Talk:April Ashley

BLP comment

As she has made TV appearances during which she has publicized the notable activities described in the article, I do not consider that the articles is in any way a violation of BLP. I assume she would be glad of the publicity, and perhaps she will provide at GFDL picture. DGG 02:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Gender

In compliance with wikipedia:Manual of Style; I have changed all references to gender to female. See: "Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to using the gendered nouns, pronouns, and possessive adjectives that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. This applies when referring to any phase of that person's life. Nevertheless, avoid confusing or seemingly logically impossible text that could result from pronoun usage (for example: She fathered her first child)." 71.225.69.87 (talk) 23:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

"Musician"

April ashley was/is not a musician; therefore, I have removed the tag.

Rape

Re "A homosexual roommate raped her, and was severely injured as a result of the sexual assault" - this implies that the rommate was injured not her, is that correct? It seems unclear. Gymnophoria (talk) 13:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Names April has gone by

see here : http://www.wellcomecollection.org/whats-on/exhibitions/identity/image-gallery.aspx?view=april-ashley%E2%80%99s-id-card

This card bears the name April Ashley West, one of the many that Ashley has used. Others include George Jamieson, Toni April, the Honourable Mrs Arthur Corbett and Mrs Jeff West.

Questionable sources

After some thought, I've tagged this article as having questionable sources. Much of what has been said does not, to someone like myself with some knowledge in this area, ring true. Looking at the references, they are mostly things April has said about herself, which falls foul of guidelines on sources writing about themselves. At this point, removing those sources and then removing the resultant uncited material, as per the BLP guidelines, would destroy the article, so I'm not inclined to do that unless no further sources can be found. ~Excesses~ (talk) 19:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Dishonourable Discharge

I doubt if Ashley was given a dishonourable discharge, as the Merchant Navy was not a military organization. What she may well have received was an annotation in her discharge book reading DR for Decline to Deport. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 16:51, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Birth name

April Ashley was named at birth George Jamieson. ("April Ashley to Appeal". The Guardian. London. 20 March 1970.)

According to MOS:DEADNAME

"In some cases, subjects have had their full names changed at some point after birth. In these cases the birth name should be given in the lead as well".

According to MOS:GENDERID (my bold)

"Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography § Changed names calls for mentioning the former name of a transgender person if they were notable under that name. In other respects, the MoS does not specify when and how to mention former names, or whether to give the former or current name first."

I can see no good reason why the original name of the person which is a matter of public record should be excluded from an encyclopaedia. I do not agree with the reversion. However I hereby withdraw my attempt to do so. Chemical Engineer (talk) 09:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Read more of MOS:DEADNAME, "In the case of transgender and non-binary people, birth names should be included in the lead sentence only when the person was notable under that name." In other words the name should not be included in the lead. I cited MOS:GENDERID since you were refering to April as George before her transition, going against policy there to use most up-to-date preference for name in all cases. WP:BLP is clear on avoiding prolonging harassment and victimization. Since her former name was publicized against her will to shame her and push her out of her industry I'd be against including her name at all. Prior RFC for other trans public figures who's former names have been published against their wishes have also followed this understanding of BLP to avoid including former names in these cases. Rab V (talk) 10:14, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

More to the point her former name was put out in the media to belittle her and ruin her career. She never used it professionally and including it will not let the reader understand April Ashley any better. The main purpose it would serves is to prolong harm and harassment the subject suffered. In this case I'm fairly certain an RFC would lead to a decision not to include the name due to WP:BLP and that has been true in prior cases that were even less extreme than this one.Rab V (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't see why "born George Jamieson" can't be added to the opening sentence. It's a simple fact, e.g. as with Lorielle London. By the way, the birth registration record at FreeBMD is this one. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Per MOS:DEADNAME. London seems to have film credits under her birth name.—Bagumba (talk) 09:00, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

So that seems clear. I see no similar guidance on the use of birthname in the infobox, so I've added it there. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

It clarifies the report. Without the birth-name, it is possible to read the intro para and not know whether April was born male or female. Valetude (talk) 11:06, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

MOS:DEADNAME only applies to living people, and April Ashley is deceased, therefore it's now ok to put her original name. 2.29.206.252 (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Not sure where you got this... MOS:DEADNAME is under biography not BLP. Again, the question is do we have notability under the birth name. Antisymmetricnoise (talk) 21:33, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Birth name inclusion

So I am conflicted about the most recent dual edits adding the birth name. I reverted the first one as it did not immediately address the notability issue. But I appreciate that the most recent re-addition is a much more nuanced attempt to balance the due weight placed on the name in the article. The quality of the biographical source provided is good albeit without resolving the notability issue, the placement in the article is much more delicate. However the fundamental question stands; is the inclusion of the name applying undue weight in an article about someone whose name was only ever revealed as a matter of public interest for the purposes of their victimisation? Was this individual notable under that name? Is the name information in the encyclopaedic context?

The MOS:DEADNAME rationale is a synthesis of WP:NOTEVERYTHING, WP:UNDUE, and WP:HARM. The new inclusion provides a greater weight balance but I am unconvinced it does not still constitute undue weight. Antisymmetricnoise (talk) 15:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe that the deadname/birthname of this individual is appropriate for inclusion here. On most biographical sources of this individual, the birth name is not listed (examples: 1, 2, 3, 4). MOS:DEADNAME specifically states to use the name most recently self-identified by the person in recent reliable sources to refer to individuals. This invididual was known by the name "April Ashley" since at least the 1960s according to this source. There really is no reason to include the birthname of this individual, in my opinion. Iscargra (talk) 12:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Ok I am trying to avoid an edit war over this but I am going to revert the name addition on basis of undue weight by sourcing, based on your source forwards argument. If a bulk set of reliable biographical sources do not include the birth name, cherry picking a single source (especially in citing a biography sample page) seems like undue weight. Antisymmetricnoise (talk) 16:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Sigh ok I would like to in essence retract my own response here. A some of the of the sources that Iscargra (talk) included do use at least part of April's birth name, although some restrain themselves explicitly to the first name. It's worth noting that the national archives source, an article specifically about the name change, which actually contains the direct sourcing of the name change deed poll, elects not to report the name, whereas secondary sources all of which are sourcing the "Portrait of a Lady" biography, often linking to the same sample page sometimes do. I am going to take a deeper look into the sourcing here. But source prevalence is less of a deciding argument. At the end of the day the question returns to is it a fit for the encyclopaedic context of wikipedia. Antisymmetricnoise (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

My apologies, I likely should have checked the sources deeper. I previously only did a cursory check of the sources. You are correct in concluding that it does come down to essentially whether or not the inclusion of this individual's birth name is necessary in a biographical encyclopedia entry. I have found further guidance on this subject at MOS:GIDINFO. This specifically states: "If a transgender subject's former or legal name is not well known or widely reported, don't include it, even if it appears in a few reliable sources." I believe this may be the best applicable MOS guidance in this situation.

Iscargra (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Essay's reasonable rationale aside I think I'm also going note that the name has no encyclopedic utility for matching/finding relevant sources, which is a key test for whether or not to include a former name. All sources are use the name April Ashley as the primary name of not and any mentions of the other name are found in sources about the individual April Ashley. Antisymmetricnoise (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)