Talk:Anya Taylor-Joy

Nationality

Her nationality seems to be all over the place. One minute she’s British-Argentine, the next she’s British-Argentine-American, and another she’s just American. To simplify things, why not simply refer to her as American-born? Scf1985 (talk) 01:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I will only say that you study international law.BROTHER2013 (talk) 20:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

How do you know what they study? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

• I would like to see this settled through discussion, rather than as Scf1985 says seeing something different every time this article comes up in my watchlist. I have just restored "American actress of British and Argentinian descent" from an IP edit which changed it to "(multi-citizenship) American, British and Argentinian actress", which I find awkward. We know from reliable sources that she was born in the United States but moved to Argentina as an infant and later to the U.K., and we have sources for her citizenship in all three countries. From reading the various interviews provided as sources, it appears she identifies with both Argentina and Britain as "home", and at least one describes her directly as an "American-born Argentine-British actress". I like that better since she does not seem to identify with her American birthplace, although one of the sources mentions that she voted for Hillary Clinton. So I don't know, what should we do here? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:24, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

  I think its a fair point to say that she is "American-born" in another sentence-paragraph-section. However, because nationality refers to identity, rather than citizenship (Picture someone being born in a country but adopted by parents in another one and living your whole live there) and she self identify as British and Argentine we should call list her as Anglo-Argentine. 193.157.208.107 (talk) 16:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

  I agree with this except I would use the term "Argentine-British". "Anglo-" is an ethnicity rather than a nationality, and having it ordered with Argentine first and British last denotes that she was an Argentine national before being a British national. Legotwin (talk) 06:40, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

• this reference https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/entertainment/anya-taylor-joy-466264 has an interview with her saying "I was born in Miami but we moved straight away to Argentina where most of my family still lives, and I was there until I was six, and then we moved to England, and I learnt English when I was eight. So my Dad’s Scottish-Argentine and my Mum’s African-Spanish". I am editing the page to reflect this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobias Reiper (talk • contribs) 14:16, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

  Thanks for your edit. You added a source which was already in the article so I've merged them, and I restored the notice asking editors to discuss here rather than repeatedly changing the article. I'm going to start a formal discussion on this. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

• Everyone is overthinking this. She's Argentine-British. The fact that she's American-born is extraneous and doesn't need to be mentioned in the opening. She was born in Florida, and by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment's definition of citizenship, she's a U.S. citizen, but neither of her parents were Americans at the time of her birth. Millie Bobby Brown was born in Spain, but the opening to her article doesn't describe her as "Spanish-born." The late John McCain was born in Panama, and Ted Cruz was born in Canada. The same thing applies to them. Hell, I was born in what is today Ukraine to African-American parents, but I don't run around calling myself "Soviet-born." Were it not for the fact that Wikipedia is an American website, we wouldn't even be debating this. I propose describing her as an "Argentine-British actress and model." UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Anya taylor was born in USA and raised in England. Her father is from Argetina and her mother is from England thats it.. She is an American born English citizen with Argentine roots but an argentine citizenship — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4089:8598:14C2:0:0:1E84:B0 (talk) 20:45, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• I was of the mind that saying 'American-born' in the opening was fine, but UncomfortablySmug makes a good point. This criteria is not applied to many other public figures, why use it here? I say remove that part from the opening sentence. In any case it is already mentioned in the following paragraph. Gaba ^(talk) 14:43, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

I've recently been watching a lot of her interviews and I'm sure in one of them she says she was only born in the USA so she could get an American passport to make it easier for her family when travelling. She was originally Argentine and became Argentine-British because she moved to Britain as a child when things were difficult in Argentina. Also her family are Argentine-British. When the political situation improved they moved back to Argentina.C3MC2 (talk) 00:51, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

RfC: Nationality in lead sentence

How should Ms. Taylor-Joy be described in the opening sentence of this biography? In particular, which nationalities (if any) should be included in this first sentence? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

For background please see the section above. The description in this biography's lead has been unstable for months, with a series of editors tweaking and changing it to different things. The current version (as of this edit) is "American-born actress of British and Argentine descent"; it has also been "actress of British and Argentinian descent", "American-Argentine-British actress", "American-born actress", "American actress of Argentine and British ancestry", "Argentine, English and American actress born in the United States", "American-born Argentine and English actress", and probably others (these are pulled from random revisions since March of this year). Repeatedly changing this description is disruptive; I'm hoping that a formal RfC will settle the matter.

As I wrote in the section above and per sources in the article, Taylor-Joy was born in the United States but moved to Argentina as an infant. She was raised there until the age of six, when her family relocated to Great Britain. She spoke only Spanish up to age eight, and attended school in Britain up to age 16. As far as I can tell from sources she hasn't stated how she self-identifies and most of the sources don't address it at all. There is an interview here in which she says home is "London and New York", which doesn't really help.

I feel that "of British and Argentine descent" is not exactly accurate: she spent her formative years in those countries; "descent" implies she just has ancestors there. Likewise I think leaving just "American" or "American-born" oversimplifies things. The only source I can find which even offers a description close to any of the ones we've used is this one, which gives "American-born Argentine-British actress", followed by a note that the author goes into more detail on this later in the article.

What is the best way for Wikipedia to handle this? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:27, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Apologies, I feel like my small edit reignited something. The Evening Standard article seems to have the clearest information in her own words (and one of the few which confirms she has US citizenship), but good luck distilling that into a snappy first sentence. If the information must be included I suppose you could either just state her - admittedly clunky to write - tri-nationality, or skip the nationality and explain she was born in the US and grew up in Argentina and the UK? 82.19.214.50 (talk) 11:42, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Sigh It's just a definition you can't tell some complicated family lines in there. She was born in USA, has citizenship, she lived there since, what, 14? So I say it's better to say just American and maybe make a note sending to section that clears this out. Better then saying she's from three countries and four descents. While I'm no expert on US, it appears that everyone's of some descents in there. Mithoron (talk) 19:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

@Mithoron: Taylor-Joy's situation isn't just having descent from another country though. She holds citizenship to all three, and was predominately raised in just Argentina and the UK. Per her own article: Taylor-Joy moved to Buenos Aires as an infant, speaking only Spanish before moving to London at age six. I find that to be significant enough. I truly think American-Argentine-English is the only definition that truly encapsulates Taylor-Joy's nationality. Sure, it looks clunky and we're not used to individuals with tri-nationality, but she is not just American. Another idea could be by going the Natalie Portman route and writing: Anya Taylor-Joy is an actress with citizenship to the United States, United Kingdom, and Argentina, and then add a better descriptor of her situation later on like: Born in Miami to an Argentine father and English mother, Taylor-Joy was later raised between Buenos Aires and London. If anything, I think the US is probably the country she holds the least connection to, as it seems she was just born there and then did not return until beginning her film career. I can't find a point in the article where it says she moved back at 14, it appears she was still in the UK at age 16 when she got scouted as a model. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 13:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@Jjj1238: I checked interview in Evening Standard and she mentions moving at 14, and her accent changing in US, England (where she was interview) and Ireland. She also calls herself American, English and Argentine (‘When I was younger I didn’t really feel like I fit in anywhere. I was too English to be Argentine, too Argentine to be English, too American to be anything.’) so I guess that ideed American-Argentine-English is perhaps best. Mithoron (talk) 19:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@Mithoron: You should add that bit about returning to the United States to the article then, since that's missing right now. The more I think about the situation though, the more I like replicating what was done on articles about individuals with complicated nationalities like Natalie Portman: Anya Taylor-Joy (born 16 April 1996) is an actress who holds citizenship to the United States, United Kingdom, and Argentina. She was born in Miami to an Argentine father and a mother of British and Spanish descent, and later raised in Buenos Aires and London until returning to the United States at age 14. I think that explains what's needed to be explained without it being too clunky. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 20:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

The relevant policy for this is MOS:CONTEXTBIO, which states: "The opening paragraph should usually provide context for the activities that made the person notable. In most modern-day cases, this will be the country of which the person is a citizen, national, or permanent resident; or, if the person is notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national, or permanent resident when the person became notable. ... Similarly, previous nationalities or the place of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." Anya Taylor-Joy became notable with her lead role in the 2015 US film The Witch. Most of her roles since then have been in American productions, with a minority being in British productions. She has mainly resided in the US since 2015. Hence, I think she should be described as American, or perhaps arguably as British-American. LK (talk) 03:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

I feel like describing her as an American actor is not following the MOS: it's not referring to her nationality but to the nationality (?) of her significant works, which will be confusing and isn't how we're supposed to do this. We could make this a construction like "Anya Taylor-Joy is an actress, known for American films [...]" but I think that doesn't really follow the MOS either.

The only other article I know of that has a dispute like this one is Kiefer Sutherland, who was born in Britain while his Canadian parents were briefly living there (he's a dual citizen, they are not). A while back his description was repeatedly changed from "British actor" to "Canadian actor" to "British-Canadian actor", and after a lot of discussion the article landed on "British-born Canadian actor". Like Taylor-Joy he's known almost exclusively for American works, which also leads me to think we shouldn't use that in determining where to go here. But it's also hardly consistent across articles, for example:

• Martin Short (Canadian-American dual citizen): "Canadian-American actor"
• Rich Little (Canadian-American dual citizen): "Canadian-American impressionist and voice actor"
• Keanu Reeves (Lebanese-born to British and American parents but only holds Canadian citizenship): "Canadian actor"
• Ewan McGregor (British-American dual citizen): "Scottish actor"
• Anthony Hopkins (British-American dual citizen): "Welsh actor"
• Gabrielle Anwar (British-American dual citizen): "English-American actress"
• Audrey Hepburn (British citizen, worked almost exclusively in American cinema): "British actress and humanitarian", with a footnote explaining her complicated nationality from being born in Belgium to a Dutch mother who under Dutch law could not pass on her nationality to her children, but that she identified as "half-Dutch", followed by another footnote explaining that her father was mistakenly believed to have been born in London when her birth certificate was issued but her mother later claimed he was Bohemian
• Natalie Portman (including because she's mentioned above; she's an Israeli-American dual citizen): "an actress and filmmaker with dual Israeli and American citizenship"

Personally I think the Natalie Portman approach is not so appropriate here: Portman's dual citizenship is more a significant part of her public identity and activism, whereas Taylor-Joy's triple citizenship is more simply background info. I suggest based on everything written here that, for one, that where she works doesn't factor into this (because it doesn't for any of these actors who are all known for work in American media), and two, that we go with something in between the Audrey Hepburn and Natalie Portman approaches. Namely, "Anya Taylor-Joy is an American-born^[footnote] Argentine-British actor" with a footnote briefly describing her upbringing and referring to more detail in the "early life" section. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ivanvector: FTR, Short, Little and Anwar are all handled badly – each of those should be "Canadian and American..." or "English and American actress", respectively. We should be paying more attention to MOS:ETHNICITY in these cases, and using "and" instead of a dash. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

• American-born Argentine-British actress is my driveby RfC opinion, since that seems to be used by at least one source, and looks the least awkward of all the options. Feel free to ignore my opinion completely if there's a good reason to. jp×g 11:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
  • I am satisfied with American-born Argentine-British actress, with an added footnote or not. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 15:42, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
• She's clearly a U.S. citizen per this Vulture article, so she's not simply American-born that would imply lost U.S. citizenship which isn't the case. As for her other nationalities/ethnicities they should only be in the lead if the sources explicitly mention that she is a citizen of either Argentina or the U.K. not merely off-hand hand mentions of "Argentine/British" etc. Gotitbro (talk) 12:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

  Though I'd like to mention that her being a U.S. citizen is only incidental to being born there as the article does say this, "She was born “on a fluke” during a memorable vacation to Miami, which had the handy side effect of making her a U.S. citizen." So mentioning American in the seems unnecessary as well. Gotitbro (talk) 06:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

• The current construction of this is terrible. I'm OK with "American-born" (though it's maybe trivial for the lede, esp. the first sentence). But "Argentine-British actress" is awful, and flies in the cast of MOS:ETHNICITY. At worst, it should be "American-born Argentine and British actress". But I question whether "Argentine" is in any way ledeworthy. I would go with "American-born British actress". If she's also an Argentine citizen, that can be mentioned later in the lede. Regardless, I absolutely oppose the current wording. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• I don’t think I’ve weighed in on this subject on the talk page but it’s certainly aggravating for the reader to see this clunkiness as the first sentence. “American-born” sounds like someone who has renounced their citizenship next to two others. According to the Constitution of the United States, she is an American citizen, period. So I don’t see what’s so wrong about saying she is American, British, and Argentine because that’s the triumverate of the truth. Trillfendi (talk) 04:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I was telling. She said she considered herself Argentine and British and American. Mithoron (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

• Elon Musk holds three citizenships (South Africa, Canada, and United States) and the the NoWiki text that precedes his occupations when editing his article states: "Talk page consensus is that 'South African-born' or 'Canadian' should not be placed in this first sentence; please leave citizenship and place of birth for later in the lead, per MOS:BLPLEAD". Information about his citizenships is instead included in the second paragraph and Early life, as well as in the infobox. Could such an arragement also be also suitable for Anya Taylor-Joy? Bizarre Bizarre^{Talk modern to me} 15:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• No nationality in lead sentence, agree with above on comparison to Elon Musk (another person of European heritage whose parents moved between several countries). See also Taylor-Joy's clarification on this Variety article. To be added later in the lead I propose Born in Florida and raised in Buenos Aires and London, Taylor-Joy identifies as a white Latina. Miyomiyo1050 (talk) 16:24, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Ethnicity rarely ever goes in the lead and this certainly isn’t one of those occasions. Trillfendi (talk) 16:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Ethnicity is already mentioned in the lead ("becoming the first Latina to win in that category") and per MOS:ETHNICITY guidelines it does seem relevant to her notability. Miyomiyo1050 (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

I should’ve said what I intended: lead sentence. As I was the one who put that she is the first Latina to win the award, which itself is notable. But the figuring out of how to say someone has three citizenships without giving precedence to one over the other is the challenge, as each country has different laws. The Embassy of Argentina says American-Argentine. In her own words, she’s too English to be Argentine, too Argentine to be English, and too American to be anything. Vague at best. Trillfendi (talk) 19:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

You added it? I noticed! I'd propose moving that fact to the body of the article (which, funnily enough, is where I already mentioned it a second time). Frankly, a Golden Globe superlative doesn't belong in the opening. If it were an Oscar superlative, it would make sense. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

• I think Miyomiyo's proposal is the best way to handle this at this time, given the new source and information we didn't have at the start of this discussion. I know we normally mention ethnicity in the first sentence but it's not required, and wedging it in as we have been is awkward, we just haven't had a better way of doing it. With Miyomiyo's proposal I suggest:

Anya Josephine Marie Taylor-Joy (born 16 April 1996) is an actress and model. Born in Florida and raised in Buenos Aires and London, Taylor-Joy identifies as a white Latina.

And for the "early life" section, which explains everything in detail with references:

Taylor-Joy holds triple British, American, and Argentine citizenship. She identifies as a white Latina.

The Variety article has started a bit of a controversy since it originally described her as a person of colour, which she is not (there's now a correction notice at the bottom which is where "white Latina" appears), which has produced quite a lot of discussion now about her ethnicity. I think it's WP:NOTNEWS but we might want to mention a bit about it. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 13:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Completely disagree. Mentioning that she's a "white Latina" or identifies as one is frivolous and gives that...issue undue weight. And citing ethnicity in the opening paragraph sets a really bad precedent. Also, a lot of Argentines are white, so the whole thing is redundant. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Variety should just hire better editors and consider getting a diversity trainer. That said, one would natutally jump to the conclusion that she could be biracial because her mother was born and raised in an African nation where the plurality of the population is a Bantu people. It just gives me the shingles seeing a state juxtaposed to two foreign cities. "Anya Josephine Marie Taylor-Joy is an actress with triple citizenship of the United States, Argentina, and the United Kingdom" may be the most diplomatic route, I think. Trillfendi (talk) 19:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

The last thing Variety needs is a diversity trainer. Frankly, that whole controversy was stupid and overblown and really underscores how meaningless terms like "people of color" are. I'm black, and I find this entire discourse baffling, but it speaks volumes about how hollow the Western obsession with race and ethnicity is. Anyway, I'm not a fan of the construction you've offered, since citizenship is something that's mentioned later in the piece. She's Argentine-British, and that's how the article should open. Sure, she has U.S. citizenship by virtue of the fact that she was born here, but I think parentage is what ought to matter when writing these articles. Anybody who sees that a subject was born in the U.S. knows that that person also holds a U.S. citizenship. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I am not a fan of the "born in Miami, raised in ..." It seems sort of clunky to me. Taylor-Joy has herself said that her being born in Miami and thus possessing American citizenship was a "fluke" due to her parents simply being there on vacation. If there was an issue with the current lead I would most prefer changing it to simply "... is an Argentine-British actress ..." with a later explanation of her American birth and citizenship. If that is unacceptable and keeping it the way it is now is also an issue, then I would be most supportive of Trillfendi's suggestion of "Anya Josephine Marie Taylor-Joy is an actress with triple citizenship of the United States, Argentina, and the United Kingdom". { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 21:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with the first part of what you said. The box mentions that she was born in Miami. Anybody who reads that can infer that she has U.S. citizenship. The intro should focus on her parentage and the cultural milieu she's closest to, not the circumstances surrounding her birth. That's why I propose that we stick with the original wording. Mentioning that she holds U.S. citizenship later in the piece suffices. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

• American, British, and Argentine actress. Nationality should be mentioned in the lead while respecting her ties to all three counties; i.e Saoirse Ronan.--Bettydaisies (talk) 21:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I'd go so far as to argue that Ronan should be described solely as Irish. Anybody born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen, so I'd omit explicitly mentioning that in the opening. It should just be mentioned later in the piece. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

She identifies as both Irish and a New Yorker, according to her "Personal life", section, so I'm sure that factors into it somehow.--

Bettydaisies (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, but she was born to undocumented Irish immigrants living in the United States. I'd say that entitles her to the American descriptor. Anya Taylor-Joy has a lot in common with Nicole Kidman. She was born in America (and is therefore an American citizen), but she was born to non-American parents. Just as Kidman is listed as Australian, Taylor-Joy should be listed as Argentine-British. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 05:32, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Nicole Kidman's page, for whatever reason, has had her lede sentence changed to "American-Australian", though I never saw a consensus on her talk page. Going through the page editing history, seems like someone tried changing it back, but it was reverted. Not sure what's going on there, but I reverted it back to only saying "Australian" for the time being. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 07:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• Everyone is overthinking this. She's Argentine-British. The fact that she's American-born is extraneous and doesn't need to be mentioned in the opening. She was born in Florida, and by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment's definition of citizenship, she's a U.S. citizen, but neither of her parents were Americans at the time of her birth. Millie Bobby Brown was born in Spain, but the opening to her article doesn't describe her as "Spanish-born." The late John McCain was born in Panama, and Ted Cruz was born in Canada. The same thing applies to them. Hell, I was born in what is today Ukraine to African-American parents, but I don't run around calling myself "Soviet-born." Were it not for the fact that Wikipedia is an American website, we wouldn't even be debating this. I propose describing her as an "Argentine-British actress and model." UncomfortablySmug (talk) 07:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

It also depends what she identifies as, though - as well as what the media describes her as. For instance, Emily Blunt is almost always referred to as a British actress, despite dual American citizenship.--Bettydaisies (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

But by that logic, a person could identify with a country in which they weren't even born. Hilaria Baldwin self-identified as Spanish, but Wikipedia describes her as an American. Should we describe her based on her preferences? On what is supposed to be a neutral website that deals in objective facts? UncomfortablySmug (talk) 05:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Unless this was inevitably lost in the sauce somewhere, she still identifies as an American too. It doesn’t matter what city in Florida (or any state for that matter) that took place in, but damn, to discard it is severely disingenuous. It wasn’t as if she was born to diplomats. In 10 years y’all’ll be saying Shiloh Jolie-Pitt isn’t a Namibian citizen because of the “circumstances” of her birth despite the details and facts provided by her parents and local media. Trillfendi (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree. We can't cut out things because they're cumbersome, especially if it disregards the subject's own views of of their identity.--Bettydaisies (talk) 21:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

By this logic, a person could identify with a country in which they weren't even born. If Hilaria Baldwin were to self-identify as Spanish, would we describe her that way? On what is supposed to be a neutral website that deals in objective facts? UncomfortablySmug (talk) 05:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• This is a complicated one but as an argentine I have seen many interviews where she identifies her attitude towards life as an "argentine" so I think it's important for her not only having that citizenship but also having grown up there (and having half of her family in this country).
• Argentine-British: The best precedent to go off of here is Nicole Kidman. Wikipedia refers to her as Australian, even though she was born in America. Like Anya Taylor-Joy, neither of her parents were American. Andrew Garfield was also born in America and is described as American-British, but his father was American. Same with Mel Gibson (born in America to an American father and listed as American), Sienna Miller (born in America to an American father and listed as British-American), and Danai Gurira (born in America to American parents and listed as Zimbabwean-American). The Kidman precedent is what should be used here. Taylor-Joy was born in America to non-American parents, and while she is undoubtedly an American citizen (like Kidman), she should be described as Argentine-British. UncomfortablySmug (talk) 05:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• No nationality: You can explain in the next sentence “Born in the U.S. and raised in Argentina and Britain...” and then go on with her description.8Dodo8 (talk · contribs) 00:59, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

• Hi @Ivanvector:. Sorry for bumping this, but the last reply was in mid-March and there still seems to be an ongoing debate. There still doesn't seem to be a definite census. Now a user 5 days ago tried editing it to say "American-Argentine-British",[1] but has now been changed back to "American-born Argentine-British.[2]. I agree with @Trillfendi:'s suggestion about changing her lede to mention her triple citizenship. On a tangent and my very late opinion/two cents on the "controversy" of her ethnic background, I agree with @UncomfortablySmug:, all these racial/ethnic labels are useless/arbitrary, and seems like mentions of her ethnic identity have since been removed. Look at Natalie Portman, she is Asian/Asian-American (Israel is in Asia whether people like it or not), but neither the U.S government or your average American would consider her as such. And Gal Gadot is also Asian, but American/English-language media isn't calling her an "Asian actress" AFAIK, and I'm sure there would be "outrage" if Gadot was considered as such. Similar to the Variety article on Taylor-Joy. I'm guessing because many people think that Asian people "cannot" resemble Europeans or be of European background as all Asian people are considered "people of colour" or "non-white" by the United States and other similar, Anglophone countries standards. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 07:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

  I was expecting that this discussion was going to go a very different way. I expected a discussion about how to best present information on her ethnicity/nationality based on what little information has been written about it in reliable sources, but instead we ended up with multiple editors not bothering to look at reliable sources at all and simply synthesizing their own opinions about U.S. birthright citizenship, and whether or not it matters. When it became apparent there was to be no coming back from that, I quietly bowed out. I think the only conclusion to take from this long discussion is that it did not settle anything. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 10:39, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

I picked up this month’s Vanity Fair cover hoping to find some clarity on this from a professional writer, but to keep it brief there was none. Except that she is a woman who is at home in three nations. here’s the digital version Trillfendi (talk) 13:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

References

• "American-Argentine-British triple citizen." Keep it simple stupid. Kire1975 (talk) 23:23, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Citizenship =/= nationality. please refer back to my post above. 193.157.208.107 (talk) 16:18, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Just doing a bit of a yell on this since it is still being debated. We need to come up with a consensus. I think we should remake the RfC with clear options for people to chose from (i.e. a. no mention, b. argentine-british, c. all three, just as an example) so we can solidify it in writing (similar to the note we have on Saoirse's page. This RfC has been going on for like, 8-9 months now and we still don't have a consensus. QueerFilmNerd^talk 08:25, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

By putting a note about I was accused of "navel gazing" when I was talking about the actual media there, not the Wikipedia talk page. If we leave out any one of these nationalities we are either omitting the country where she is a voter, her heritage, or the country she was raised and started her career in. But it seems people think it’s facile to just call her 2 out of 3 (which boggles my mind personally.) Trillfendi (talk) 18:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

The RfC is botched; the current version seems to be stable and acceptable (among registered non-driveby editors, anyway), it has precedent, and I think it's the best option going forward, simply because it's less ridiculous than the other constructions (IMO). Alternatively, if anyone here knows Taylor-Joy, I guess you could ask her to kindly renounce a couple of citizenships -- that would also make things a lot easier. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Argentine citizenship

Okay so I'm opening this up for a discussion because now even I'm confused. It seemed like prior to a few weeks (days?) ago, everyone was under the impression that Taylor-Joy is a triple British, Argentine, and American citizen, through Argentine/British descent and American birth. Now suddenly she is not an Argentine citizen? What are the sources that confirm this? And if it's true that she's not an actual Argentine citizen then I think a line explaining that would be useful as she's still widely described as Argentine in the media. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 12:58, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

She has Argentinian residency but not citizenship/nationality. Source is Anya Taylor Joy in an interview given to InStyle magazine, linked here. Yanyezhnayu (talk) 12:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

In what way would that be possible? Argentina has a permanent citizenship policy, her father is Argentine by birth so that directly transfers his nationality/citizenship to Anya. She lived there until she was 6 years old in Argentina, for which a citizenship was necessary. It's a huge mistake not to mention her Argentine citizenship which comes first than the british one. Alan Rib. (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

As the footnote at the start of the article notes, there are conflicting sources as to whether she has Argentine citizenship. If you can find a WP:reliable source about Argentinian citizenship then that would be relevant.Sbishop (talk) 13:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

personal life section involves unconfirmed

I propose to add a personal life section to the article. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } has objected. There is a discussion at http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Jjj1238#reversion_boyfriend_rumor. I'd like other editors' opinions. In the discussion I used the word "rumor," but I think "suggestion" is stronger. Almost every Wikipedia article about a person has a Personal life section. I think this section for Taylor-Joy would be useful to readers even if it only says relationships are unconfirmed. Tentatively it would read thus (citations in parentheses):

Personal life

Taylor-Joy has deliberately refused to confirm her romantic relationships. (https://www.bustle.com/entertainment/who-is-anya-taylor-joy-dating-relationship) There is strong suggestion that she has been in several relationships, including a current one (as of October 2021) with musician Malcolm McRae. (https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a36477829/who-is-malcolm-mcrae-anya-taylor-joy-boyfriend/) (https://www.bustle.com/entertainment/who-is-anya-taylor-joy-dating-relationship) Greg Dahlen (talk) 19:05, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

No, rumours or suggestions should not be included unless there is a very strong reason to do so, such as discussion in scholarly sources about a historical figure who may or may not have been in a particular relationship. If she has actually refused to discuss her possible relationships, it would be entirely inappropriate to include them. Just like it would (obviously) be inappropriate to say anything about her reticence in talking about her relationships. --bonadea contributions talk 21:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Bonadea why do you say it's "obviously" inappropriate to mention her confirmed unwillingness to confirm relationships? Greg Dahlen (talk) 11:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Apart from the fact that this is not a "confirmed unwillingness": it is minor, trivial, and basically just gossip. Again, if there are scholarly sources talking in depth about her attitude towards disclosing her romantic relationships, that would be one thing. A brief piece in a doubtfully reliable source is not that (again, apart from the fact that the bustle source misrepresented the guardian article). See WP:BLPGOSSIP. --bonadea contributions talk 14:30, 19 November 2021 (UTC) NB: username added to signature after the reply below

Was this comment written by User:Bonadea? It would be nice to sign so I know who to tag.

I'm not sure why you say "again" referring to your conclusion that bustle misrepresented. When a person says "again," it means they've already said something once. But in fact this is the first time you said the bustle article misrepresented.

But actually, reading the bustle article and the guardian article, I do believe you're right.

However, if it were confirmed that Anya had never confirmed a relationship, I don't think you'd need a deep scholarly analysis for it to be included in a Wikipedia article. Personal life sections include confirmed relationships, and noone analyzes why the person decided to confirm.

As far as the sources that attempt to figure out what her relationships, if any, have been, do you think those are gossip? I'd say they are educated guesses, and rise to a higher level than gossip, and merit inclusion as educated guesses. Greg Dahlen (talk) 11:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that was by me – sorry, I apparently managed to add an extra tilde when I signed. There is no need to ping me, but of course I should have signed properly anyway. If you wonder who has made a specific comment you can find out in the same way you would find out who made an edit to an article: look in the edit history. --bonadea <small contributions talk 18:36, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

When a person says "again," it means they've already said something once. Yes. I had already commented that "this is not a "confirmed unwillingness"". An "educated guess" would only merit inclusion if it were actually an educated guess, in other words a scholarly source such as a biography published by a reputable publishing house. Check the "Marriages and relationships" section in Elizabeth Taylor, for example. Wikipedia should never publish rumours and speculations about someone's personal life (especially a living person). The Elle article linked above is definitely gossip, and inappropriate as a source. --bonadea contributions talk 18:49, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Bonadea Okay, I thought you were trying to express some contempt for me by not signing. Glad it was just an error.

Looking at it now, I can see that the "again" is a little ambiguous. I'd say putting it in the parentheses with the statement about bustle misrepresenting guardian makes it most seem like you are claiming you had already said bustle misrepresented guardian once before, when in fact you hadn't. It matters to me because I'd be embarrassed to think you had said it before and I missed it.

Where do you think are the educated guesses in the Liz Taylor section? The only thing in that vein I see is the statement in paragraph five that rumors they were in an affair "were confirmed by a paparazzi shot of them on a yacht in Ischia." Actually I would think the photo doesn't confirm an affair. Wouldn't the only way to confirm an affair with a photo be to get a photo of them having sex? I'm seeing some of the photos here https://lisawallerrogers.com/tag/pictures-of-elizabeth-taylor-and-richard-burton-kissing/ and they don't show the couple having sex.

As far as I know, Elle (magazine) is a highly reputed magazine, with reporters with journalism degrees with strong skills in investigating situations. Is your perception different? I could agree that a strong book would be the best source, but why isn't Elle adequate?

If you accept the info in the Liz Taylor article that their affair was confirmed or strongly suggested by pictures of the couple together, we actually have a picture of Liz and Dick kissing in https://lisawallerrogers.com/tag/pictures-of-elizabeth-taylor-and-richard-burton-kissing/ that is similar to a picture of Anya and Malcolm kissing in https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a36477829/who-is-malcolm-mcrae-anya-taylor-joy-boyfriend/

By the way, as I thought about this, I got to wondering if something makes something probable but doesn't confirm it, can the something that makes it probable be called "evidence"? I put the question on Quora: https://www.quora.com/If-something-exists-that-makes-it-probable-something-else-happened-is-the-first-thing-evidence-that-the-second-thing-happened-Or-is-it-only-evidence-if-it-Proves-the-other-thing-happened. I'm interested because if we do reach a consensus that the Elle info can be included in the Taylor-Joy article, can we call what's in the Elle article "evidence" if it only makes it probable Taylor-Joy has had relationships? Some of the Quora answerers thought yes. I rather doubt it, but I can't think of a better word or concept. I think what's in the Elle article is better than "rumors" or "strong suggestions." Greg Dahlen (talk) 15:43, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

No, the point about the paparazzi comment is that it is supported by an actual published biography, not by the photos themselves. And the point about using that article as an example is that it consistently uses high-quality sources, especially when discussing her relationships. The Elle article contains no actual information (and certainly not any evidence – it explicitly states that it is publishing rumours), so it can't be used. --bonadea contributions talk

Solid no from me. Not every single actor needs a Personal Life section, especially actors who choose to keep their personal life incredibly private, like Anya does. Unless she ever decides to openly discuss her romantic relationships, it's not needed. QueerFilmNerd^talk 05:07, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

QueerFilmNerd^talk I'd say anyone who is notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia should have a Personal Life section. It humanizes the person and fleshes out their life for the reader. Personal lives are important and relevant to achievements. If the only thing you could say in a personal life section is that there is no information or it's difficult to find information, that would give the reader useful information, as it tells them something about the notable person. Greg Dahlen (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, there can be a "Personal life" section. I agree we should not include tabloid-type rumors, but if we strictly report the facts (such as, "Although she has not confirmed dating Malcolm McRae, the two were photographed kissing ...."). Although she has been very private about her personal life, that doesn't mean we should not include what is reliably sourced. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. And if you take just a few minutes to look at other bios you'll see that "Personal life" sections sometimes have information other than romantic relationships. That being said, we should also be mindful of WP:WEIGHT and not write extensively about one or two minor facts. Sundayclose (talk) 19:23, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

There are lot of articles citing she is now "reportedly" married to Malcom. Is it possible to post this information? Even though language like "reported" is used there are multiple sites corroborating, the story.

FictiousLibrarian (talk). 03:59, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

The fact that many articles in gossip and trash magazines report something doesn't make it a fact. Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. It should only be included in the article if a citation can be found from a reliable source, eg a newspaper regarded as a journal of record. Sbishop (talk) 08:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2023

I would like to update the photo of Anya Taylor-Joy to a more recent photo of her at the Super Mario Bros. premiere. 2600:1700:5100:8A00:8939:2795:5657:4649 (talk) 12:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 13:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

American-born?

I think it would be fair to specify Mrs. Taylor-Joy as American-born, given she was born in the United States. Albert Einstein, for example, had multiple citizenships throughout his lifetime, and is specified as German-born since he was born in Germany. Dunkahoop (talk) 06:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Her birth location is covered in the Early life section and in the infobox. Being born in the US has no special relevance to her notability, unlike the somewhat special case for Einstein where being born in Germany is significant for a lot of historical reasons. Geraldo Perez (talk) 06:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

It is. "Born in Miami..." is how the second para starts. Normally nationality would be in the lede, but American-Scottish-English-Argentinian-Spanish-Zambian is a little convoluted, so this makes more apparent sense as-is, I think. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 19:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Early life - "Séamus Heaney"

As per the poet's own Wikipedia article and every source you will find anywhere about him, there is no fada (acute accent) over the "e" in Seamus Heaney's name. Please fix. 92.8.136.81 (talk) 10:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Poirot09 (talk) 11:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Documento Nacional de Identidad

I found Anya Taylor-Joy's DNI (National Identity Document)[1] [2] on the official Cuit website in Argentina. In addition to being a permanent DNI for an Argentine citizen (Not DNI for foreigners residing in the country) that is valid since its date of issue: 12/15/2016.[3] This document confirms that Taylor-Joy also has Argentine citizenship. Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 17:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2024

The personal life section needs a correction: her second wedding ceremony in Venice wasn't public. It was in fact kept private too as they didn't publicly announce anything, nor they published any picture. Any information and picture about it was shared only by third parties such as paparazzi and gossip sites. Therefore, this: "They held a second, public wedding during the last weekend of September 2023 at the Palazzo Pisani Moretta in Venice, Italy." Should be changed to this: "They held a second ceremony during the last weekend of September 2023 at the Palazzo Pisani Moretta in Venice, Italy." ViandantEh (talk) 15:40, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done —Sirdog (talk) 02:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2024

Glass movie is not the sequel to split movie. 84.84.207.78 (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ⸺(Random)staplers 17:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)