Talk:Lauren Harries

year of Wogan appearance

The Guardian article states Harris appeared on Wogan in 1990 for the first time. Allen's documentary says 1988. 1988 feels right to me, since I remember it very well and I would have been 16 in 1988, and I'm sure I wouldn't have been 18 when I forst saw her. --bodnotbod 23:31, Jun 28, 2004 (UTC)

Poor kid. This thread on UKPFC_Forum might be worth reading [1]. Morwen - Talk 23:37, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, she never really stood a chance with that family. --bodnotbod 23:59, Jun 28, 2004 (UTC)

"Eventually Lauren realised she was a transsexual." Surely it was James who realised this? Mysteronald 23:37, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

BLP dispute

There's a large amount of unreferenced material here, some of which is potentially controversial.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 03:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

all dodgy BLP claims gone for now :) special, random, Merkinsmum 00:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing more controversial that Lauren herself, I'm afraid. I'm kind of annoyed the entry about her constant media lobbying and self-publicising cannot be listed. These are clear facts. She is contantly fame seeking. Is this not worthy for inclusion? Hardylane (talk) 02:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

age on wogan

Sme reliable sources say ten [2], others say twelve [3] so I don't know which. If the first wogan appearance was when her date of birth makes it ten or eleven, obviously that's the age she was. But I don't know. What do you all think? special, random, Merkinsmum 17:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear. Seems she was born in 78 but the critical question is whether she appeared on Wogan in 88 or 90, the BBC pic looks like she was 10 (IMO) but that is original research. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The Independent says he was 12 which would make it 1990. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It was in August 1988. (92.7.27.64 (talk) 21:55, 15 August 2011 (UTC))

although some of the sources listed may be abstracts/starts of articles

Enough of them is shown to verify each of the facts concerned, which is why they're being used. special, random, Merkinsmum 11:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The link http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-29092583_ITM is now broken. Jonknight73 (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

categories

if only there were an Anglo-Welsh Transexual Buddhist category 86.163.254.9 (talk) 16:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

There are many categories that apply to Ms Harries, but we cannot, legally, do that. I prefer to settle on "shameless fame-seeker", myself Hardylane (talk) 01:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

rework

I have edited the lede both to give it a tiny bit of substance and to ensure it conforms to the guidance developed on the LGBT project for trans biographies. I have also gone through the text and reworded some of the references to former name and gender, which we try to avoid as much as possible in trans biographies. Please note that we prefer to use subjects' surnames. Some of the references look a bit iffy, but I have no interest in trawling through this article to check them all personally. Reading some of the comments, do remember WP:NPOV. I know it is hard with some people, but we need to be fair, especially in BLPs. Mish (just an editor) (talk) 00:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

In this particular case the phrasing 'known as "James Harries"' makes the factual meaning a bit unclear. It sounds as if "James Harries" were a character appearing on the Wogan chat show, in much the same way that "Ali G" or "Basil Brush" might appear on a chat show. This is a sensitive area, and using plain 'Harries' for the rest of the article is fine, but the style is obscuring the factual content a bit here. Better to say: her former name was James Harries, and under this name she appeared on television... Ed Avis (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Changed it. Mish (just an editor) (talk) 14:56, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

This article needs more attention re: he/she, just look at this paragraph: "Encouraged by ***his*** family to appear in the media, Harries's first television appearance was on Terry Wogan's UK chat show, Wogan. The twelve-year-old demonstrated what seemed to be a knowledge of antiques which, combined with an odd appearance including bow ties, hair in thick golden curls, formal attire and a precocious manner of speaking, made ***her*** memorable to British viewers." --Hburdon (talk) 15:29, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Attacked?

There is a quote her of how some thugs, "attacked Lauren, her father and her brother in the family home". In the documentary, Little Lady Fauntleroy, one of the things that comes up is the family's flamboyance/eccentricity on the one hand, and paranoia, on the other. It was implied that some of these attacks, e.g. stone throwing etc may have even been made up. (And it seems that they occurred long before the surgery as well)

From the doc, the family also seems to fancy themselves as counsellors, although their credentials for doing so are highly questionable.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The sources indicate the attack happened, and resulted in prosecution. There is nothing about the second point here, and the documentary sheds no light on these beyond hearsay. Mish (just an editor) (talk) 21:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Antiques expert

Coming to this as someone with no knowledge, I get the distinct impression that James-as-was was not in fact an antiques expert, but it's neither stated outright nor backed up with a reference, merely snidely implied. Perhaps to article could be fixed for either accuracy or dignity, don't really care which... --94.212.2.245 (talk) 23:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

James Harries was NOT an antiques expert at all. He has admitted himself that his father told him what to say before each television appearance. This article should be deleted because James Harries is not a notable person, just an unemployed 33-year-old living on a council estate in Cardiff. (92.10.133.248 (talk) 20:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC))

Not a child prodigy

Lauren Harries now freely admits she knew almost nothing about antiques as a child and that her father told her what to say before each TV appearance. The Keith Allen documentary also revealed taht it was her mother who carried out the pre-op counselling using fake qualifications bought from the Internet. Also there is nothing wrong with using the 1991 picture because Lauren Harries was only famous as a child. (92.7.27.64 (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC))

I disagree on her being only famous as a child. However tastless the coverage was her emergance as female garnered a lot of coverage. RafikiSykes (talk) 22:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Did it? I only heard about him again in 2005 when I saw the Allen programme. (92.7.18.204 (talk) 12:09, 16 August 2011 (UTC))

Yes it was covered in a range of media and the publicity and interviews helped pay off her operations etc.

• http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/lauren-harries-the-boy-in-the-madeup-world-681220.html
• http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,472608,00.html
• http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/antiques-expert-seeks-tall-boy-1.183719
• http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1315012/News-in-brief.html

RafikiSykes (talk) 12:38, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, the reason it made news in 2001 was because of his brief TV fame in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Either way it is essential that the article should make clear that Harries never was an antique expert, or child prodigy, by her own admission. The fact that the conselling before the operation was carried out by his mother using fake qualifications is also notable. (92.7.18.204 (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC))

You need to find a reliable, citable source for these assertions, and saying "watch the documentary" doesn't meet Wikipedia standards.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Should there even be an article for this person? James/Lauren Harries is not notable enough to meet wikipedia standards. (92.7.18.204 (talk) 15:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC))