Talk:Rowan Blanchard

Ancestry

I removed the listing in the article and the related categories that detailed the ancestry of 7 of her 16 great-great grandparents as this is far to diffuse to be meaningful. The source was her father's memory and this looks more like family lore than well-researched genealogy. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Issue has come up again. Any ancestry beyond grand parents becomes far too defuse to be WP:Defining for this person and article. Unlikely to impact her personal beliefs and behavior or self-identity in any way. Basically why ancestry may be important to a person. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Age

She is 13 right now. Not 12.

Can you provide sources to verify your statement?--Chamith (talk) 21:19, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

10 more days - let the template calculate the ages. See her Disney Bio (says born October 14, 2001) which we will trust over pretty much any other reference. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:44, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Child vs teen actress

I've seen a few edits over the last couple of months replacing the term "child actress" with "teen actress" in the lead section (after Blanchard turned 13), which were reverted since her listed credits occurred before she became a teenager. Just to be clear, at what point would it be considered appropriate to use the term "teen actress"? (Examples also wouldn't hurt.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Legally she remain a child actress until she becomes emancipated and is no longer tied to child acting labor law requiring limited times on set and on-site schooling. In this system you are either a child or an adult. Practically, I would say that until she becomes more known for her roles after 13 than for her roles before 13 the adjective could change. Basically child encompasses teen but teen does not encompass child. Child will remain the most inclusive for all her credits until she gets significant adult roles. If this is really an issue just drop "child" or "teen" from the description and just call her an actress. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

This edit removed the adjective, and I think we can refer to Blanchard as simply an actress now. I've read the leads for Sabrina Carpenter and Peyton List, fellow Disney Channel stars, and they are identified as simply actresses, not teen actresses. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Geraldo Perez (talk) 13:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Twitter account as official site, external link

That link was added per the exemption in WP:ELNO that permits WP:ELOFFICIAL as a link to an external site that is controlled by subject, covers area that the subject is notable for and gives the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself. This is the only link of this sort in the external links section so is obviously not excessive. It would be great to have a personal website as an official site but this is the best that is available for this person. If something better were available it wouldn't be needed. It provides value to the reader so should be in the article. The fact that it is hosted on Twitter and is a social media site does not mean it isn't a valid link for this purpose. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but it says "covers area that the subject is notable for". That would be something like Shane Dawson's or Smosh's Youtube channel. Rowan is not famous through Twitter. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 01:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

It includes information about her acting career, what she is notable for, which meets the requirement. The main point is that it gives info about what she says about herself. It doesn't mean that she is a twitter personality famous through twitter, just that it contains "...meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article...". What purpose would it serve to remove it? At this point in time it is pretty harmless, useful to some readers and I don't see any policy reason to remove it. If something better shows up, then there would be no reason at all to have it and at that point should definitely be removed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree it should be included, providing we don't list every single social media account she has. — Confession0791 ^talk 07:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree as well. Since it's the only official account that can be identified as hers, there is nothing wrong with adding it. Once she has an official website we can replace the twitter link with official website link. But at the moment her twitter profile is the only thing that can be taken as a reliable external link.--Chamith (talk) 09:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Hmm... I personally felt it was a violation of the no-social-media rule, but since Rowan doesn't have an official website yet, I certainly don't object to the inclusion of her Twitter account. But if anybody tries to lump in Instagram etc, the rest goes. Luthien22 (talk) 16:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

That is from WP:ELNO #10 about no social media and that is the general rule. The exception stated at the top of the ELNO section is what is being used to justify this usage. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Concerning edits about Blanchard's sexual preference

As this was coming from her Twitter page [1], it could be taken as reliable. This is also a primary source, and discussing a contentious subject, so there must be care bringing this up in the article because of possible misinterpretation. However, I've come across a secondary source from Zap2it [2], one of our reliable outlets, which brings up what Blanchard said in the Twitter post I cited. Now to figure out how to word things so it is in compliance with Wikipedia policies. MPFitz1968 (talk) 02:29, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

MPFitz1968, the second source is not reliable. That aside, like romantic relationships, the sexuality of a girl who barely turned 14 is pretty irrelevant. For one, I doubt she's sexually active (she could be, but probably not). Two, she's a minor, anything involving that material should not be on Wikipedia. At this age, it's very natural to be curious - she could just be curious, who knows? Wait till we get more sources and at least wait till she's 18. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Joseph Prasad, thanks for the input. Given her age and the nature of the subject, it is best, and our responsibility, to refrain from discussing this in the article until it is appropriate and additional sources present this to be notable. I likely would not have come up with how to word what has come to light anyway, as this is very sensitive. MPFitz1968 (talk) 02:50, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

It is not really sensitive now based on current culture and is actually somewhat banal. A reliable primary source (her verified twitter account) for the info shows self-declared backed up with Zap2it being a reliable secondary source to show notability. As long as we stick with what she said with no interpretation we should be fine. My understanding queer just means not straight but she gave no more details than that. I personally don't take what a child says about sexuality too seriously and expect her identification will mature along with her but we should go with what we have and this may impact the story lines for the shows she is in. I agree that with her level of maturity that this not likely to be well-considered and doubt she has any real understanding but still, it is what she stated and this type of self-declaration is currently considered brave and edgy by many people and supports her other listed political activities so is somewhat relevant. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but I don't we should place anything, as again, she is still a child. Which is why we don't place relationships on Wikipedia of minors, unless they are controversial and/or covered by numerous sources (like the relationships of 16 year old Hilary Duff and 25 year old Joel Madden or 17 year old Kylie Jenner and 25 year old Tyga). I don't even see the relationship of Bella Thorne with Gregg Sulkin all that relevant. I say just give this time and see if a great number of sources report it. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 03:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't care either way, I'm not going to add it but won't remove the info if someone does. This is a more a political statement from her that matches her other activities, most of which are also, in my opinion, somewhat meaningless for a child to be taken seriously about. She is not talking about relationships, just personal beliefs at this point. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it may be a political statement (which is also in this article), what I was saying before, it also has to due with sourcing. This isn't notable enough to be in here. I know she isn't talking about relationships specifically, but sexuality tends to go hand in hand. Plus, according to E! Online, it's not about being truly queer, as in not straight. She just doesn't want a label, as in straight, gay, etc. "In my life—only ever liked boys," "However I personally don't wanna label myself as straight, gay or whateva so I am not gonna give myself labels to stick with—just existing;)", "Yes, [I'm] open to liking any gender in future is why I identify as queer." (Which is slightly hypocritical since she just put a label on herself, but whatever.) Rowan means she's open to liking other genders, yet admitted to being only attracted to just boys. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 04:33, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Agreed - the Twitter comment is just ambiguous enough that it's not a suitable source for something like this. Now, that E Online article goes into more depth and could act as a starting point for an addition for Rowam's entry. I'd still want to see additional reliable sources beyond that. We're in no hurry on this - as WP:BLP says let's get it right. Tabercil (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

But what I'm trying to understand though, is why it's so important. For someone who's heterosexual, we don't put that they're straight. So why should we put something if they're homosexual, or something else? -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Enough reliable sources have picked this up to show notability and multiple different editors are adding it to the article. There is no policy reason for it to not be in the article and evolving consensus seems to support its inclusion. The last edit here made statements of fact backed up with her own words with no interpretation as to meaning. I think now it should be included. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I can restore that edit, if no one else objects. (I was the one who reverted it in the first place.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:49, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I still don't think so, due to her not truly being queer. It would be wrong to call her that. Personal preferences of Rowan state she doesn't want a label, also, she has not been attracted to any females, as she has admitted. So, if we were to label her anything, she would be straight, since she has stated she only has been attracted to boys. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 06:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, at this point it's utterly ambiguous. Even she is quite not sure about her sexuality. We shouldn't be the ones to determine that for her based on the little amount of evidence we have. Give it time. She is minor, she has a whole life ahead of her. -- Chamith (talk) 07:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

We wouldn't be determining anything and wouldn't be labeling her in any way, just reporting what she stated and accurately quoting her own words. Let the reader make the conclusions. The edit in question stated Blanchard stated on Twitter that she identifies as queer, saying "In my life – only ever liked boys," the 14-year-old Girl Meets World star wrote. "However I personally don't wanna label myself as straight, gay or whateva so I am not gonna give myself labels to stick with – just existing… yes open to liking any gender in future is why I identify as queer." The only negative reaction to her based on her own words is making her look a bit (OK, actually really) immature, but hey, multiple reliable sources have picked this up and there is no real policy reason to keep this out of the article. It does add to all the other similar level political activism she is pushing and is appropriate given all the other similar type of statements she has made. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Contrary to what I said above, I actually don't see a problem with mentioning her own words given that it wouldn't be someone else's perspective on the matter. What she said was vague for sure, but as it has already been publicized by multiple sources it's not unreasonable to include it in her bio. She might change her self-image in the course of time, but as for now, this is her opinion on herself. -- Chamith (talk) 16:32, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

This edit added Category:LGBT entertainers. Besides the immediate issue that that category is a container category that should have only subcatgories in it, not articles, there is the issue of if what she said about herself is sufficient for inclusion in any of the myriad LGBT categories at all. I think not but looking for opinions. It is one thing to report her own words in the article without any evaluation but quite another to to make classifications and WP:OR judgements of what she meant in her ambiguous pronouncements. In my opinion, she is making a purely political statement that aligns her with a currently popular in-group without actually being a member of that group. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:57, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Protection

I just ran across the history of this article (in Special:Contributions/Winkelvi, for reasons to be explained at Winkelvi's request) and was astonished that it hadn't already been listed at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection; this has gotten tons of reversions in the last 2½ days, including some by established users, so it's way past the minimum point for protection. Note that I didn't look at the text until after protecting it (nobody was calling anything vandalism, and established users generally don't engage in the practice), so please don't accuse me of protecting the version I favored. Nyttend (talk) 04:29, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Political endorsements

This article has been edit protected based on a minor edit conflict as to whether or not this reliably sourced info is notable and belongs in the article. After the first removal of this info a discussion should have been started per WP:BRD. Since this is purely a twitter posting by Blanchard, a reliable primary source that has not been picked up by any reliable secondary sources which in general we would like to see to show that anybody cares, it does not belong in the article until such coverage is shown. The political musing of a child who can't vote seems a long way from being interesting to anybody except maybe her fans. We don't need to create a copy of everything she says on her twitter feed. Interested people can read it there for themselves. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:15, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Exactly Geraldo Perez. I follow her Twitter and I can see it from there.When she tweets something career-wise (like an upcoming role or even going for a music career like her co-star Sabrina Carpenter), that may be a different case, but random political endorsements don't belong. We don't need every single thing she tweets here. There have been bigger news on Twitter with other celebrities for Twitter controversies due to their activites on the site, and we don't even place that anywhere, due it not being all that notable. Like that (and even more so for this), I doubt even if its picked up by a reliable source, this can be considered notable. It's pretty irrelevant. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 09:00, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Geraldo Perez. Also, that edit introduced a thing known as WP:SEAOFBLUE. – nyuszika7h (talk) 16:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Just as a bit of humor that also expresses the concept, see WP:FART. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:54, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Great, next time someone adds trivia to an article, I can link to this instead of WP:NOTNEWS. -- Chamith (talk) 04:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit request

Hey can you make so i can edit this Juniorgrans (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@Juniorgrans: Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. nyuszika7h (talk) 13:37, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Why is this page locked?

I want edits this and fix this up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.10.31.54 (talk) 18:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

@71.10.31.54: Article has been indefinitely semiprotected since March 2016 due to violations of the Biographies of Living Persons policy. I recommend you register an account and get it to autoconfirmed (wait at least four days and make 10+ edits elsewhere) if you wish to edit this article. You could also try to contact the administrator who locked the article (found in the log here), but given Blanchard's level of publicity, I have doubts the article will be unprotected. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:40, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Middle name

I do recall it was mentioned in the Girl Meets World episode "World Meets Girl" (although it was Sabrina Carpenter who uttered it), and there has been at least one video I saw on YouTube a long time ago where Blanchard may have mentioned her middle name in passing or in response to a question she was asked. Despite this, we need a solid reliable source before this can be added. Even if Blanchard brings it up one day on her Twitter account (verified), that may be an acceptable source. (And yes, I have heard it to be "Eleanor", but still, we need the source.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2021

facts she also a activist 2603:9000:F80C:E00:3146:3215:F960:4BC5 (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jack Frost (talk) 00:57, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 03 October 2021

"unjust genocide" should at least be in quotes, as the genocide claim is demonstrably false and also begs the question of what would be a "just genocide". "rightful stolen land" is at best a debatable point and should also be in quotes, as it is not established fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsol55a (talk • contribs) 01:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2023

Under 'television roles' in the filmography section, Blanchard's credit for 'Invisible Sister' has a typo. Under 'Notes' on that credit, the word 'television' in 'television film' is misspelled as 'teleivision'. My edit request is solely for that typo to be amended. 76.25.70.146 (talk) 02:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. MPFitz1968 (talk) 02:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2024

Rqt to add new section under 'personal life', to give dedicated space to current and future political/societal efforts, as distinct from personal relationships/discussion of sexuality, and so on; as follows (and include your existing poli-social efforts)  :)

== Philanthropy and Activism ==

Blanchard is an activist on issues such as feminism, human rights, and gun violence. While most of her comments regarding these issues are posted via Twitter or Tumblr, she has spoken at the UN Women and US National Committee's annual conference as part of #TeamHeForShe, a feminist campaign.[25]

In April 2018, Blanchard criticized Israel and its military on her social media and shared her own post with a photo of Palestinian activist Ahed Tamimi holding the Palestinian flag. In the same post, Blanchard voiced support for the Palestinians during the 2018–2019 Gaza border protests.[26]

In May 2018, Blanchard criticized Israel once again in her social media and shared another photo of Tamimi. Blanchard wrote that "Gaza qualifies under every definition of genocide yet massacred protestors must always be identified as 'peaceful'."[27]

In October 2023, Blanchard signed an open letter for the "Artists4Ceasefire" campaign alongside other artists, urging President Joe Biden to push for a ceasefire and an end to the killing of civilians amid the 2023 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip. Discourseofcourse (talk) 02:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Denied :No to the edit as recommended. The added paragraph is trivia, the new header suggested is incorrectly capitalized, as headers get Sentence case, not Title Case. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 05:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)