopleyay (talk) 07:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

In ten years, Andrew Tate will still be in prison, therefore it's still gonna be notable. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 19:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

No. Because it's been made clear further down in this discussion that his arrest had nothing to do with the exchange of tweets. HiLo48 (talk) 22:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

In ten years, will people be confused by her changing her twitter bio? Maybe. But that’s still there. Will people be confused by something arguably much more notable? Less likely. Don’t know why this is still such a big issue Helpingpeopleyay (talk) 07:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Because it's trivia. HiLo48 (talk) 07:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Her tweet had nothing to do with her arrest it seems. Doug Weller talk 08:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

It’s obvious that without her he wouldn’t have been arrested inadvertently or not Helpingpeopleyay (talk) 12:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

No it's not. HiLo48 (talk) 22:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

• https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/12/30/andrew-tate-explainer-arrested-greta-misogyny/

"Despite the online speculation that Romanian authorities were able to locate Tate after he posted a video in response to Thunberg containing a pizza box from a local spot that gave away his location, authorities denied that the video played any role. The investigation into Tate and his brother began in April after the U.S. Embassy called Romanian authorities with information that a U.S. citizen was being held involuntarily at a house in Ilfov." —PaleoNeonate – 15:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Notability is not the standard we use for inclusion of facts in articles. WP:DUE is the way we measure whether something can be included. If it is proportionally covered by WP:RS then we can consider inclusion. This is a lower standard than notability. Elizium23 (talk) 22:31, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

See Also -- link to Xiuhtezcatl Martinez

Imho the **See Also** section could also contain a link to Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, like Thunberg et al. an important contemporary environmental activist who started as a minor, roughly at the same age. 2003:F6:3712:D547:1D5:D8C:F47:C736 (talk) 11:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Greta Thunberg Pronouns

They have made it clear to use they/them pronouns, not she/her. This Wikipedia article should reflect that. 49.192.222.28 (talk) 00:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources for this claim. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

It's possible that she uses gender-neutral pronouns in Swedish which do not translate exactly into English. PatGallacher (talk) 17:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Maybe, but we still need the source. I understand Swedish. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:23, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

If this were true, one would think Swedish editors would know it, but her Swedish article uses feminine pronouns. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2023

hello i would like to preserve Greta Thunberg personal email "smalldickenergy@getalife.com" under her profile name. since internet right and freedom of speech is under attack. dont want this information lost, freedom of information, ect. even if it at the very bottom of the wiki page, "she said it, so it must be true" write it down... Preserved it, preserve, preserve, preserve... to bad the dirty native couldnt preserve their land until the our white people came. at least im not afraid to say "only winners rewrite history." who prisoners of war becomes The Holocaust survivors. and 1750-1900 native of this land befor the white one, we killed like 80% of the natives of this land in a huge Genocide. long story short. "preserve Greta Thunberg personal email "smalldickenergy@getalife.com" under her profile name." 74.206.159.62 (talk) 16:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Er...it's a joke email.... DonQuixote (talk) 17:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Parents in the infobox

@Rowing007: Why do you think User talk:Thedarkknightli#Infobox person isn't supportive? The rules have been changing. There's no consensus that different parameters are required. --Thedarkknightli (talk) 15:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

For the nth time, per the template's documentation, the "mother" and "father" parameters may be used, and they are used on multiple other pages of a notable person with 2 notable parents, as well as in the example on the template's page. Nothing you presented on your talk page constitutes a valid argument against this position; it's just your personal opinion and the personal opinion of a random person you pinged. I am stating that per the documentation, the use of these parameters is valid, so, kindly stop this crusade. Rowing007 (talk) 17:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not convinced. The template's example isn't the only standard and should be updated. Opinions given by experienced editors (e.g. User:SNUGGUMS) should be considered. --Thedarkknightli (talk) 07:46, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Also, WP:OWNERSHIP should be respected. --Thedarkknightli (talk) 11:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

This is truly unhinged. The template says the parameters may be used. They are used. Their use is valid. End of story. If you have an issue with the template itself, start an RFC on the template's talk page. Rowing007 (talk) 14:07, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, weighing in as an uninvolved editor. This is a ridiculous thing to be bickering about. Her parents are going to be listed either way; I'm not sure why it matters whether they're listed together in the "parents" parameter or separately in "mother" and "father". However, my preference would be for "parents", because the template documentation is very clear that "mother" and "father" are only to be used if the subject has only one notable parent. Yes, the use of both parameters is valid, but I don't see any reason to do so in this case. Aerin17 (t • c) 16:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hear hear! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

The mother and father parameters are used in the example on the template's documentation, and they're used on multiple other articles of people that have 2 notable parents. Further, it helps disambiguate the mother and the father. The template documentation clearly states may be used (optionally with father parameter) in place of parents parameter and may be used (optionally with mother parameter) in place of parents parameter. As their use is valid per the template documentation, there is no reason to forcibly impose the other style. Like I mentioned, if Thedarkknightli has such an issue with this, he should start an RFC on the template's talk page. Either way, this is a truly ridiculous point. Rowing007 (talk) 17:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

And once again, the template documentation also states If subject has only one notable mother and only one notable father, mother and father parameters may be used instead. Rowing007 (talk) 17:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

You're not hearing us. It doesn't matter. This is not a hill to die on. Spend your time improving the article instead. (This obviously applies to both people involved in the dispute). Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

To be very clear, that's what I've been doing from the start. I don't really need to be told to edit instead of discussing a completely innocuous and valid edit I made with someone (Thedarkknightli) so vehemently opposed to it. How I choose to spend my time is my prerogative. I do agree that the other party's energy in this discussion would lead to more fruitful results if they were to open an RFC on the template's talk page instead of further engaging here. Rowing007 (talk) 21:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Bastun: Got it. --Thedarkknightli (talk) 01:42, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Nationality is not necessary info in the short description 🇦🇽

If you insist, you can add a descriptive symbol in the short description which you want to keep within letter limits. Less is more. Nowadays those flag emojis are all the rage for what they're worth. Wikipedia advises not to emphasize ethnicity. ToniTurunen (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)