Jump to content

Talk:Chloë Duckworth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Chloe Duckworth)

}}

Note from article creator

[edit]

Adding a statement here as creator of the page that I work in the same department as the subject and have been made aware this counts as a conflict of interest. I should have suggested this as an article for creation rather than posting it myself, apologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drlmshillito (talkcontribs) 00:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MCIfA

[edit]

See Template_talk:Post-nominals#Edit_request_19_February_2023:_MCIfA where I've requested that this be added to the post-nominals template. PamD 23:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Category: LGBT Academics?

[edit]

I see that User:‎Smasongarrison has added the page to Category:LGBT academics. I can't see anything in the article to say that Duckworth identifies as such, and her thesis thanks her husband, David, in the acknowledgements. Of course, that's no proof that she doesn't identify as LGBT, but is there any encyclopedia-standard reason to say that she does? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add her to the category. I added her to the lgbt project based on the fact that she was already listed in the category. Mason (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, understood - my mistake. I wonder whether User:Drlmshillito has a view here? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 13:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Further to this: I've just had a look around; in her Twitter bio, she used to have a comment which would be relevant here, but she has since deleted that account (in 2021, I think) and I'm uncomfortable, given that she's taken down what seems to be the only public record of that, effectively 'outing' her through Wikipedia. There's also a real BLP risk to having an unsourced claim about a living person, particularly one which the subject may not wish to have online. I've gone ahead and removed the LGBT references: if nothing else, they're now unsourced. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that this would be outing her at best and being inaccurate at worst.. Mason (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison I removed the unsourced statement that she was bisexual (the tef only showed that she supported diversity,), but forgot to check for corresponding categories. The statement, and its dodgy sourcing, had been in the article since early days. PamD 17:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]