Talk:Laurel Hubbard/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Suggestion that discussion of controversy be moved into a separate section or article

I notice that the wiki article now contains separate links to nine named individuals who have made public statements that criticise Hubbard. Assuming that this list of names will continue growing, it might be useful to create a separate section or article for the criticism. I will leave this task to somebody who has more experience. Eggdone (talk) 07:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia prefers to avoid "Controversy" sections and put material chronologically instead. See WP:CSECTION.-gadfium 09:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining this. It is appreciated. Eggdone (talk) 05:07, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2021

hey lol what about removing her deadname thanks bye 80.100.229.110 (talk) 08:05, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done -- Jonel (Speak to me) 08:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

There's an argument that she was notable under her former name. This argument appears to be marginal, because the records she won were junior ones.-gadfium 09:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

National junior records in a new category, so, yes, quite a marginal argument. Doesn't meet anything in WP:NSPORT. Without some significant showing of pre-transition notability, the deadname should be excluded per MOS:DEADNAME. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 20:16, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Sourcing and pronouns

(In reply to a query posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies): Two things jump out:

• A complete lack of sources for anything except the competition stats, despite many readily available—e.g., this one. Some folks are prone to hissy fits when LGBT status in BLP articles isn't sourced to the nth degree, so that should be fixed in a hurry.
• A bunch of unnecessary "he" pronouns—it could be reworded to avoid that.

I'm also not so sure about the description—"is a transgender weightlifter"; if she's a notable athlete in the first place, the modifier is probably extraneous there. Her trans woman status is noteworthy, per the news article I linked above, and maybe could be mentioned in a new next sentence. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 13:41, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I corrected the pronouns (per MOS:GENDERID) and added a reference in the Washington Post. I will look for more... Funcrunch (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I would also question the usage if a former name in the article. It is highly inappropriate in this context. ALBonnell (talk) 08:33, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Why would that be appropriate? HandsomeFella (talk) 14:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

It is insane to consider that mention of Hubbard’s former name “would be inappropriate”. She won competitions as a man! Hubbard is a hugely controversial weightlifter and with the Olympics coming up in a few months’ time, she is becoming more controversial by the day. As such, all relevant facts that aren’t trivial are of note. Whatever is your side of the argument, that is the case. Wikipedia is not here to lambast anyone, neither is it here to mollycoddle anyone.Boscaswell talk 07:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Boscaswell: The relevant guideline is MOS:GENDERID as mentioned above. Being "hugely controversial" or "becoming more controversial by the say" is not relevant. Nor is it true that "all relevant facts that aren't trivial are of note". Wikipedia not being here to "mollycoddle anyone" is also irrelevant. It's not like we're suggesting excluding all mention that she is transgender or the controversy around her participation. Nor are we discussing excluding her achievements and records prior to transitioning. This is just about whether to include her dead name. This seems potentially to be a borderline case to me. Wikipedia:Notability (sports) doesn't have anything for weighlifting in particular. But generally winning competitions is not enough to automatically make a sports person notable. It's only if they win significant enough competitions. Being the NZ junior record holder is also unlikely to be enough. Even for athletics which tends to receive more attention than weightlifting, the requirement is for a world junior record. Maybe being the Executive Officer for Olympic Weightlifting New Zealand is enough but I'm not sure. Administrative positions in organisations like that often aren't particularly significant. Possibly the most likely criteria is basic WP:GNG i.e. finding enough source on Hubbard prior to her transition to establish she was notable under her former name. If this cannot be done then her dead name should be removed per the guideline. Since it's borderline I'm not going to remove it myself. I'm also not adding it back if someone else removes until and unless someone establishes she is notable under her former name. Nil Einne (talk) 07:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Umm, if controversy is the only means of acquiring notability, then it is relevant.174.0.48.147 (talk) 21:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Controversy isn't the only means of demonstrating notability. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 02:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Indeed controversy often does not mean notability per WP:ONEEVENT. But also this is a flawed argument anyway. The controversy arose because of her participation in weightlifting as a sportswoman after her transition. Therefore it cannot be used as an argument for her being notable under her DEADNAME. Note other than meeting GNG and we generally don't really care why someone meets GNG provided ONEEVENT and similar issues are properly considered Hubbard likely meets NSPORTS because of her world championship medal and probably also because of her Pacific Games win and her participation in the Olympics would also be enough, and these are independent of any controversy other than as it may have affected her wins and selection. (In other words if there was no controversy she would still meet NSPORTS provided she still won and was selected.) Nil Einne (talk) 07:18, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

cross-sex hormones is not the way to say hormone replacement therapy in fact its rather insulting fix it

Done -- Jonel (Speak to me) 12:59, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Page says Hubbard is the first openly trans athlete to compete in the Olympics, but Quinn (soccer) is also competing in these Games and is openly trans? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c8:8998:ee01:f86c:86:2ecf:d5c8 (talk • contribs)

I've added a qualifier (please adjust, or let me know to adjust, if necessary). -- Jonel (Speak to me) 13:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Citing Reuters and BBC does not make it a scientific claim.

Hello!

She's getting a lot of hate online, so I was wondering what you wonderful people had compiled about her. This bit stood out for me:

"The decision attracted controversy. The applicable International Olympic Committee guidelines have been criticized by many scientists, due to recently published papers showing that people who went through male puberty retain significant advantages even after a year of testosterone suppression.[4][27]"

Reuters mentions "scientists" but gives no source nor name. BBC does neither. So why include that? It's baseless. What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

However, quick googling gives some studies to support that claim, so perhaps those should be used instead?

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/782557v1 systematic review https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865 individual study

Zeymad (talk) 06:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

According to our WP:Reliable sources guideline, Reuters and The Guardian are highly reliable sources for reporting that something is controversial and why. The following text from the sources is what supports it:

"However, the IOC’s decision has recently come under fire after scientific papers were published which said that people who have undergone male puberty retain significant advantages, including in power and strength, even after taking medication to suppress their testosterone levels. Last year, the scientists Emma Hilton and Tommy Lundberg found that the male performance advantage in weightlifting was 30% when compared to women. Their research indicated that even when transgender women suppressed testosterone for 12 months, the loss of lean body mass, muscle area and strength was only around 5%." [1]

"Many scientists have criticised these guidelines, saying they do little to mitigate the biological advantages of those who have gone through puberty as males, including bone and muscle density." [2]

The Hilton and Lundberg paper specified by The Guardian is a review article and located here. This paper that you linked, by Harper et al., is another review article. I suspect that this one too may have played a role in why those media sources said what they did. If other editors want to add these as sources as well, I won't fight it, but as scientific papers they don't specify anything about Hubbard; that connection is made by the media sources, so it seems best to use those. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

First

Seeing all the edits about what, exactly, Hubbard was the "first" to do, I've been meaning to suggest: this seems like the kind of thing an {{efn}} would be good for. Say whatever is concisely accurate in the prose, and let an {{efn}} explain that some sources say "first trans athlete" but there were earlier ones (citing the refes used in recent edits). This would inform readers and hopefully forestall well-intentioned edits from ones who see reporting that says "first trans athlete" and might try to 'correct' what they think is inadvertently overly-narrow language on our part. (Besides Quinn, Alana Smith (skateboarder) is also at the Olympics.) -sche (talk) 02:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I've tried to clarify it a little - and used an efn but for a slightly different purpose... Tvcameraop (talk) 12:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request

This one is pretty straightforward.

In the "Olympic Qualification" section it states that she qualified to "compete in the women's 87-kilogram category", however she competed in the +87-kilogram category, which is one weight category up.

It's linked to the correct page in Wikipedia for the +87, so all you need to do is change the "87" to "+87" in the text and everything will be consistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.190.23 (talk • contribs)

Done --Pokelova (talk) 17:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2021

Change Laurel Hubbard (born 9 February 1978) is a New Zealand weightlifter.

to

Laurel Hubbard (born 9 February 1978) born [redacted] is a New Zealand weightlifter. Natesroomrule (talk) 19:00, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Not done. Consensus is that she was not notable under her deadname. I've redacted the deadname from your request.-gadfium 19:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Was Eminem ever famous under the name of Marshall Bruce Mathers III? Why are both names (plus all the other names he's performed under over the years) included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.190.23 (talk • contribs)

He literally named two albums after himself. --Pokelova (talk) 17:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

What about Cary Grant (Archibald Alec Leach)? I just want to understand when it's appropriate to include the subject's birth name and when it's not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.190.23 (talk • contribs)

It's not appropriate when it's not a non-notable deadname, that's it. --Pokelova (talk) 18:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Dodgy citations

Under the career tab, it says that in 1998 Hubbard had a snatch of 135 kg and a clean and snatch of 170 kg. This would mean a total of 305 kg, alas it says a total of 300 kg. The citation accompanying it (citation 7) makes this mistake and is presumably why it’s present in the Wikipedia article. Also, this may be unimportant but the citation doesn’t even seem to be an authority on the claim it makes. It appears to be from a New Zealand School board and not a Governing body.

In addition, citation 8 doesn’t show up on my phone, but that may just be a problem on my end.

Sorry if this was formatted wrong, if I bring up unnecessary points, or is otherwise irritating. I created an account just to report this error; this is my first time using Wikipedia for something other than just to read up on something. Philtaylorfan (talk) 20:43, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for raising this issue, Philtaylorfan. Citation 8 works for me on desktop, by the way. I agree that something is not adding up here, but any of the three figures could be the wrong one, so I think we need an expert or an original source for the competition (maybe a bit difficult if it's 1998, likely pre-internet reporting of results). All I can find are recent pieces in Sky News and BBC News Pidgin that report some/all of the same figures, the latter including this strange 135+170=300 error. Probably cases of citogenesis. Does anyone know where we can find a source for the 1998 competition results? — Bilorv (talk) 22:37, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

In weightlifting, the records for the two different lifts and for the total might be set at up to three different competitions. The source does not provide the date(s) of the records set by Hubbard. I read the source as saying that at some point, Hubbard lifted 135kg in snatch; at some other competition, Hubbard lifted 170kg in clean & jerk; at some competition, either one of those (most likely) or a third, Hubbard completed two lifts adding to 300kg. In other words, there is not necessarily any internal error in the source. For a better view of this phenomenon, see the world records at List of world records in Olympic weightlifting -- it is fairly common for the two lifts' world records not to add up to the total world record. The three records are independent. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 04:41, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I read our paragraph as saying that Hubbard set the record in one competition, not several. Perhaps this could be rephrased for clarity. — Bilorv (talk) 09:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Photo Availability

I was curious if there was a photo available for usage on Laurel's infobox? Is there any content which can be feasibly used or is it all technically in violation of copyright? Gongfong2021 (talk) 03:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Gongfong2021: to be used freely, images have to be compatibly licensed with Wikipedia's CC BY-SA 3.0 licensing. We can use images under fair use but choose to heavily restrict this to satisfy our purpose of being reusable by others (with attribution) so we have rigid non-free content criteria, the first of which ("No free equivalent") is failed in the case of most living people. Indeed, often the solution is making a free equivalent, either by somebody meeting Hubbard and taking a photo which they freely license, or by contacting Hubbard or her agent and getting a photographer to go through our release generator. — Bilorv (talk) 09:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

What was her birth name?

What did Laurel Hubbard's parents name him? It seems like a glaring omission in this article. Vividuppers (talk) 15:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Found it myself. His name was [deleted], see here [deleted] This info should be added to the lede. Vividuppers (talk) 15:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Reverted per MOS:DEADNAME, If a living transgender or non-binary person was not notable under a former name (a deadname), it should not be included in any page (including lists, redirects, disambiguation pages, category names, templates, etc), even in quotations, even if reliable sourcing exists. Please also note in this same section, Refer to any person whose gender might be questioned with gendered words (e.g. pronouns [...]) that reflect the person's latest expressed gender self-identification as reported in the most recent reliable sources [...]. This holds for any phase of the person's life, unless they have indicated a preference otherwise. Beccaynr (talk) 15:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I have some concerns about your conduct that I mentioned at your user talk page. As far as content goes, no, I don't think we should include Hubbard's birth name. I don't believe she was notable under that name, which is the test in MOS:DEADNAME. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 16:02, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Reluctance to research and publish "deadnames" is an utterly deplorable policy.96.250.80.27 (talk) 21:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Alana Smith

This article contains a footnote stating that Alana Smith is transgender, but the Alana Smith article does not say that Smith is transgender. Can this be fixed? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 01:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

That's a different Alana Smith. --Pokelova (talk) 01:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

A bigger problem with the footnote is that it treats AFAB competitors in a women-only event as setting a precedent for the AMAB Hubbard.96.250.80.27 (talk) 21:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it does that. It merely notes that some sources describe Hubbard as the first "trans athlete" or similar (regardless of whether the sources were intentionally excluding AFAB NB in women's events or instead simply unaware of Quinn and/or Smith) while common usage of "trans" includes NB people such as Quinn and Smith. It's not about "precedent". Anyway, if you have better wording for the footnote, please go ahead and suggest it. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 21:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

The footnote and its alleged relevance is unsourced WP:OR and should be removed. This article isn't supposed to be a hub for every trans and non-binary athlete. The sources agree on 'first trans woman', which is enough. Crossroads ^-talk- 21:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

See section above ("First") for what happens when we leave off a footnote. People see sources saying "first trans athlete" and try to change it (generally meaning well), without seeing that other sources make the more precise distinction of "first trans woman." I'm ok with deleting the footnote (though I disagree that a footnote acknowledging differences in the sources we use is OR), but the text in the article should remain accurate. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 21:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

The note needs to be sourced or it is OR. What about something like this. Aircorn (talk) 23:00, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

To be clear, the factual statements in the footnote regarding Hubbard, Quinn, Smith, and Wolfe were sourced. I understood Crossroads's argument to be that the existence of the footnote discussing why we used "first trans woman" per source B rather than "first trans athlete" per source A (that is, a footnote noting that the sources say different things and explaining why we followed one rather than the other) was OR. Again, it was mostly a measure to deal with people having seen things like source A, coming to the article, seeing something different from source A, and trying to change the article to match source A—when source B demonstrates that source A's description is inaccurate/incomplete and provides a different, more precise/accurate description. Now that the Olympics are over, there will probably be fewer people doing that, so it's not as much of an issue. The current article simply uses source B's description. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 23:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

As was stated in the version that I wrote that was reverted, Hubbard both qualified and competed as transitioned, while Smith and Quinn competed disregarding their trans identity. A source that ignores this is incomplete.96.250.80.27 (talk) 23:14, 14 August 2021 (UTC)