Talk:Hilaria Baldwin

Appropriate for lead?

Do other editors believe this would be appropriate to add to the lead? "Baldwin's background and ethnic identity became the focus of intense scrutiny following allegations in December 2020 she was culturally appropriating a Spanish background." Any thoughts appreciated! --Kbabej (talk) 03:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Taumata994: As the only other editor on this article so far, I wanted to ping you to see if you had any thoughts. No pressure either way. --Kbabej (talk) 03:28, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it needs to be in the lead section. Might be a hot topic right now, but will probably blow over soon. Anyone who comes to the article looking for info about that aspect (as I did) should be able to find the dedicated section easily enough. On the other hand, I'm not opposed to it being there if others deem it appropriate. (Disclaimer: I haven't edited the article, but came here after reading [1].) I'll update Hilaria Baldwin (Q24702913) which says she was born in Majorca and is a Spanish citizen. —Pelagic ( messages ) – (16:08 Mon 28, AEDT) 05:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Is this really important enough for the lead? It's a one-time news story. Inclusion seems like WP:RECENTISM to me. Jmill1806 (talk) 15:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I believe it is appropriate, given the significant coverage the controversy has gotten. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I just removed this (before seeing this discussion). I honestly wasn't meaning to edit without respecting whatever consensus you guys reach. Having said that, this is pure recentism, and the issue is more than adequately covered in the body of the article. --Bongwarrior (talk) 19:48, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Bongwarrior: Hello there! Please refer to WP:LEAD, which states "make sure the lead correctly reflects the entirety of the article." It should definitely be included at this point. --Kbabej (talk) 20:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Spelling of alternate name

Resolved

Is her anglicised given name Hilary or Hillary (one or two 'l's)? I've seen it spelled both ways. Pelagic ( messages ) – (16:08 Mon 28, AEDT) 05:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Her high school yearbook lists it as Hillary with two Ls. That’s probably the original spelling. —Kbabej (talk) 05:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Need citation for birth date

This Page Six article was used as a citation for her birth date, but it has no mention of that so I've removed the citation and replaced with {{cn}} tags. Softlavender (talk) 08:46, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Update: I added a citation. Softlavender (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

We have Meaww listing her birthday here. Thoughts? Meaww is not on the WP:RSP list. --Kbabej (talk) 22:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Page Six

Page Six is a non-RS WP:TABLOID site. If you can't find verification for its claims anywhere but a tabloid gossip site, then those claims should not be in a WP:BLP. Why would any responsible editor reinsert a non-RS tabloid site like Page Six? --Tenebrae (talk) 15:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

The fact that only Page Six and some non-RS sites including forums and Twitter cites her mom as Kathryn Hayward is a big red flag. Not even the Daily Beast article says that. Page Six is the Daily Mail of the US and we should not be using it in a BLP.--Tenebrae (talk) 15:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Take it to RSN, please, if you have a problem with that article. There is no reason to doubt the information that we quote from that article. There's a video online of her mother talking about her giving birth to Hillary/Hilaria while she was in med school. Softlavender (talk) 15:48, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't have to go the RSN when it already says we're not supposed to use tabloid gossip pages in a BLP. We're not supposed to be gossipmongers. If there's a video online as you say, then link to it. But if the tabloid Page Six is the only source of a claim, then we shouldn't use it. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:56, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

We have other sources now for her parentage. I thought I had saved the video of her mother talking about the births of her two children but I can't find it now; it is linked a few times in a massive thread on a forum called DC Urban Moms. If I manage to find it I'll present it; it may help quantify Hilllary/Hilaria's birthdate or year. Softlavender (talk) 23:50, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I have found the video of Hillary's mother talking about when she gave birth to her children: [2]. It appears to confirm the birth year of 1984, and also confirms the birth month of January. Starting at about 5:55, she says her first child (Jeremy) was born three months before medical school started, and Hillary was born in January of the second year of medical school. In the video description, it says she became an intern in 1986 (interns have completed their four years of medical school), and in the video she states that she did not take any breaks between med school and internship. So this seems to bear out the correctness of the birth date of January 6, 1984. Softlavender (talk) 01:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Page protection

Resolved

I went to request page protection on this article due to the high level of IP and SPA vandalism. Looks like Softlavender was one step ahead of me! Ideally that will be granted. --Kbabej (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

The request can be viewed here. —Kbabej (talk) 18:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Header

Softlavender has changed the 2020 accusations section back to the name "Accusations of cultural appropriation". There is no mention of an accusation like that in the section itself. And even if there were, the fact remains that most accusations center around accusing Baldwin of deliberately using an accent and go not as far as to say she is culturally appropriating. --Distelfinck (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Read it again. Softlavender (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

My guess would be that you have a different understanding of what the word "appropriation" means than me? Either way the section doesn't mention any critic use the word "cultural appropriation". Let's be very careful and not put into her critics mouths what they might have thought but go with what they actually said. Cultural appropriation is a very heavy accusation --Distelfinck (talk) 17:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Did you do a search for sources on this before you commented, Distelfinck? This article has "cultural appropriation" in its title. Many others use it in the body of the article (one here). The description of cultural appropriation is appropriate. --Kbabej (talk) 17:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Aside from the fact that this is not mentioned in our article at this point: Accusation of cultural appropriation is a tiny aspect of the 2020 accusations. Currently, all of the section is about other things. The title of the section should be encompassing the whole of its contents. Various news outlets have called the accusations "Accusations of fake accent and heritage". Sounds better and is a more broader wording than cultural appropriation, since most critics don't accuse Baldwin of that --Distelfinck (talk) 17:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Cultural appropriation seems to me the best way to describe the situation. What else would affecting an accent and misrepresenting her background be? Sources within the article now state it is cultural appropriation. —Kbabej (talk) 18:14, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Distelfinck, please stop trying to remove this. You do not have consensus, and there is no better or more neutral way of titling the section. Softlavender (talk) 18:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I stopped renmaing the section like 1 1/2 hours ago. Re better way of titling it: What do you think of the "Accusations of fake accent and heritage" I mentioned. This wording is used by many reliable sources --Distelfinck (talk) 18:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

That's too non-neutral for a BLP dominated by this coverage. I've added lots of citations now. Softlavender (talk) 18:46, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Why is it too non-neutral for this article? Among the sources you added are SheKnows.com and Sioux County Radio... yeah great sources... not --Distelfinck (talk) 18:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Because it's a WP:BLP and must adhere to those guidelines, erring on the side of neutrality and mildness. And because really the only reason this article exists is because of this one controversy (which generated all of the substantive coverage about her), so we must minimize it as much as possible, and emphasize other facts in order to balance the article out. And because her accent isn't necessarily "fake" per se; it's a Spanish accent she apparently adopts because of time spent in Spain, speaking Spanish to her nannies and children, and affinity for the culture. Softlavender (talk) 18:59, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about with "SheKnows.com"; I added the following citations: There are more where those came from, but I thought five citations enough; more than that would equate to overciting; and as you said in your edit summary, no one disputes that there are numerous accusations of cultural appropriation against her online. Softlavender (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Softlavender: Yes, I agree we need to balance out the article. I'm going to work more on her career section right now to try and beef that up. There's info out there; I just need to sift through the recentism to get to it. --Kbabej (talk) 21:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

"saying she identifies as white"

This is definitely a true statement that she said it, but isn't it a non-sequitur to include this given as this was never in doubt in the first place, she was pretending to not be American, not pretending to not be white. This tells us nothing, it's no different to if she was busted for pretending to be Scottish and then said she was white; the two things are not exclusionary and in 99% of cases they are white. I know that most Americans believe that everyone who speaks Spanish looks like the typical Mexican, but the American definition of who is white still includes Spaniards [3]. It's just funny that the American public only seems to see them that way when they were conquering Aztecs and Incas. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I think it's important to include, considering Spanish people can be considered Lantinx, and she has been described as a Latina on multiple occasions, as this source points out. --Kbabej (talk) 21:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I think it's important to clarify here that, regardless of what media outlets have described her as, Spaniards are considered Hispanic, not Latina. Latina people are people from Latin America or with family roots in Latin America. Hispanic people, a group of Romance people, are grouped by language, not ethnicity. While the two are often grouped together, and many times a person is both Latina and Hispanic, they are not the same thing. And while there are certainly White Latin Americans and non-white Hispanic people, it appears Baldwin was never insinuating that she was Latina or not white. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

This sums it up well IMO (from Refinery 29 here): "Although she wasn’t necessarily pretending not to be white, she has made numerous appearances in Latina Magazine and been falsely identified as a Latina and native Spanish speaker. Needless to say, as an American-born white woman, Hilaria has been afforded opportunities that actual Latinx women, and people who aren’t fluent in English, are not." --Kbabej (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

OMG. Do you realize how racist all the above comments are? Latino is not a race but a culture and anybody that identifies as latino is a latino. If she defines herself as latina, well I see no problem with that. Latin american people can be slovak, german, swedish, nigerian, japanaese or mayan as far as they share the latin american culture which is just a mixture of european and native american. By the way, there are as many white latinos as white people in USA, the only difference is that native amaerican were not exterminated like in the USA. There is people living in latin american that is not considered latinos we call them colonies so living in latin american doesn´t equal to be latino. --159.253.231.34 (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

No where did I say that Latino was a race (I even referenced White Latin Americans, many of which are of Germanic ancestry i.e. Alexis Bledel and Gisele Bündchen). However, Baldwin has no connection to Latin America besides the fact that her grandfather spent some of his adulthood in Argentina. She stated she was raised speaking Spanish, but, as far as I am aware, has not identified as "Latina". "Latina" has a geographic connotation. "Hispanic" is linguistic. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Willthacheerleader18 - She seems to have purposely been vague about her life, and didn't mind if people acted like she was Hispanic/Latina, even though she was an American and had no Latin American/Hispanic connections. I mean, she changed her name to "Hilaria", which sounds like a pseudo-Latinization of her birth name "Hilary". But, I'm not shocked at all the confusion and ignorance. Look at how confusing "race" is in America, where "Hilaria/Hilary" is from. Many, but not all Latino Americans have varying degrees of Native DNA, but the U.S definition for "Native" refers specifically to the tribes of USA, therefore many don't qualify as being partly or fully "Native American" (hence why only 1.3% of the country is "Native American"). The U.S also says Asian is a "race" and that they're "POC" (although historically, "yellow" was used before the term was deemed outdated), while denying many people from Asia (those who aren't part of their definition of "Asian American") the right to be considered "Asian American". In fact, many Asians who aren't part of America's definition are classified as being White American. Because of this, many people think that Asians can't have blonde hair, or blue eyes or "Eurocentric" features, or how Asian countries like Lebanon/Israel/etc aren't part of "Asia" and that only China/Japan/etc are "Asia" when this far from the case. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 08:47, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Birth date -- apparent confirmation

I have found a video of Hillary's mother talking about when she gave birth to her children: [4]. It appears to confirm the birth year of 1984, and also confirms the birth month of January. Starting at about 5:55, she says her first child (Jeremy) was born three months before medical school started, and Hillary was born in January of the second year of medical school. In the video description, it says she became an intern in 1986 (interns have completed their four years of medical school), and in the video she states that she did not take any extra breaks between med school and internship. So this seems to bear out the correctness of the birth date of January 6, 1984. Softlavender (talk) 01:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

NYT access?

If anyone's got New York Times access, there's an article on the subject's yoga career (I believe that is the focus by the title). It's available here if you can access it. I can't. --Kbabej (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Here is a link to the Wayback Machine Copy of the NYT article Whoisjohngalt (talk) 23:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! —Kbabej (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Spanish is in fact "white/Caucasian"

The article needs to find some way of correcting some misleading information about the claims of cultural appropriation. Spain is in Europe, and Spanish people are just as "white" as French, Italian, or even many German people. Spanish is a EUROPEAN language, and a EUROPEAN culture. Too many people assume that "Spanish" or "Latin" automatically means something indigenous to North, Central, or South America--- or the Caribbean. This woman h — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:5B02:703C:B8E8:C27F:8BEF:5004 (talk) 04:07, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Bruh it's still cultural appropiation, and just because you're from Spain doesn't mean that you can't be a minority. She claimed that she was mallorquin and mallorquin background, which, btw, they are supposed to be a recognised minority, with a different culture and language than the majority of Spain.

Please search more about Spain and its people. Also, your way of seeing Europe it's a bit wrong and ignorant? " Spanish is a EUROPEAN language, and a EUROPEAN culture" bro chill out, what would you say to the flemish?

And no, not all europeans look the same, germans have a different face characteristics that spaniards re lol.

You need to reinform yourself what "cultural appropiation" means, it's not only for POCs.

Oh, and why is Europe and Spain considered white? Countries like Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan are sometimes considered European (Eurasian) and non-white. Like, fot you, being european means that you're automatically white (except for the ones with african, latino and asian background), bro that ain't cute and southern Europe is more complicated than that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olatort (talk • contribs) 18:43, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Speaking as a European, Spaniards are viewed no differently to people from the other areas of the Mediterranean here. Darker complexions sure, but not "non-white". But in the USA where "Hilaria" is from things are rather different - I've seen numerous American's asserting Spaniards are "People of Colour" in light of them being classified as "Hispanic" over there. There is also the subconscious or active bias of Americans associating Spanish-speakers as being default "non-white".

Some folks there may assert that she was faking being Spanish in order to take advantage of America's strange and nonsensical racial politics. It all depends on who you talk to. POC in the US are likely to see them as white, white people are more likely to see them as non-white. She was certainly viewed as a Woman fo Colour by most Americans until this story broke, but that brings in another dimension of "racial passing"... --Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 20:18, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I think the confusion in USA at least about Spaniards being "people of color" is that there is a misunderstanding among non-Hispanics primarily of the difference between Hispanic (related to Spanish language) and Latino/Latina (related to geography, Latin America). Spaniards are Hispanic, but not Latino. Brazilians are Latino, but not Hispanic, generally, as an example. GoldenGoose100 (talk) 03:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

This^^--Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 19:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

GoldenGoose100 and Trans-Neptunian object - I agree with both of your points. As another example, Latin America includes Haiti but in the United States, being "Latino" generally only refers to Hispanic countries in the Americas, and Brazil can be a "debated" topic as well. But all these "race" labels are arbitrary and socially constructed. On a tangent, look at how confusing America's racial labels are. America considers "Asian" to be a "race" and they're all considered "POC", even though USA's definition excludes people from Asian countries like Lebanon and Israel as being "Asian" and the general "default Asian" in America are East Asians (probably because the term did arise, in part because describing them as being "yellow" is now deemed outdated/problematic). There are many Americans who think that Asians can't have blonde hair, blue eyes, and "Eurocentric features", because they're considered "POC" in USA, when this is far from the case. So all this confusion and ignorance isn't that shocking. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 07:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Using the term "Latino" for Spanish and Portuguese speakers in the New World is a relatively new and entirely pop cultural phenomenon. Is there a link to the term on Wikipedia? It's time for an article disambiguating the terms, if that hasn't been done. The term we now know as "Latino/Latina/Latinx" was once merely "Latin" back in the 50's and 60's and was a covert way of referring to the fact that Spanish-speaking people were viewed as distinctive from other European-descended populations. So Ricky Ricardo and Ricardo Montalban are referred to as "Latin" in pop culture - not academic culture. The use of the term for only Spanish-speakers or descendants of Spanish-speakers is fairly new. Hispanic is a term that technically excludes Brazilians and Portuguese speaking/descended people. So it's complex and not easy to work with inside this article unless the word is well-explained on its own Wiki. And the word "Caucasian" is terribly problematic. Technically, in history and anthropology, it refers to the people of the Caucasus and to their languages but was put to use in the United States only to describe "white people," another problematic category. If y ou look at studies on how these terms are used in actual English speaking populations, you will see that many ENglish-speaking Brits do not regard all Europeans as "white" and in fact choose to try and find ways of speaking of Spaniards and Greeks as distinctive from other European populations. Right now, Romanians are also included in this special category, particularly in England. I think it would be best not to try and define race or terms people use to speak about race in this article and instead merely refer to things Hilaria has said and that have been publicly been said about her - putting the problem words in quotes. She has basically claimed to be Spanish, which is a nationality - and said that she considers herself a "white girl." No need to say much more than that. 2603:8001:A702:13A8:CDB0:7937:4BE5:2F62 (talk) 16:27, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

^^? We don't go around discussing the race of people from Europe all that much. I have never ever ever come across someone describing Romanians as "non-white" here! They have had the same anti-Eastern European sentiment inflicted upon them as those from Poland. Same for the Spanish, same for the Greeks - but then I have *never* witnessed any report on Greeks and Spaniards facing discrimination above "normal" levels here. You see more anti-Irish sentiment here than you do anti-Spanish/Greek/Romanian rhetoric. The idea that Spaniards/Greeks/Romanians are treated like "people of colour" here in the UK is laughable, because it's simply untrue. You're getting racism mixed up with xenophobia. Not everything needs to be viewed through the lens of American-style race relations...! This clearly shows a stark difference between race in Europe Vs. Race in the US. Example: "Anglo-Saxon" is used as a byword for anyone white in the US, more specifically northern Europeans - even Celts are often included in the category. Here in England, aside from the ramblings of a few fringe groups, Anglo-Saxon's are treated as a people of the past, whose language and culture started to erode away after 1066. --Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 20:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Needs editing

That last paragraph in the Response section really needs some editing. I don't know if someone typed it quickly or did some bad copy and paste, but it sure needs some editing. 2600:1700:BC01:9B0:544F:E012:2320:EFE4 (talk) 00:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

To add to New York Times article section: Spain timeline

When asked by the New York Time to specify exactly how much time she had spent in Spain during her childhood, Baldwin refused saying: “I think it would be maddening to do such a tight time line of everything. You know, sometimes there was school involved. Sometimes it was vacation. It was such a mix, mishmash, is that the right word? Like a mix of different things.” However Baldwin has only ever been enrolled in school in Massachusetts. C240 (talk) 12:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

did she actually spend ANY time there?

she grew up in boston, moved to NY for college, and then, several years after she finished college and was well up to speed running a business, her parents RETIRED to spain, perhaps taking some siblings. she herself DID NOT ACCOMPANY THEM.

i guess maybe there was some coming and going in prior years as tourists, but someone needs to confirm this. i haven't heard mention the parents were actually LIVING there, as visiting scholars or w/e. let alone whether she herself was with them.

as it stands right now, it is not even certain the gal ever even VISITED the place! i imagine she did, but the burden is on the article to detail this. right now the tone is "all her time in spain doesn't add up to citizenship and an accent", whereas i question the "all her time there" aspect as well.

-----

also, how about "Dr. --" on the mother's name?! "a physician" afterwards is insufficient!

66.30.47.138 (talk) 18:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Redirect

Google search for Hilaria Baldwin Wikipedia page is now redirecting to Alec Baldwin Wikipedia page? Can this be corrected? Guest218 (talk) 19:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hilaria Baldwin's claims that the press did not do due diligence on her origins

In November 2012, Vanity Fair Spain published an article that explicitly stated that they asked both Hilaria and her agents for clarification about her origins and childhood and they all refused to respond:

https://www.revistavanityfair.es/sociedad/celebrities/galerias/hilaria-thomas-la-espanola-que-sedujo-al-seductor/8853/image/593111

De pequeña

Nueva York es la Meca para las personas que quieren reinventarse a sí mismas. Imbuída de ese espíritu, Thomas se niega a dar o confersar ningún dato biográfico. Solo alguna anécdota elegida con cuidado. Tampoco lo hacen sus agentes, los mismos que Baldwin, que se excusan alegando que lo hacen para salvaguardar la intimidad de su familia. En su lugar, Hilaria se entusiasma narrando su recorrido profesional.

Translation:

Her childhood

New York is the Mecca for people who want to reinvent themselves. Imbued with this spirit, Thomas refuses to give or confess any biographical information [about her childhood]. Only a carefully selected anecdote here and there. Her agents, the same as Baldwin, don't either, declining to, alleging that they are safeguarding the family's privacy. Instead, Hilaria gets excited talking about her professional trajectory.

2A0C:5A80:1F06:AF00:EC23:4A8F:9C9C:1B4F (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)último mono

References

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hilaria Baldwin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Haleth (talk · contribs) 15:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm starting a review for this article as part of the GAN Backlog Drive. Will be back with comments. Haleth (talk) 15:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Lede

• There is barely any mention of the fact that her marriage to Alec Baldwin has enhanced or increased her career opportunities and public prominence, which is reflected in the prose. Certainly, the impression I get from the prose is that the media took an interest in her exercise DVD and wellness-focused book because of her association with her husband.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Early life

• Baldwin claims that she was raised in a Spanish-speaking household and traveled to Spain annually. This should come after the sentence about her brother in the first paragraph instead of being in the second paragraph which discuss her ancestry and grandparents, since that paragraph deals with her immediate family.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:21, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Career

• Baldwin started yoga around age 20 Add practicing before yoga.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• It has been several years after the lawsuit was commenced in the Manhattan Supreme Court. Are there any sources which detail the outcome of the lawsuit? Any legal-centric sources which discuss the judgment, if any, which determined the outcome?

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• She periodically worked with Extra in that role through 2019 Is there a source which could support this statement as an inline citation?

I've searched for a source to state she ended in 2019 but cannot find one. I can source her appearances through 2019, but nothing stating it ended then (if that makes sense). --Kbabej (talk) 15:26, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• It is preferable if you could paraphrase the review snippet by US Weekly instead of going for a direct quote.

 Done Shortened. --Kbabej (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• Same with Vanity Fair and AM New York Metro. They are uncontroversial elements or commentary about The Living Clearly Method. Try to reduce the reliance on direct quotes if you could write a summary instead.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• The bit about her website should be placed after the introductory sentence which talks about her book aand its release date.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• The bit about her claiming to be vegetarian since age five should have been part of either the "early life" or "personal life" section of the article. On the other hand, you could say that she is invited to speak on the United Nations panel as a "wellness expert".

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Personal life

• The direct quote from Hilaria about her appearance at 20 is overly detailed. GA Criteria #3 indicates that it should stay focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (summary style). It should simply be summarized, with a brief explanation on how the feeling of being miserable and desperate to feel better motivated her future career as a health practitioner.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Accusations of cultural appropriation

• I think the tone of the headline could use an adjustment to sound more neutral. Either "Allegations of cultural appropriation" or a generic "Controversy" would do. If you could find more sources about the lawsuit, "Controversies" is definitely the way to go and I'd move information about it down to this section from "Career".

 Done Headline updated. I'll look for some more sources regarding the lawsuit as well. --Kbabej (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• she was heard to speak American accented English Should be she was heard speaking American accented English.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• Her agency's website listed her birthplace as Mallorca rather than Boston The cited inline source clearly attributed another source for discovering her birthplace info as marked on her agency's website. Proper attribution is in order.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• The entire section about her April 2020 podcast seems unnecessary and duplicates the points made in the early life section of this article and a further paragraph in the same section. Remove it entirely. The information about her moving to New York to go to NYU at the age of 19 can be used for the third paragraph of "Early Life" with the appropriate inline citation.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• She stated she was born in Boston Unnecessary duplication of a fact already explained in Early Life.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• After her marriage in 2012, Baldwin also stated in a Vanity Fair article her reluctance to answer certain questions to "safeguard her family's privacy".[88] Doesn't belong under this section. The source can be used, but perhaps repurposed for a sentence under Personal Life. Just say something about Hilaria considering herself a private person and that she has indicated a reluctance to answer certain questions to "safeguard her family's privacy".

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• @Kbabej: I have left my comments. Looking forward to your response.

• @Haleth: I've updated the changes I've made and replied to your comments when I couldn't make the suggested changes. Thank you for your work on this! --15:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• Just to follow up on your revisions:

Could you leave an in-line citation which, at the minimum, verify that she made at least one appearance in 2019 for Extra?

 Done I was accidentally conflating her appearances on Extra as being a correspondent for Extra. She was only a correspondent for two years, and I added a source for that. --Kbabej (talk) 03:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't approve of the Grunt Stuff article which you used to cite the lawsuit, because it is quite clear to me that the author, Tina Sinders, have more or less lifted an article from Page Six, a New York Post subsidiary, which came out more then a month prior with only minor adjustments to its prose. I suggest Dlisted which more or less covered similar points, since New York Post has been specifically marked as generally unreliable to be cited directly. Please remove and replace the source.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 02:53, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Speaking of Page Six, I just noticed that it is used to cite her schooling years. Could you replace Page Six with this source instead, which supports the same point.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 02:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I found a news bit about Hilaria Baldwin which came out about 3 weeks ago, where she has provided further commentary in the aftermath of the cultural appropriation controversy. I think it is useful as an update to the controversy section.

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 03:00, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

This recent source from Boston Herald is about Alec Baldwin's response to the controversy surrounding his wife. It also contains an update about her podcast following the controversy. You may find it relevant. Haleth (talk) 00:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Kbabej (talk) 03:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Haleth: All good points; they've all been incorporated. --Kbabej (talk) 03:25, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kbabej:, just one last quibble. Adam Baldwin's comments about cancel culture was in May. Hilaria's most recent take on the controversy, as reported by HuffPost and other outlets, came out nearly two months later. You wrote it as if his comments came afterwards. Also, I suggest combining paragraph 3 and 5 into a single paragraph as both are essentially a summary of the direct response from Hilaria and her husband towards the controversy. Haleth (talk)

 Done @Haleth: Thank you for all your work on this! I appreciate it. --Kbabej (talk) 17:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've addressed a few minor elements like formatting and a point of grammar. I am satisfied with the cumulative changes thus far, and I happily pass this article. Haleth (talk) 17:33, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

• Yep, she is a private person, that's correct. She's fully entitled to her privacy. She just didn't correct the media's assumption(s) about her. CaribDigita (talk) 06:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Trimmed WP:Peacock and non-encyclopedic content

I made edits in this diff to reduce peacock and non-encyclopedic content.

There is a paragraph about the covers that she's appeared on. It seems to be that it would be good to focus on the most noteworthy / national sources. (I generally wouldn't add a paragraph like this.) Thoughts on scaling back to the most notable covers? Perhaps without the dates?–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:41, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and took at stab at it here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: These look like good cuts, but would you mind going over your first two edits to remove any dangling references? For example, you removed the sentence "She additionally suffered two miscarriages." but didn't remove the citation that followed it, so now there's a footnote to the People article about her miscarriages that looks like it's attached to the previous sentence (about Ireland Baldwin) even though it's unrelated. Also, I probably would have kept one or both of her TV appearances for the podcast, since Today is a fairly prominent show, so the fact that she appeared there to promote the podcast shows that it had some degree of relevance. But other than that, I agree with all the removals. Colin M (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Colin M, Makes sense.  Done, including adding a source for Ireland Baldwin.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:05, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Improving lead section

The lead section includes this line:

She married into the Baldwin family upon her wedding to actor Alec Baldwin in June 2012, after which her career opportunities increased and media attention was focused on her. In December 2020, she faced allegations that she faked her Spanish accent and misled people about her nationality.

The first sentence seems written in a non-neutral way, and also I am not seeing sources or further development of it further below in the body of the article. I will delete it.

The second sentence, about her accent allegations, I will not delete at this time. There are sources and it is further expanded below. Something to consider by me later, or by others at any time, is whether this section on the accent "controversy" is suitable for Wikipedia, and if so, whether it has due weight, or excessive weight in the article. I make this note here for others to help consider the issue. Thank you. Al83tito (talk) 18:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

The section is more than "accent allegations", and is properly referenced with RS. Additionally, it passed a GA review with all that information included. --Kbabej (talk) 20:07, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2021

Change: Baldwin claims that she was raised in a Spanish-speaking household and traveled to Spain annually.

To: Baldwin claims that she was raised in a Spanish-speaking household and vacationed in Spain.

Reason: The source article does not state that she visited annually, and she has never stated that she visited annually. 2400:2410:8CE0:D700:9D21:675D:BAA2:1053 (talk) 07:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Per the cited story "Ms. Baldwin first visited Spain with her parents when she was a baby, she said, and she went at least yearly thereafter. " Cannolis (talk) 07:29, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2022

Add “She claimed she was Spanish when she spoke at the UN, representing herself as “half Spanish, half American” and then later as being “from Spain”. Source-https://youtube.com/m3JvlV9RQdU Brandywine1989 (talk) 16:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

This needs to be added to the part about speaking at the UN for accuracy. Brandywine1989 (talk) 16:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Youtube videos are not reliable secondary sourcs, and that link is a 404 anyway. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

franco canadenses sao latinos e ela tem aspecto mediterraneo pouco germanico..french canadians are latins and she have a mediterranean southern aspect less germanic/anglo saxon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.211.74.156 (talk) 07:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

e a familia dela foi criada imersa na cultura espanhola entao sendo bilingue ela podia ter sotaque sim vcs querem colocar ela no patamar de uma mulher que se finge de outra raça sendo que espanhois sao tao euros quanto a ancestralidade dela — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.211.74.156 (talk) 07:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2022

Change Hilaria to Hillary 2601:540:8203:BA60:3:F95A:CFE0:7891 (talk) 03:39, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 08:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2022

I noticed that the following sentence is not supported by the source in question: "She stated that she spent "some" of her childhood in Spain and "some" in Massachusetts, but had never been enrolled in school in Spain, only spending time there during family holidays.[4]"

The source links to a Vanity Fair article which doesn't mention what Baldwin herself has stated about where she went to school. The sentence should be altered to reflect her statements in the New York Times article, where she does say that she went to school in Spain: "Ms. Baldwin first visited Spain with her parents when she was a baby, she said, and she went at least yearly thereafter. She declined to explain in detail how frequently they traveled there or how long they stayed. “I think it would be maddening to do such a tight time line of everything. You know, sometimes there was school involved. Sometimes it was vacation. It was such a mix, mishmash, is that the right word? Like a mix of different things.” That quote is from this NYT article.

The sentence can be changed like this: "She stated that she spent "some" of her childhood in Spain and "some" in Massachusetts, both attending school and vacationing in both places.[12]"

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamboolucy (talk • contribs) 02:01, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Hello @Bamboolucy! The Vanity Fair article that is used as the attribution for that sentence is correct (link here). The article states: "On Sunday, Hilaria addressed the speculation over her ancestry on Instagram, posting a video in which she explains, "I spent some of my childhood in Boston, some of my childhood in Spain, my family, my brother, my parents, my nephew, everybody is over there in Spain now, I'm here." (bolding mine). Hope that helps! Cheers. --Kbabej (talk) 15:45, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Kbabej thank you for checking! I'm still a bit confused though, because although the direct quote may be correctly attributed to the VF article, the rest of the sentence is not: "but had never been enrolled in school in Spain, only spending time there during family holidays." Considering that the Vanity Fair article makes no mention of either vacations or school, and a direct quote exists from a reputable source (NYT) that refutes this part, could we consider changing it like this?

Change: She stated that she spent "some" of her childhood in Spain and "some" in Massachusetts, but had never been enrolled in school in Spain, only spending time there during family holidays.[4]

to this: She stated that she spent "some" of her childhood in Spain and "some" in Massachusetts. [4]

In this way the direct quote is still correctly attributed, but it doesn't have the extra part, which isn't found in the article in question. Bamboolucy (talk) 17:07, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Bamboolucy! Thanks for pointing that out. I've found a source for the second half of the sentence in a Grazia article (link here). It's very close paraphrasing from the source, however, so I'll likely restructure the sentence soon. --Kbabej (talk) 17:51, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

A big improvement! Thank you. It seems the most accurate in this case may be to cite the actual Instagram video the source talks about, but I don't know what that is and have never seen it. Bamboolucy (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

While self-generated content would be good to support such an unexceptional claim, usually secondary sources like the Grazia article are better since these are (usually) more unbiased. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources.

Also, if you have no more comments, you can change the edit request template above back to answered. Aaron Liu (talk) 04:23, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Hilaria Baldwin

The following discussion 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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: There does not appear to be a consensus at this time for the article to be delisted. The concerns raised about the article should be discussed on the article talk page. Gusfriend (talk) 10:26, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

This is not a good article. If it was only not-so-good while still meeting the Good Article criteria fine, but it's a terrible article. I get that "Good Article" has its own rubric, but I don't think a "Good Article" should be an actually awful article. This would be confusing to readers.

It's a bad article because a quarter of it -- the "Allegations of cultural appropriation" section -- is an egregious tabloid hatchet job. My recommendation is that the section titled "Allegations of cultural appropriation" be removed, and the material in it be cut down to a couple-few anodyne sentences and stuck at the end of the "Personal life" section, or something to that general effect.

This section probably doesn't violate either WP:BLP, exactly, or WP:NOTGOSSIP, exactly, but it sure does skirt close to it. Beyond that, it just sucks. It sucks to punch down at this private person, and it double sucks that other media have picked up on this article and spread the egregious and very detailed defamation we're engaged in here. If "a good part of the article double sucks" and "It is a Good Article, which we want to display to the world as some of our best work" can coexist according to our rubric, then something's really wrong with our rubric, and until and if that is fixed, we are not a bureaucracy here and let's fix this particular problem right now. I have more to say, at length, I'll hat it, but it's probably worth scanning if you want to engage.

More

Altho it's arguable whether the section in question truly violates WP:BLP, at the very least it's skirting the edge, and also the edge of the policy WP:NOTGOSSIP ("Wikipedia is not a newspaper... not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Ensure that Wikipedia articles are not:... Celebrity gossip...", altho the rest of that section does let you get away with it. The woman is not close to being a public figure, she's a rich man's wife who has done this and that and been on this or that show because she is, and wants to enjoy that. And BLP says "Many Wikipedia articles contain material on people who are not well known, even if they are notable enough for their own article. In such cases, exercise restrain... Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care; in many jurisdictions, repeating a defamatory claim is actionable, and there are additional protections for subjects who are not public figures."

Sure, truth is generally a defense against libel, but I mean "We shred this person in excruciating detail, but not in a way which crosses the line of being actually criminal" isn't what you'd want to see in any article, let alone one we want to crow about.

Who gives a... gosh-freaking-darn... if people want to have some fun with their persona. Jeepers creepers, half the people you meet are like "Oh I have some Cherokee blood" or "My people came over on the Mayflower" or "Actually I'm descended from Eric the Red" or whatever. Who knows if its true. Probably not. People put on airs, people say that they played an a band with Trent Reznor years ago, people hide that their parents were poor, etc etc etc. We all have different faces. So? Who is this woman harming, with her chosen face. Spain is a first-world country for crying out loud. They can watch out for their heritage without our help I am quite confident.

But wait. It gets worse. There's a "This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations" tag here, and the media says horrible things about this person which I don't even want to repeat here, and apparentlythey are getting this from us in part at least. We are actively popularizing and spreading this... shinola.... I mean, for marginally notable persons, we are the biggest part of their public face. We are the second google hit on this person, after her instagram. We describe her to the world much more loudly and widely than any other source. And for centuries, maybe.

We are a huge, huge organization read by millions of people and which helps shape the zeitgeist. She is just a little person, a marginally notable person, who has her own inner life and her own reasons for doing things. Writing stuff like this at detailed length is punching down, punching way down, and it's not a good look. Let other people be egregious... scamps... and revel in shaming people. Let the National Enquirer do it. We don't have to. We really don't. We are free people on this earth, and we don't.

You know, there's a lot of facts and other material that we don't publish. A lot. See WP:NOT. We don't have to publish this.

I have been here a long time and I know the counterarguments. You can make them again and will. I know that I didn't hardly cite any WP:RULES. I know about beep beep boop boop, so I don't expect to win this one. But I'd be ashamed if I didn't try.

Anyway, I'm sending this article back for reconsideration until the nothingburger "cultural appropriation scandal" (yes, this Good Article says that, and in our words) is removed as a section and cut down to a couple-few anodyne sentences at the end of the personal-life section, or something to that general effect.

Herostratus (talk) 06:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

So the reason you want this article reassessed is because "People put on airs... She is just a little person... who has her own inner life and her own reasons for doing things"? The article passed GA review after an extensive review with updates to the prose, sourcing, and formatting. This reassessment is basically an IDONTLIKEIT argument, as it's not based in policy whatsoever. WP is not a reputation management company; it's just the facts. --Kbabej (talk) 15:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

If we're not a reputation management company, why are we going so far out of our way to manage this person's reputation? Herostratus (talk) 07:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

We aren't. Your suggestions would be. This article was written to cover the subject's life in full, not keep information out that could potentially embarrass her. It's weighted well, and passed GA review with that information included. --Kbabej (talk) 19:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Are so. If we put in information out that could potentially embarrass her, on purpose and at this length and level of detail, we are managing her reputation, just in the the other direction. It's out of proportion and its POV. If she'd been convicted of a serious crime that'd probably be different. But she hasn't. Heck I'm not sure that even Grey Owl gets raked over the coals like this. Herostratus (talk) 04:53, 30 September 2022 (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.

.

Very last paragraph of cultural appropriation section

It does not seem like a relevant paragraph to me. Plenty of topics, people and things in general have subreddit pages dedicated to them, which is rarely relevant to Wikipedia. Reddit itself is not a good source, nor are the people there necessarily knowledgeable. The posts on this specific subreddits are akin to those made my tabloids or readers thereof. The fact that Baldwin has not responded to the conspiracies made on there does not seem relevant either, as most celebrities do not respond to their online hate movements, why should they? The only reason this specific reddit community might seem wikipedia-level relevant is because it is particularly big, but that in itself really isn't that noteworthy. JerichoPD (talk) 19:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I hadn't heard of Hilaria Baldwin until today and this section seems a bit off and not very enclyclopedic. There's also too much detail. If some people want to place their own interpretation about someone's identity, that's not necessarily a justification to have a whole section called "Allegations of cultural appropriation". What does that even mean or imply? Her own explanations seem to stand for themselves. However, clearly this topic has some notability due to widespread coverage. I'll see if I can rewrite this section and certainly reduce it. Seaweed (talk) 19:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I've rewritten the whole section with new references to condense the whole thing. Seems like a mostly tabloid/unusual story if you ask me. Not sure when/why her place of birth became Mallorca in some media. I haven't seen anything reliable about her "hoaxing" or "faking" her identity. I've done a lot of research and editing into pretendians and I can't see anything as strong as that that here. Anyway, I've learnt about Hilaria Baldwin today. Seaweed (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Seaweed, I respectfully disagree with your removal of the majority of this section and with the removal of the section heading. I have reinstated most of it, although I have made it a subsection under "personal life" and have changed the section heading. I also removed the sentence about conspiracy theories and made a few tweaks. The material you removed was fairly well sourced, so I don't see it as "tabloid" material. I also don't see this material as POV or undue, given that about one-third of the sources cited in the article are in some way connected to questions about her culture, heritage, and accent. To put it simply: The culture/heritage/accent controversy is one of the things Baldwin is best known for. Bottom line: If you want to cut any of this material, we at least need a more in-depth discussion here and some consensus. Thanks. MonMothma (talk) 18:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

This size of this subsection in this version as well as the inclusion of a separate header seems to violate WP:WEIGHT, especially with regards to a WP:BLP article; I'm in favor of retaining Seaweed's version of the identity controversey, or at least closer to the size of Seaweed's version. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

OhNoitsJamie, if we were talking about a news story that attracted attention from three or four sources and petered out after a week or so, I'd agree with you. However, this situation is far from that. Again, one-third of the sources in the entire article have something to do with this controversy. I don't see how it can possibly be undue to include three paragraphs on it in an article this size. So I respectfully disagree. MonMothma (talk) 18:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Seaweed, one other thing. The Mercury News source cited in the article mentions that Baldwin was at a United Nations event and got identified publicly as being half Spanish. She went right along with it. That takes us into hoax territory, IMHO. MonMothma (talk) 21:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I genuinely had never heard of Hilaria Baldwin until I read this article last month, so I was reading it very objectively. It just struck me as there was undue weight to her birthplace/identity issue relative to this rest of biography. I actually came accross her because I've been editing articles on various Canadian "identity frauds", so had that perspective. It just seemed to me that due to the notable fame of her husband, it seemed to have generated a lot of media interest, but was just saying the same thing over and over again. Her case doesn't come accross as a "hoax" to me. I don't know really. I was just inclined to simplify the topic and let readers decide for themselves. Seaweed (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

David Lloyd Thomas Jr.

• David Lloyd Thomas Jr. was born in 1949 to David Lloyd Thomas Sr. and Mary Lou Artman.
• He went to Scarsdale Senior High School in Scarsdale, New York, USA.
• He studied Spanish language and literature at Haverford College in Haverford, Pennsylvania, USA.
• From 1971 to 1974, he attended Georgetown University and earned his Juris Doctor.
• He lived in Boston, Massachusetts for 37 years
• He lived in Charlestown, Concord and Marshfield, Massachusetts
• He is a former law clerk for Hon. Max Rosenn in the Third Circuit at the U.S. Court of Appeals.
• In Massachusetts, he practiced corporate real estate law for Ropes & Gray and Peabody & Brown, now known as Nixon Peabody LLP. As a lawyer, he retired in 1993.
• In 1994, he started working at CityState LLC and became chief executive officer.
• He earned a certificate in plant-based nutrition from the T. Colin Campbell Center for Nutritional Studies in Ithaca, New York.
• From 1996 until 2008, he was a member of the Haverford College’s board of managers.
• In 2007, he and Kathryn co-founded International Integrators in Boston.
• In 2011, he and Kathryn retired and relocated from Massachusetts to Mallorca, Spain.
• From 2014 to 2015, he facilitated a food and nutrition program for fourth year medical students, Humanistic Elective in Activism and Reflective Transformation and Integrative Medicine (HEART).

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 23:36, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Pause

If the article it documents that she has latin/hispanic roots in her lineage (per grandparents) . How can in the same breath it be alleged that she's cultural appropriating? That would be embracing of roots. This article should be careful about getting caught up in media hype which sometimes coins quick catch phrases solely for the sake of only selling more newspapers. CaribDigita (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you about the hype. As far as I can tell, she doesn't have any ethnic roots to Spain. Her connections to the Spanish language seem to come from her grandfather and to Spain more generally much more recently in her own lifetime with her close family moving to Mallorca, including herself at times. I think. After reading about her, she and her family are the sort-of international people who don't necessary fit into a neat box.Seaweed (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)