Jump to content

Talk:Anya Taylor-Joy

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2a00:23c8:3d03:d300:7002:ebfa:9d5b:6784 (talk) at 00:55, 7 March 2021 (Argentine or Argentinian?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


best known for

I see this pattern repeated a lot where someone is listed as "best known for" - well in this case it says she is "best known" for a role in a movie that grossed 40 million worldwide vs a movie that grossed $300 million. I mean come on now, by what criteria is an actor best known for if it isn't the literal worldwide exposure of their movies?67.83.201.3 (talk) 09:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed this, too. Seems to be that fanboys of a particular show or movie will cite that movie/show for an actor, ignoring pretty much everything else where the actor may actually be better known for. That, or some version of recentism (citing the latest movie/show the actor has appeared in). I'm not sure if Wikipedia has an actual guideline concerning "best known for" but it would be useful if someone can point it out if there is one. — al-Shimoni (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing information to education

Would like to make the following edit request. To remove Queen's Gate School from this page. It appears in two sections, in the 'Early Life' section and in the summary section on the right hand side.

The early life section will read as follows and the education section will simply be removed from the summary box.

Early life Taylor-Joy was born in Miami, Florida, the youngest of six children.[3] Her mother worked in photography and interior design and is British-Spanish.[4][5] Her father, a former international banker, is Scottish-Argentinian.[4][5][6][7][8] Taylor-Joy moved to Argentina as an infant and only spoke Spanish before moving to London at age 6. She attended the preparatory school Hill House in Kensington. She is a former ballet dancer.[3][10] At the age of 16, she was scouted as a model while walking outside Harrods Department Store by Sarah Doukas of Storm Model Management. It was through her work as a model that she met and signed with an acting agent.[11][12]

Thank you PersonalPRAssistant (talk) 11:20, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The current wording is absolutely fine and shall remain. Thank you. –Davey2010Talk 11:40, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality

Her nationality seems to be all over the place. One minute she’s British-Argentine, the next she’s British-Argentine-American, and another she’s just American. To simplify things, why not simply refer to her as American-born? Scf1985 (talk) 01:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will only say that you study international law.BROTHER2013 (talk) 20:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How do you know what they study? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to see this settled through discussion, rather than as Scf1985 says seeing something different every time this article comes up in my watchlist. I have just restored "American actress of British and Argentinian descent" from an IP edit which changed it to "(multi-citizenship) American, British and Argentinian actress", which I find awkward. We know from reliable sources that she was born in the United States but moved to Argentina as an infant and later to the U.K., and we have sources for her citizenship in all three countries. From reading the various interviews provided as sources, it appears she identifies with both Argentina and Britain as "home", and at least one describes her directly as an "American-born Argentine-British actress". I like that better since she does not seem to identify with her American birthplace, although one of the sources mentions that she voted for Hillary Clinton. So I don't know, what should we do here? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:24, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • this reference https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/entertainment/anya-taylor-joy-466264 has an interview with her saying "I was born in Miami but we moved straight away to Argentina where most of my family still lives, and I was there until I was six, and then we moved to England, and I learnt English when I was eight. So my Dad’s Scottish-Argentine and my Mum’s African-Spanish". I am editing the page to reflect this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobias Reiper (talkcontribs) 14:16, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your edit. You added a source which was already in the article so I've merged them, and I restored the notice asking editors to discuss here rather than repeatedly changing the article. I'm going to start a formal discussion on this. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Everyone is overthinking this. She's Argentine-British. The fact that she's American-born is extraneous and doesn't need to be mentioned in the opening. She was born in Florida, and by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment's definition of citizenship, she's a U.S. citizen, but neither of her parents were Americans at the time of her birth. Millie Bobby Brown was born in Spain, but the opening to her article doesn't describe her as "Spanish-born." The late John McCain was born in Panama, and Ted Cruz was born in Canada. The same thing applies to them. Hell, I was born in what is today Ukraine to African-American parents, but I don't run around calling myself "Soviet-born." Were it not for the fact that Wikipedia is an American website, we wouldn't even be debating this. I propose describing her as an "Argentine-British actress and model." UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Nationality in lead sentence

How should Ms. Taylor-Joy be described in the opening sentence of this biography? In particular, which nationalities (if any) should be included in this first sentence? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For background please see the section above. The description in this biography's lead has been unstable for months, with a series of editors tweaking and changing it to different things. The current version (as of this edit) is "American-born actress of British and Argentine descent"; it has also been "actress of British and Argentinian descent", "American-Argentine-British actress", "American-born actress", "American actress of Argentine and British ancestry", "Argentine, English and American actress born in the United States", "American-born Argentine and English actress", and probably others (these are pulled from random revisions since March of this year). Repeatedly changing this description is disruptive; I'm hoping that a formal RfC will settle the matter.

As I wrote in the section above and per sources in the article, Taylor-Joy was born in the United States but moved to Argentina as an infant. She was raised there until the age of six, when her family relocated to Great Britain. She spoke only Spanish up to age eight, and attended school in Britain up to age 16. As far as I can tell from sources she hasn't stated how she self-identifies and most of the sources don't address it at all. There is an interview here in which she says home is "London and New York", which doesn't really help.

I feel that "of British and Argentine descent" is not exactly accurate: she spent her formative years in those countries; "descent" implies she just has ancestors there. Likewise I think leaving just "American" or "American-born" oversimplifies things. The only source I can find which even offers a description close to any of the ones we've used is this one, which gives "American-born Argentine-British actress", followed by a note that the author goes into more detail on this later in the article.

What is the best way for Wikipedia to handle this? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:27, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I feel like my small edit reignited something. The Evening Standard article seems to have the clearest information in her own words (and one of the few which confirms she has US citizenship), but good luck distilling that into a snappy first sentence. If the information must be included I suppose you could either just state her - admittedly clunky to write - tri-nationality, or skip the nationality and explain she was born in the US and grew up in Argentina and the UK? 82.19.214.50 (talk) 11:42, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh It's just a definition you can't tell some complicated family lines in there. She was born in USA, has citizenship, she lived there since, what, 14? So I say it's better to say just American and maybe make a note sending to section that clears this out. Better then saying she's from three countries and four descents. While I'm no expert on US, it appears that everyone's of some descents in there. Mithoron (talk) 19:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mithoron: Taylor-Joy's situation isn't just having descent from another country though. She holds citizenship to all three, and was predominately raised in just Argentina and the UK. Per her own article: Taylor-Joy moved to Buenos Aires as an infant, speaking only Spanish before moving to London at age six. I find that to be significant enough. I truly think American-Argentine-English is the only definition that truly encapsulates Taylor-Joy's nationality. Sure, it looks clunky and we're not used to individuals with tri-nationality, but she is not just American. Another idea could be by going the Natalie Portman route and writing: Anya Taylor-Joy is an actress with citizenship to the United States, United Kingdom, and Argentina, and then add a better descriptor of her situation later on like: Born in Miami to an Argentine father and English mother, Taylor-Joy was later raised between Buenos Aires and London. If anything, I think the US is probably the country she holds the least connection to, as it seems she was just born there and then did not return until beginning her film career. I can't find a point in the article where it says she moved back at 14, it appears she was still in the UK at age 16 when she got scouted as a model. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 13:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jjj1238: I checked interview in Evening Standard and she mentions moving at 14, and her accent changing in US, England (where she was interview) and Ireland. She also calls herself American, English and Argentine (‘When I was younger I didn’t really feel like I fit in anywhere. I was too English to be Argentine, too Argentine to be English, too American to be anything.’) so I guess that ideed American-Argentine-English is perhaps best. Mithoron (talk) 19:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mithoron: You should add that bit about returning to the United States to the article then, since that's missing right now. The more I think about the situation though, the more I like replicating what was done on articles about individuals with complicated nationalities like Natalie Portman: Anya Taylor-Joy (born 16 April 1996) is an actress who holds citizenship to the United States, United Kingdom, and Argentina. She was born in Miami to an Argentine father and a mother of British and Spanish descent, and later raised in Buenos Aires and London until returning to the United States at age 14. I think that explains what's needed to be explained without it being too clunky. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 20:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant policy for this is MOS:CONTEXTBIO, which states: "The opening paragraph should usually provide context for the activities that made the person notable. In most modern-day cases, this will be the country of which the person is a citizen, national, or permanent resident; or, if the person is notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national, or permanent resident when the person became notable. ... Similarly, previous nationalities or the place of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." Anya Taylor-Joy became notable with her lead role in the 2015 US film The Witch. Most of her roles since then have been in American productions, with a minority being in British productions. She has mainly resided in the US since 2015. Hence, I think she should be described as American, or perhaps arguably as British-American. LK (talk) 03:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like describing her as an American actor is not following the MOS: it's not referring to her nationality but to the nationality (?) of her significant works, which will be confusing and isn't how we're supposed to do this. We could make this a construction like "Anya Taylor-Joy is an actress, known for American films [...]" but I think that doesn't really follow the MOS either.
The only other article I know of that has a dispute like this one is Kiefer Sutherland, who was born in Britain while his Canadian parents were briefly living there (he's a dual citizen, they are not). A while back his description was repeatedly changed from "British actor" to "Canadian actor" to "British-Canadian actor", and after a lot of discussion the article landed on "British-born Canadian actor". Like Taylor-Joy he's known almost exclusively for American works, which also leads me to think we shouldn't use that in determining where to go here. But it's also hardly consistent across articles, for example:
  • Martin Short (Canadian-American dual citizen): "Canadian-American actor"
  • Rich Little (Canadian-American dual citizen): "Canadian-American impressionist and voice actor"
  • Keanu Reeves (Lebanese-born to British and American parents but only holds Canadian citizenship): "Canadian actor"
  • Ewan McGregor (British-American dual citizen): "Scottish actor"
  • Anthony Hopkins (British-American dual citizen): "Welsh actor"
  • Gabrielle Anwar (British-American dual citizen): "English-American actress"
  • Audrey Hepburn (British citizen, worked almost exclusively in American cinema): "British actress and humanitarian", with a footnote explaining her complicated nationality from being born in Belgium to a Dutch mother who under Dutch law could not pass on her nationality to her children, but that she identified as "half-Dutch", followed by another footnote explaining that her father was mistakenly believed to have been born in London when her birth certificate was issued but her mother later claimed he was Bohemian
  • Natalie Portman (including because she's mentioned above; she's an Israeli-American dual citizen): "an actress and filmmaker with dual Israeli and American citizenship"
Personally I think the Natalie Portman approach is not so appropriate here: Portman's dual citizenship is more a significant part of her public identity and activism, whereas Taylor-Joy's triple citizenship is more simply background info. I suggest based on everything written here that, for one, that where she works doesn't factor into this (because it doesn't for any of these actors who are all known for work in American media), and two, that we go with something in between the Audrey Hepburn and Natalie Portman approaches. Namely, "Anya Taylor-Joy is an American-born[footnote] Argentine-British actor" with a footnote briefly describing her upbringing and referring to more detail in the "early life" section. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector: FTR, Short, Little and Anwar are all handled badly – each of those should be "Canadian and American..." or "English and American actress", respectively. We should be paying more attention to MOS:ETHNICITY in these cases, and using "and" instead of a dash. --IJBall (contribstalk) 20:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • American-born Argentine-British actress is my driveby RfC opinion, since that seems to be used by at least one source, and looks the least awkward of all the options. Feel free to ignore my opinion completely if there's a good reason to. jp×g 11:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • She's clearly a U.S. citizen per this Vulture article, so she's not simply American-born that would imply lost U.S. citizenship which isn't the case. As for her other nationalities/ethnicities they should only be in the lead if the sources explicitly mention that she is a citizen of either Argentina or the U.K. not merely off-hand hand mentions of "Argentine/British" etc. Gotitbro (talk) 12:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Though I'd like to mention that her being a U.S. citizen is only incidental to being born there as the article does say this, "She was born “on a fluke” during a memorable vacation to Miami, which had the handy side effect of making her a U.S. citizen." So mentioning American in the seems unnecessary as well. Gotitbro (talk) 06:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current construction of this is terrible. I'm OK with "American-born" (though it's maybe trivial for the lede, esp. the first sentence). But "Argentine-British actress" is awful, and flies in the cast of MOS:ETHNICITY. At worst, it should be "American-born Argentine and British actress". But I question whether "Argentine" is in any way ledeworthy. I would go with "American-born British actress". If she's also an Argentine citizen, that can be mentioned later in the lede. Regardless, I absolutely oppose the current wording. --IJBall (contribstalk) 19:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don’t think I’ve weighed in on this subject on the talk page but it’s certainly aggravating for the reader to see this clunkiness as the first sentence. “American-born” sounds like someone who has renounced their citizenship next to two others. According to the Constitution of the United States, she is an American citizen, period. So I don’t see what’s so wrong about saying she is American, British, and Argentine because that’s the triumverate of the truth. Trillfendi (talk) 04:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's pretty much what I was telling. She said she considered herself Argentine and British and American. Mithoron (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)* Elon Musk holds three citizenships (South Africa, Canada, and United States) and the the NoWiki text that precedes his occupations when editing his article states: "Talk page consensus is that 'South African-born' or 'Canadian' should not be placed in this first sentence; please leave citizenship and place of birth for later in the lead, per MOS:BLPLEAD". Information about his citizenships is instead included in the second paragraph and Early life, as well as in the infobox. Could such an arragement also be also suitable for Anya Taylor-Joy? Bizarre BizarreTalk modern to me 15:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No nationality in lead sentence, agree with above on comparison to Elon Musk (another person of European heritage whose parents moved between several countries). See also Taylor-Joy's clarification on this Variety article. To be added later in the lead I propose Born in Florida and raised in Buenos Aires and London, Taylor-Joy identifies as a white Latina. Miyomiyo1050 (talk) 16:24, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ethnicity rarely ever goes in the lead and this certainly isn’t one of those occasions. Trillfendi (talk) 16:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ethnicity is already mentioned in the lead ("becoming the first Latina to win in that category") and per MOS:ETHNICITY guidelines it does seem relevant to her notability. Miyomiyo1050 (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I should’ve said what I intended: lead sentence. As I was the one who put that she is the first Latina to win the award, which itself is notable. But the figuring out of how to say someone has three citizenships without giving precedence to one over the other is the challenge, as each country has different laws. The Embassy of Argentina says American-Argentine. In her own words, she’s too English to be Argentine, too Argentine to be English, and too American to be anything. Vague at best. Trillfendi (talk) 19:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You added it? I noticed! I'd propose moving that fact to the body of the article (which, funnily enough, is where I already mentioned it a second time). Frankly, a Golden Globe superlative doesn't belong in the opening. If it were an Oscar superlative, it would make sense. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think Miyomiyo's proposal is the best way to handle this at this time, given the new source and information we didn't have at the start of this discussion. I know we normally mention ethnicity in the first sentence but it's not required, and wedging it in as we have been is awkward, we just haven't had a better way of doing it. With Miyomiyo's proposal I suggest:
Anya Josephine Marie Taylor-Joy (born 16 April 1996) is an actress and model. Born in Florida and raised in Buenos Aires and London, Taylor-Joy identifies as a white Latina.
And for the "early life" section, which explains everything in detail with references:
Taylor-Joy holds triple British, American, and Argentine citizenship.[1][2] She identifies as a white Latina.[3]
The Variety article has started a bit of a controversy since it originally described her as a person of colour, which she is not (there's now a correction notice at the bottom which is where "white Latina" appears), which has produced quite a lot of discussion now about her ethnicity. I think it's WP:NOTNEWS but we might want to mention a bit about it. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 13:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Completely disagree. Mentioning that she's a "white Latina" or identifies as one is frivolous and gives that...issue undue weight. And citing ethnicity in the opening paragraph sets a really bad precedent. Also, a lot of Argentines are white, so the whole thing is redundant. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Variety should just hire better editors and consider getting a diversity trainer. That said, one would natutally jump to the conclusion that she could be biracial because her mother was born and raised in an African nation where the plurality of the population is a Bantu people. It just gives me the shingles seeing a state juxtaposed to two foreign cities. "Anya Josephine Marie Taylor-Joy is an actress with triple citizenship of the United States, Argentina, and the United Kingdom" may be the most diplomatic route, I think. Trillfendi (talk) 19:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The last thing Variety needs is a diversity trainer. Frankly, that whole controversy was stupid and overblown and really underscores how meaningless terms like "people of color" are. I'm black, and I find this entire discourse baffling, but it speaks volumes about how hollow the Western obsession with race and ethnicity is. Anyway, I'm not a fan of the construction you've offered, since citizenship is something that's mentioned later in the piece. She's Argentine-British, and that's how the article should open. Sure, she has U.S. citizenship by virtue of the fact that she was born here, but I think parentage is what ought to matter when writing these articles. Anybody who sees that a subject was born in the U.S. knows that that person also holds a U.S. citizenship. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a fan of the "born in Miami, raised in ..." It seems sort of clunky to me. Taylor-Joy has herself said that her being born in Miami and thus possessing American citizenship was a "fluke" due to her parents simply being there on vacation.[4] If there was an issue with the current lead I would most prefer changing it to simply "... is an Argentine-British actress ..." with a later explanation of her American birth and citizenship. If that is unacceptable and keeping it the way it is now is also an issue, then I would be most supportive of Trillfendi's suggestion of "Anya Josephine Marie Taylor-Joy is an actress with triple citizenship of the United States, Argentina, and the United Kingdom". { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 21:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the first part of what you said. The box mentions that she was born in Miami. Anybody who reads that can infer that she has U.S. citizenship. The intro should focus on her parentage and the cultural milieu she's closest to, not the circumstances surrounding her birth. That's why I propose that we stick with the original wording. Mentioning that she holds U.S. citizenship later in the piece suffices. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go so far as to argue that Ronan should be described solely as Irish. Anybody born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen, so I'd omit explicitly mentioning that in the opening. It should just be mentioned later in the piece. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
She identifies as both Irish and a New Yorker, according to her "Personal life", section, so I'm sure that factors into it somehow.--Bettydaisies (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Everyone is overthinking this. She's Argentine-British. The fact that she's American-born is extraneous and doesn't need to be mentioned in the opening. She was born in Florida, and by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment's definition of citizenship, she's a U.S. citizen, but neither of her parents were Americans at the time of her birth. Millie Bobby Brown was born in Spain, but the opening to her article doesn't describe her as "Spanish-born." The late John McCain was born in Panama, and Ted Cruz was born in Canada. The same thing applies to them. Hell, I was born in what is today Ukraine to African-American parents, but I don't run around calling myself "Soviet-born." Were it not for the fact that Wikipedia is an American website, we wouldn't even be debating this. I propose describing her as an "Argentine-British actress and model." UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It also depends what she identifies as, though - as well as what the media describes her as. For instance, Emily Blunt is almost always referred to as a British actress, despite dual American citizenship.--Bettydaisies (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unless this was inevitably lost in the sauce somewhere, she still identifies as an American too. It doesn’t matter what city in Florida (or any state for that matter) that took place in, but damn, to discard it is severely disingenuous. It wasn’t as if she was born to diplomats. In 10 years y’all’ll be saying Shiloh Jolie-Pitt isn’t a Namibian citizen because of the “circumstances” of her birth despite the details and facts provided by her parents and local media. Trillfendi (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We can't cut out things because they're cumbersome, especially if it disregards the subject's own views of of their identity.--Bettydaisies (talk) 21:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a complicated one but as an argentine I have seen many interviews where she identifies her attitude towards life as an "argentine"[5][6] so I think it's important for her not only having that citizenship but also having grown up there (and having half of her family in this country).

References

  1. ^ Samuel Fishwick (19 January 2017). "Anya Taylor-Joy: meet the actress on the cusp of Hollywood superstardom". Evening Standard. Retrieved 9 March 2017.
  2. ^ Chui, Delphine (19 January 2017). "Why you need to get to know up-and-coming actress Anya Taylor Joy". Marie Claire. Retrieved 9 April 2017.
  3. ^ Turchiano, Danielle (28 February 2021). "'Queen's Gambit' Wins Golden Globes for Best Limited Series, Actress for Anya Taylor-Joy". Variety. Variety Media. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
  4. ^ Jones, Nate (14 March 2018). "Anya Taylor-Joy Is Ready for Her Close-Up". Vulture.
  5. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KeNeZX4Cao
  6. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rlvmkclg2Q8

Spanish name hatnote

A while ago Belagaile added a {{family name hatnote}} to the article saying that Taylor-Joy is a Spanish compound surname. I don't think that's true: Spanish surnames are not hypenated, and neither of Taylor-Joy's parents have Spanish double surnames themselves. It seems to me that Taylor-Joy is an English double-barrelled name. However, I don't see that it's discussed in any of the sources in the article. Should the note be removed? Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 14:26, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it should be, and I just did that. Thanks for pointing out. Mithoron (talk) 20:48, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Argentine or Argentinian?

I believe but may be wrong that "Argentine" is preferred by middle class British English especially, Americans and Aussies tend to use "Argentinian" . I do know from my grandfather's British shipping logs from the 1920s that he would refer to Argentina as "the Argentine". Does Wikipedia have a standard? And what do Argentines/Argentinians prefer, is there any data in such regards or do their views not count?