Talk:Rachel Levine

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rachel Levine article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1: 2 months

Discussions on this page have often led to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government / Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Health and fitness Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies: Person

	LGBTQ portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
	This article is supported by the LGBTQ+ Person task force.

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Medicine: Society Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them.

The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:

This page is protected. You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

This article should adhere to the gender identity guideline because it contains material about one or more trans women. Precedence should be given to self-designation as reported in the most up-to-date reliable sources, anywhere in article space, even when it doesn't match what's most common in reliable sources. Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman") that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. Some people go by singular they pronouns, which are acceptable for use in articles. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life, unless the subject has indicated a preference otherwise. Former, pre-transition names may only be included if the person was notable while using the name; outside of the main biographical article, such names should only appear once, in a footnote or parentheses.

If material violating this guideline is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other related issues, please report the issue to the LGBTQ+ WikiProject, or, in the case of living people, to the BLP noticeboard.

faq page

Frequently asked questions

Please read the following FAQs before posting.

Q:Why doesn’t this article include her former name?

A:Per WP: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. Treat the pre-notability name as a privacy interest."

The Erasure of History

Birth name and the date of transition should be included. Pronouns used before the date of transition should be "He/Him". Seki1949 (talk) 20:10, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In this section of our article on Prince, we don't refer to him as "The artist formerly known as Prince" or his symbol; his name is what we use because that's his name. We are not "erasing history" by not giving someone's birth name. Primefac (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a common mistake. The language of "transition" encourages us to think of a person having one gender before and a different one after and so we might expect their former pronouns to apply up until the point of transition, even in retrospect. That was my first guess before I learned a bit more about how it really works. This is to misunderstand what is transitioning. The person is not transitioning from one gender to another. They are transitioning how they live to reflect the gender they are and probably always were, even if it took them a while to realise it. It's like coming out as gay. We would not say, in retrospect, that a person was straight up until the day they came out as gay. They were gay all along. It's just that we only found out when they came out. I think it is a fair thing to ask about but putting it under such an inflammatory title was a big mistake. It can attract trolls and that doesn't help anybody. In this case, Levine's previous name is not a notable part of her history for us to document. Including it would be gratuitous. It is different with people who were genuinely notable under their former names. MOS:GENDERID does permit limited inclusion of their previous names in such cases. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:18, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling correction needed

Under “Personal Life” first paragraph, Tulane (Univ.) is misspelled as “Tuslane”. Ireadthedictionaryforfun (talk) 16:04, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done and added "University" for clarity EvergreenFir (talk) 16:37, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deadnaming by Current Administration

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-admin-deadnames-biden-transgender-191858265.html

So far it seems that all they've done is change the name plate on an official portrait; whether Rachel will henceforth be referred to as (BLP violation removed) by the HHS and other government agencies... I feel that is a likely possibility.

So I was thinking perhaps there should be a redirect here from (BLP violation removed) or perhaps it would make better sense to simply add a link to this article in the existing disambiguation page for (BLP violation removed)? OwlParty (talk) 04:46, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Levine was never notable under her deadname, and a petty act of harassment by her former employer seems unlikely to change this. I think it is very unlikely that any readers would be served by such a redirect, nor that Trump's HHS will publish anything substantive about her going forward. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 04:59, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a redirect page is not the best solution; if only for the reason that there are several different "(BLP violation removed)"s, and such a redirect would be navigationally problematic. OwlParty (talk) 06:35, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe that adding this article to the disambiguation page for "(BLP violation removed)" may be useful. My only intention is to help potential readers find the article they are looking for. Certain sources, including certain "News" media outlets may refer to her as "(BLP violation removed)", .

A link to her article (under the name Rachel Levine) was previously included on that disambiguation page, until some transphobic editor decided to vandalize it. I have no desire to cause a repeat of that drama, and no expectation that it will be repeated, as the disambiguation page is now protected, and the offending editor banned. OwlParty (talk) 06:49, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop the WP:deadnaming. BLP policy applies to talk pages as well as article space. Innisfree987 (talk) 06:55, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry, I will try harder to respect the guidelines in regard to Wikipedia:Deadnaming

I'm not sure if you understand my purpose in this topic? Or why I brought it up?

Did you at least glance at the news article I'd mentioned: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-admin-deadnames-biden-transgender-191858265.html ? Or the rest of what I've said here?

I'm not trying to deadname anyone; but to provide navigation to this article for people who may have only encountered references to her by that name. It seems from a couple of comments elsewhere on this page that she may have had /some/ notability under that name. Whether or not that notability reaches a level worth mentioning here, I could not say, and will not argue; my only point is that it /may/ be enough that there could be folks searching for an article about her under that name. OwlParty (talk) 07:35, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand but I don’t agree. I agree with DanielRigal’s comment below.
Since you’ve already made seven, increasingly lengthy comments just under this subhead, I also want to suggest you read WP:BLUDGEON. Innisfree987 (talk) 23:06, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"nor that Trump's HHS will publish anything substantive about..."

I'm not sure whether you intended definition #1 or #3:

substantive /sŭb′stən-tĭv/

adjective

1. Substantial; considerable.

2. Independent in existence or function; not subordinate.

3. Not imaginary; actual; real.

As per definition #3, I would question whether the Trump administration in general (not just the HHS) is likely to publish anything truly "substantive" on any particular topic.

If I could assume that this one petty act of harassment would be the end of it, as an isolated incident, I would agree with you. But repeated petty acts, misrepresentation of facts, deliberate efforts at revising history, and erasing from the historical record all signs of gender identity which do not conform to their own alleged "values" seems to be the norm. Which leads me to believe that the Trump administration may very well take further steps in attempting to de-legitimize and effectively negate this person's true identity in the public consciousness. Meanwhile certain "News" media outlets will continue to repeat and amplify whatever this administration has to say, substantive or not.

Perhaps I am overreacting, but I see the "winners" re-writing history right now, right in front of us. Today it's just a name plate on a portrait. Yesterday it was this: https://www.npr.org/2025/03/19/nx-s1-5317567/federal-websites-lgbtq-diversity-erased . Who knows what tomorrow will bring?

While I certainly have strong political opinions, my cause here is only ensure that the information is more easily accessible to those who may not necessarily know the current name of the person, depending on where they may have heard of them, as our current government seems determined to obscure/erase that name. OwlParty (talk) 07:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support including Levine's original first name in the article, with appropriate weight (i.e. in the infobox and early life sections). Most of her academic career was conducted under that name which appears in plenty of pre-transition media sources and other publications. Post-transition, her original name is frequently mentioned in biographical pieces, e.g. Philly Inquirer, Washington Post, even her profile as an LGBT History Month "Icon". I T B F 📢 06:31, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this issue is discussed above under "Edit request on transition year", and "The Erasure of History". I think you've made some valid points, which merit discussion in those conversations. My focus here is on navigation; making sure that readers find what they are looking for, whether they may or may not know the current vs. deadname of the subject. OwlParty (talk) 06:46, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The policy on Wikipedia (see MOS:GENDERID and the links from there) is that trans people who were not notable under their former name should not have that name appear, because we consider it not to be relevant — and indeed for it to be a privacy violation.

Of course we should mention that the Trump administration have changed the label on her portrait in order to deadname her. But we don't need to deadname Admiral Dr Levine ourselves in order to describe that. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 12:58, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not debating whether she was notable under her former name. And I am not suggesting that her former name should appear in this article. If you believe that a mention about the Trump administration deadnaming her by changing the label on her portrait is worth including in this article, then I support that; but it's not really why I posted this here.

My intention was simply to improve navigation to this article, by adding a link to it in the (deadname) disambiguation page, for any poor confused soul who might potentially come searching for "deadname" instead of "Rachel Levine" through simple ignorance regarding her current name. Perhaps the chance of that happening is slim, but I fear an increasing likelihood of that possibility as this administration continues trying to erase the identity of transgendered people.

If adding a link to the Rachel Levine article to the (deadname)disambiguation page is considered 'deadnaming' her, and or a violation of her privacy, well that certainly was not my intention.

Really I should have probably had this whole discussion on the talk page of that disambiguation page in the first place. I'm sure I would have likely gotten a similar response there, but maybe without distractions as to what should go into this article itself. OwlParty (talk) 16:37, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the scenario where that poor confused soul finds their way to searching Wikipedia for the deadname? I don't see it. It's not like Wendy Carlos where you could imagine some lucky crate diver finding an old pressing of one of her early albums in a thrift store, buying it out of curiosity, being impressed and wanting to know more about her. Who knows Levine's deadname but not her real name? A former classmate from school? Yeah, but who turns to Wikipedia to look up old acquaintances? Wikipedia is not Facebook. Somebody who has seen the mislabelled portrait but doesn't know the backstory? I just don't see that as a possibility. Some people delight in throwing the deadname around but they make damn sure to tell you what they are doing and who is being targetted. Nobody is going to hear the deadname and think that it is the name of some other guy. If there was plausibly a type of person that a redirect would be helpful to then there would be a nuanced decision to be made but I don't see it. DanielRigal (talk) 18:18, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here is that MOS:DEADNAME is quite clear that this would be prohibited under Wikipedia policy. She was not notable under her former name and there's no reason to include it in the article or in a redirect link to the article. If you wish to change the policy, I would suggest that you attempt to do so, although such a policy came from consensus and much like Sisyphus, you are not likely to find it fruitful to push the boulder up this particular hill. Bill Heller (talk) 07:15, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've EC protected this talk page for one day, with regret

With four DEADNAME redactions in the last 72 hours, I've chosen to briefly EC protect this talk under CTOP/BLP. After expiration the protection should revert back to indefinite semi-protection previously applied. BusterD (talk) 18:37, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]