Jump to content

Talk:Wendy Carlos: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
Bots
1,374,105 edits
m Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Wendy Carlos/Archive 2. (BOT)
 
(34 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|listas=Carlos, Wendy|1=
{{WikiProject Women in Red|150}}
{{WikiProject Biography|filmbio-work-group=yes |musician-work-group=yes |musician-priority=low |filmbio-priority=low}}
{{WikiProject Composers}}
{{WikiProject Classical music}}
{{WikiProject Electronic music|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Women}}
{{WikiProject LGBT studies|person=yes}}
{{WikiProject Women in Music|importance=Low}}
}}
{{MOS-TW}}
{{MOS-TW}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|1=
{{WIR-00-2020}}
{{WikiProject Biography |living=yes |class=B |filmbio-work-group=yes |musician-work-group=yes |listas=Carlos, Wendy |musician-priority=low |filmbio-priority=low}}
{{WikiProject Composers |class=B}}
{{WikiProject Classical music|contemporary=yes|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Electronic music |class=B |importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Women |class=B}}
{{WikiProject LGBT studies |class=B |person=yes}}
{{WikiProject Women in Music |class=B |importance=Low}}
}}
{{Photo requested|date=January 2017|composers}}
{{Photo requested|date=January 2017|composers}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
Line 23: Line 24:
}}
}}


== synthpop? jazz? ==
== An edit notice or FAQ may help slow the thrashing about naming in the lead and infobox ==
I don't recall that any of her works could be categorised as "synthpop". Can you provide any examples or should we remove that label? And how about jazz? --[[Special:Contributions/80.221.189.8|80.221.189.8]] ([[User talk:80.221.189.8|talk]]) 14:58, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be a never-ending supply of editors (usually newish) who change the lead or Infobox in order to [[WP:RGW|campaign for what they think is right]] regarding Carlos's birth name. A similar thing used to happen pretty often regarding [[Leslie Feinberg]]'s pronouns, until we applied an [[WP:Edit notice]] to the article. That didn't stop it entirely, but it slowed it way down. To see the edit notice, go to [[Leslie Feinberg]] and click the Edit link as if you were going to edit the page.

Do we want to add an Edit notice here about changing the naming in the article, along the lines of the one at [[Leslie Feinberg]]? If so, I'm happy to create one. If not, we may need to request [[WP:SEMIPROTECT|semi-protection]] for this article, but I'm hoping we can avoid that. (As a side note, if an edit notice is created, mobile web users *will* see the notice before they can edit, although apparently mobile iOS app users will not see it, per {{phab|T201596}}.)

Another approach we could try, is to add a [[Template:FAQ|FAQ box]] to the header section at the top of the page. You can see a FAQ box in action at [[Talk:Rachel Levine]], [[Talk:Elliot Page]], and [[Talk:Chelsea Manning]]. All of these have a FAQ question about deadname, which are resolved differently, according to the circumstances of the individual cases. We could do something like that here, as well. Thanks, [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 06:00, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

:It's a reasonable idea, but I do wonder sometimes if people actually read these things. There is already a HTML note explaining that there is a talk page consensus that Carlos was previously notable under another name, but it doesn't seem to have much of an effect.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 06:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:: I can believe they don't read the FAQ as much, but it's a place to point to, if you revert someone. But the Edit notice is a different kind of animal; you can't very well *not* read it, as it comes up very much in your face, when you try to edit the article. There's kind of no way to not see it. [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 07:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
:::Er, use mobile? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] &#x1f339; ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 11:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
::::As a trans woman all I can say is that even if a trans person was notable under another name previously it SUCKS to have every article / every item on a person feel it needs to prominently include said dead name
::::Honestly, its frustrating to think that a trans person is forever denied the right to have their dead name actually die.
::::How many trans people were consulted / included in the decision process? this being the talk page - I don't see said "talk page consensus" or really any actual discussion of the appropriateness of deadnaming her.
::::Yes she was notable under another name .. over 40 years ago. I really wish we could give trans people - even ones that are notable - some dignity in this regard.
::::
::::[[User:DigitalSorceress|DigitalSorceress]] ([[User talk:DigitalSorceress|talk]]) 13:45, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::{{tq|As a trans woman all I can say is that even if a trans person was notable under another name previously it SUCKS to have every article / every item on a person feel it needs to prominently include said dead name}}
:::::Same. The policy about "notable under their deadname" at least has some logic to it, but not when the subject has been out for over 40 years. When was the last time anything was released under Wendy's deadname? Why does it have to be in the lead? I know about [[MOS:GENDERID]], and there's consensus on the issue. But it seems that consensus was built more around people like Elliot Page and Caitlyn Jenner, when a recent transition might genuinely confuse some readers looking at an article.
:::::I doubt a rational discussion could be had about it right now. But maybe there's a path toward consensus that the deadnaming policy is being applied by the letter of the MOS, not the spirit. Maybe the deadname policy itself could be revised some day.
:::::Or, we must keep the deadname in the lead because without it, someone who obtained the original theatrical release of a clockwork orange might get confused when they google who did the music. /s [[User:Sativa Inflorescence|Sativa Inflorescence]] ([[User talk:Sativa Inflorescence|talk]]) 14:45, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::Also, terrible thought: Everybody dies. When it's Wendy's time, everyone will flock to wikipedia and before the first sentence is over, the reader will view the deadname as equally important as her real name. Really disgusting, and a reminder why I'm a wikidoomer, and deleting all of wikipedia might be the best option lol. [[User:Sativa Inflorescence|Sativa Inflorescence]] ([[User talk:Sativa Inflorescence|talk]]) 14:51, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::At least, once Wendy passes, she will no longer be personally offended. The deadname advocates have fought for YEARS to include this hurtful information. The ludicrous explanation－that somebody might buy an original LP pressing of "Clockwork Orange" and be confused by it－is a transparent excuse for gender identity intransigence. [[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 13:43, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
:::::::I respectfully disagree that the [[WP:PLA|principle of least astonishment]] has no purpose here. I think that the statement that this {{tq|is a transparent excuse for gender identity intransigence}} is a failure to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. We have a policy, [[MOS:DEADNAME]], that governs the use of notable deadnames. I would ask those who disagree with the consensus policy to please consider the [[WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS]] portion of the [[WP:TE|tendentious editing]] essay. [[User:Peaceray|Peaceray]] ([[User talk:Peaceray|talk]]) 15:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Quite right. The [[MOS:DEADNAME]] style guide is clear about such cases in which the birth name is associated with early fame. Let's not stick our collective head in the sand and ignore this aspect. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 16:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
:Her identity does not need a caveat or asterisk. This is not like a casual name change or the way an actor changes their name. See day Carlos is not a character she puts on or an alter ego, it is who she is. Once she felt comfortable to do so she informed the world that they had been mistaken about her identity. She has corrected everyone on the subject. She is Wendy Carlos. Period. It’s a matter of factuality. Her dead name is irrelevant to her legacy and historical contribution. It’s hard to see how any argument to the contrary isn’t either purely in bad faith or stems directly from a frankly harmful level of stubbornness and lack of ability to empathize with the situation. Her name was never truly that. It’s like if via the “telephone game” many people were under the false impression that a girl named Emily was named Sarah and on said girls wiki page you named her as Emily (unless you heard it’s Sarah, some people think it’s Sarah). EXCEPT that no one would ever hatefully call a girl named Emily Sarah, and if a girl named Emily informed Wikipedia editors that her name was not in fact Sarah you’d change it. This is literally the point and purpose of Wikipedia’s editability. So that errors can be corrected and are not recorded forever as such in our human history. It’s ok. I understand it can be hard and even uncomfortable, when you are not personally affected by an error like this, to not see how incredibly harmful it is. But that is why the wise but privileged person listens to members of marginalized communities, to better understand a perspective they can never truly know. Please don’t be the kind of people that fight to invalidate trans identities, I’d have thought better of this community [[User:Maravelous77|Maravelous77]] ([[User talk:Maravelous77|talk]]) 03:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
::Please forgive the grammatical errors. I’m swipe typing this. I think the point still gets across [[User:Maravelous77|Maravelous77]] ([[User talk:Maravelous77|talk]]) 03:45, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

== Wendy Carlos Streaming ==

Her work is available on Spotify. Her biography on Wikipedia states that her discography is largely unavailable and not licensed for streaming services. This edit would correct that error and increase awareness of her life and achievements [[User:Andy6502|Andy6502]] ([[User talk:Andy6502|talk]]) 15:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

:I had a look on Spotify [https://open.spotify.com/artist/5MmXZQUGs0eXP5PV79iKrB] and it isn't anything like a comprehensive list of her works. It is still true that many of her works can only be bought as compact discs or vinyl on the used market, and are not available on streaming services. It is unusually difficult to buy Carlos's work new nowadays.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 15:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
::There is currently no published works on clockwork orange on spotify or youtube and lead me to this wikipedia article because of it [[Special:Contributions/66.74.198.140|66.74.198.140]] ([[User talk:66.74.198.140|talk]]) 11:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Most(not all) of her discography is Streamable on Amazon.com's Music service or cds can be bought there, as per a deal she made with amazon a while back, as well as deals with Barnes and Noble and(now defunct) Boarders. This includes the Clockwork Orange soundtrack. [[User:5cardz|5cardz]] ([[User talk:5cardz|talk]]) 23:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

== Additions ==

Could whoever is wielding the eraser on my edits please hold fire? I have literally just acquired the new Carlos biography and will add the appropriate references asap. Thank you. Please show a modicum of patience. [[User:Dunks58|Dunks]] ([[User talk:Dunks58|talk]]) 10:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
:You should add the ref in the ''same'' edit as the content that it supports, that way people know that you're not fabricating it. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] &#x1f339; ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 20:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
:Dunks, I assume the "new Carlos biography" you refer to is by Amanda Sewell, since it's the only one out there. You should know that Carlos herself has proclaimed it untruthful, full of misinterpretations/speculations, and not to be trusted. I found the book to be generally an in-depth compilation of publicly-available information on Wendy, except when Sewell veered into speculation about Wendy's state-of-mind and made unsupported statements about suicidal ideation. A much better portrait of Wendy can be had by spending about a month reading everything she herself has posted on her website. She does not hold back on any subject. [[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 13:54, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
::Dunks, I just noticed that you repeated Sewell's unfounded speculation in the section on "Switched-On Bach." Since this episode is already covered FACTUALLY under the "Gender Transition" paragraph－where it rightfully belongs－your addition should probably be backed out. I'm done editing Wendy's page; it's a thankless task fighting the intransigents; but you can certainly correct your own addition. [[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 14:17, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

== Section Proposal: Influence on Contemporary Electronic Music ==

''I'd like to propose the following section to highlight her influence on contemporary electronic music-- other articles featuring notable musicians tend to have an influence/legacy section, and she deserves one too! <3''
[[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:Tomato"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 16:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

[Draft to follow below]

== Draft: Influence on Contemporary Electronic Music ==
Wendy Carlos's pioneering work with synthesizers and electronic music in the 1960s and 1970s has had a significant impact on the development of contemporary electronic music. Her use of analog synthesizers and innovative sound design techniques helped shape the sound of early electronic music and laid the groundwork for later genres such as ambient, techno, and electro-pop.

Numerous contemporary artists cite Carlos as a major influence on their own work. Among them are Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, who described Carlos's album "Switched-On Bach" as a "life-changing" experience, and praised her for "taking this unwieldy instrument and making music with it that feels timeless".[1] Aphex Twin has cited Carlos as one of his biggest inspirations and has covered her song "Beauty in the Beast".[2] Daft Punk has also spoken about Carlos's influence, with Thomas Bangalter stating that "her music is some of the most important electronic music ever made".[3]
Carlos's influence can also be heard in the work of ambient and experimental artists such as Brian Eno, who has cited her as a key inspiration,[4] and Tangerine Dream, who have described her as a "pioneer of electronic music".[5] Her use of synthesizers to create atmospheric textures and otherworldly soundscapes was especially influential in the development of ambient music, which often prioritizes mood and atmosphere over traditional song structures.

Today, Carlos's legacy continues to be celebrated in electronic music circles. Her use of analog synthesizers and other vintage gear is seen as a hallmark of "classic" electronic music, and her groundbreaking work with early synthesizers and sound design techniques has left an indelible mark on the genre.
= References == {{Reflist}}
References:
Pareles, Jon. "Wendy Carlos's Switched-On Bach, the First Classic Synthesizer Album." The New York Times, 10 Mar. 2016. Accessed 16 Feb. 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/arts/music/wendy-carloss-switched-on-bach-the-first-classic-synthesizer-album.html.
Colburn, Randall. "Aphex Twin Covers Wendy Carlos's 'Beauty In The Beast': Listen." Consequence, 3 Aug. 2020. Accessed 16 Feb. 2023. https://consequence.net/2020/08/aphex-twin-wendy-carlos-beauty-in-the-beast/.
"Daft Punk Talk Wendy Carlos, Dance Music and More in Rare Interview." Rolling Stone, 17 May 2013. Accessed 16 Feb. 2023. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/daft-punk-talk-wendy-carlos-dance-music-and-more-in-rare-interview-196615/.
Hogan, Marc. "Brian Eno Talks Inspiration, China, and His Brilliant New Album, The Ship." Pitchfork, 29 Apr. 2016. Accessed 16 Feb. 2023. https://pitchfork.com/features/interview/9944-brian-eno-talks-inspiration-china-and-his-brilliant-new-album-the-ship/.
"Interview: Tangerine Dream on the Evolution of Electronic Music." Reverb.com, 28 Apr. 2016. Accessed 16 Feb. 2023. https://reverb.com/news/interview-tangerine-dream-on-the-evolution-of-electronic-music.

[[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:Tomato"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 16:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

:Shoutout to @[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] for improving the style, cutting it down to size a little, and bringing it in line with MOS! Thank you! <3 [[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#e24666"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 18:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It's nothing much. I think the problem you had with the previous version was that quite a lot of the proposed section was unsourced analysis of Carlos' influence. I've just removed those unsourced statements and left the cited facts. <span style="font-family: Opensans, sans-serif;">[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] ([[User talk:Schminnte|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Schminnte|contribs]])</span> 18:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry, {{u|Atomic putty? Rien!}} but where exactly are your references taken from. The URLs provided are either blank, broken or link to a different page. I have checked the wayback machine as well and there has been no luck. As these are quotations, I'm going to remove the section for now until references are either proved or provided. Sorry for the hassle. <span style="font-family: Opensans, sans-serif;">[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] ([[User talk:Schminnte|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Schminnte|contribs]])</span> 19:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

:@[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] super odd. It's probably my fault, I'm not very experienced with finding/adding citations-- let me retrace my steps [[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#e24666"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 19:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
:Update: I think the NYT stuff is locked behind paywalls. : (
:I've sourced *an* anecdote from Aphex Twin listing Carlos as one of his favorites-- feels a little like cherrypicking tho. Probably best to leave him out.
:(Found this from a blog post too, so I don't necessarily trust it)
:“Kraftwerk’s weirder stuff, Wendy Carlos, Terry Riley, Steve Reich. I probably like Steve Reich best ... this is music I enjoy."
:https://lannerchronicle.wordpress.com/2020/11/18/aphex-twin-q-magazine-march-1994/
: [[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#e24666"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 19:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
:As for the other stuff, feeding the quotations into google and pairing up the results with the automatic citation tool might turn up usable citations, but it seems like a lot of work, eek [[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#e24666"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 19:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If there are no reliable sources for a quote, I would recommend not using it. If you could attempt to find references using the automatic cite tool that would be great. <span style="font-family: Opensans, sans-serif;">[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] ([[User talk:Schminnte|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Schminnte|contribs]])</span> 19:54, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

:Will do! Thank you for all of your advice!!
: [[User:Atomic putty? Rien!|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#e24666"> Atomic putty? Rien! </span>]] 20:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
::This needs to be a lot tighter. The version that I reverted had way too much unsourced analysis. The cites should directly support the text.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 20:35, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

{{ping|IanMacM}} If you see the (now reverted) changes I made to the section, all of the unsourced analysis was removed. I am troubled by the lack of sourcing though, hence my revert. <span style="font-family: Opensans, sans-serif;">[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] ([[User talk:Schminnte|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Schminnte|contribs]])</span> 20:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

{{ping|Ianmacm}} (Ping again because I messed up.) <span style="font-family: Opensans, sans-serif;">[[User:Schminnte|Schminnte]] ([[User talk:Schminnte|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Schminnte|contribs]])</span> 20:49, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

== Why exactly are we dead naming her? ==


:Jazz is at least somewhat attested in the NYT review of Switched-On Bach that's cited. I've removed synthpop pending a mention in the article and a source. Good catch. [[User:Remsense|<span style="border-radius:2px 0 0 2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F;color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]][[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="border:1px solid #1E816F;border-radius:0 2px 2px 0;padding:1px 3px;color:#000">诉</span>]] 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Her dead name absolutely needs to removed. If you’re not trans you probably won’t get this, and if you are you probably really really do; regardless it’s pet messed up that you dead name her immediately and frequently. Her identity doesn’t need a caveat or asterisk. What exactly is anyone getting out of that? [[User:Maravelous77|Maravelous77]] ([[User talk:Maravelous77|talk]]) 03:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)


== It would be easier to read if the period of Carlos' life before the gender/sex change was referred to as "he" ==
:Please review the [[MOS:DEADNAME]] guideline that states {{tq|In the case of a living transgender or non-binary person, their birth name or former name (professional name, stage name, or pseudonym) should be included in the lead sentence of their main biographical article only if they were notable under that name. Introduce the prior name with either "born" or "formerly".}}
:In 1972, Carlos released ''[[Walter Carlos' Clockwork Orange]]''. Many know her by her former name. Consider the [[WP:PLA|Principle of least astonishment]]. Those searching for Carlos under her former name would be very confused to arrive at an article that contained no mention of that former name. [[User:Peaceray|Peaceray]] ([[User talk:Peaceray|talk]]) 04:00, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
: I really, really, do get it, and what you say is absolutely true in regards to to hundreds of articles about trans individuals at Wikipedia, but it doesn't apply to this article. And if you are not aware of the fact that Carlos was already famous under her birth name, or if you don't know what Wikipedia's DEADNAME guideline says, then you probably won't get this, and if you are, you probably really really will. What we get out of this is a consistent approach to the style of naming trans individuals based on the guidelines. See, for example [[Jan Morris]], or [[Chaz Bono]], or [[Caitlyn Jenner]]. Wendy's situation is just like theirs. [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 08:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
::It was Carlos's own decision to give the interview to ''Playboy'' magazine in 1979 that put all of this into the public domain. She had grown tired of people not knowing that she was transgender, and of the albums being released under the name Walter Carlos even after she had undergone gender reassignment surgery. I get that Carlos doesn't seem to like any of this being mentioned today, but relevant facts that are in the public domain are hard to remove.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 08:05, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


Since Carlos began gender/sex changes around 1968, it would be much easier and factually correct to refer to the earlier period as "he" rather than "she". Perhaps consider using "they" to highlight that the gender of the earlier period is not plain vanilla "she"... [[User:Cawag98|Cawag98]] ([[User talk:Cawag98|talk]]) 00:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
== But why does the infobox need to deadname her twice? ==


:Switching pronouns would be more confusing and less correct. The Manual of Style says not to do this. Please see [[WP:GENDERID]], particularly the Retroactivity section. We can't use "they" for people who have not chosen "they", or at least disclaimed everything else. [[User:DanielRigal|DanielRigal]] ([[User talk:DanielRigal|talk]]) 12:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
I get the MOS policy in this situation, but if you look at articles for Elliot Page, and others, there is no reference to deadname in the infobox. The article only says "formerly X Y Z"
:In addition to what DanielRigal stated, Wendy herself has stated she always felt female. "Didn't see why her parents didn't see it clearly" and all that. For this reason referring to her as "her" throughout her life seems like the kind and respectful thing to do. [[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 21:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)


== Using Amanda Sewell's book as a reference ==
Where does the policy say that the infobox also needs to say the birth name? [[User:Lillianama|Lillianama]] ([[User talk:Lillianama|talk]]) 00:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


I note that somewhere in the past year some of the passages from Amanda Sewell's book about Carlos--which Wendy herself has called "fiction"--have been woven into the narrative of her life. Rather than just dive in & remove them, I'd like to ask the assembled community: do we really want to reproduce allegations that Carlos became suicidal on being asked to perform live, when she herself disputes this?
:You're right, [[MOS:DEADNAME]] only gives us guidance for including the name in the article's lead. Additionally a [[Special:PermaLink/1158982243#Topic_3:_How_often_to_mention_deadnames?_(MOS:GENDERID_3rd_paragraph*)|recent RfC on GENDERID]] left us with a {{tq|clear consensus to use prior names as little as possible}}. So with that in mind, I've removed Carlos' former name from the infobox. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 01:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
::Thank you! [[User:Lillianama|Lillianama]] ([[User talk:Lillianama|talk]]) 02:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
[[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 02:10, 27 September 2024 (UTC)


:I agree that the Amanda Sewell book should not be used for controversial claims with BLP issues. Carlos did not want a biography at all, and although most of the Sewell book is uncontroversial, some of it has been specifically denied by Carlos.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 07:24, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
== Suggestion: More recent photos ==
::So will you, or one of the other senior editors, take on the task of removing disproven content?
::[[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 00:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
:::It shouldn't be removed. We don't remove legitimate sources simply because the subject disputed them. Anything noteworthy should be kept, with a note that Carlos disputes it when appropriate.&mdash;[[User:Chowbok|<span style="background:black; color:white; font-weight: bold;">Chowbok</span>]] [[User talk:Chowbok|<span style="color:black;">☠</span>]] 16:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
::::Wikipedia has a presumption of privacy for living persons. If a controversial claim about a living person is only being made in a single source, then we likely should be removing the content from Wikipedia articles. Per [[WP:BLPPUBLIC]], there should be "{{tq|''multiple'' reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident}}" (emphasis included in policy) or else it should be removed from the article. – [[User:Notwally|notwally]] ([[User talk:Notwally|talk]]) 20:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
::::Are you KIDDING me??? "We don't remove legitimate sources simply because the subject disputed them"? Wendy herself says Sewell's book is "fiction." Why would you propagate untrue assertions when the subject herself says they're untrue? You need to rethink your biases, Chowbok. (And this is why I no longer have any desire to contribute to Wikipedia...)
::::[[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 21:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)


:::::As do you. We do not act as stenographers for the subjects of articles. If she disputes a claim, we can quote that dispute, but we're not going to entirely chuck out a biography by a subject matter expert from one of the world's most reputable publishers. Especially since Carlos " hasn't liked anything anyone's written about her for 45 years" [https://www.interlochen.org/stories/qa-amanda-sewell-phd-author-wendy-carlos-biography] [[User:Gamaliel|<span style="color:DarkGreen;">Gamaliel</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Gamaliel|<span style="color:DarkGreen;">talk</span>]])</small> 01:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
The only photo in the article is from 1958, before her gender transition. It would make more sense to have more recent photos. What about this portrait she uses on her website? With proper attribution, could this go in the infobox? [https://www.wendycarlos.com/photos/wendy+pandy.jpg]https://www.wendycarlos.com/photos/wendy+pandy.jpg? [[User:JCLarsson|JCLarsson]] ([[User talk:JCLarsson|talk]]) 03:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
::::::Per notwally (above): "Per WP:BLPPUBLIC, there should be "multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident" (emphasis included in policy) or else it should be removed from the article." You won't find any other sources that corroborate Sewell's allegations. Is that clear enough?
::::::[[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 01:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::Oxford publishing is very reliable, despite the predictable complaint by Carlos. We are not throwing out the Sewell book simply because Carlos said it was fiction. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 04:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::Dear Binksternet, Gamaliel, Chowbok et al: May I recommend you read, if you have not already, the discussion and resolution of this issue four years ago? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wendy_Carlos/Archive_2
::::::Back then, a particularly-belligerent editor was banned, he created a sock puppet to advocate against the banning, and then was permanently banned when his deceit was uncovered. I don't know if any of you are also sock puppets, but you're making the same argument. [[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 19:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::This accusation is out of line. You said above you had no desire to contribute to Wikipedia; I strongly suggest you follow your (lack of) desire.&mdash;[[User:Chowbok|<span style="background:black; color:white; font-weight: bold;">Chowbok</span>]] [[User talk:Chowbok|<span style="color:black;">☠</span>]] 20:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::It's not an accusation, Chow, it's a fact. This argument has all been covered－and I thought resolved－four years ago. If current editors are unwilling to follow Wiki's own guidelines (WP:BLPPUBLIC) then the lack of adult supervision here makes Wikipedia useless as a public resource.[[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 01:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::But you're right. Ongoing vandalism is not my responsibility. I shall try to forget it exists. [[User:Rcarlberg|Rcarlberg]] ([[User talk:Rcarlberg|talk]]) 01:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
::Sewell clearly states her sources after every chapter. Since she has scoured practically every source available then it would be practically impossible to write anything about Carlos beyond what is on Carlos's website and in her Playboy interview. Dismissing a whole book as fiction by Carlos seems to me a bit extreme without some qualification. Best compromise is to highlight disputed facts but not to dismiss an entire book. We prefer secondary sources to primary sources and Sewell's book is a secondary source. [[User:Egrabczewski|Egrabczewski]] ([[User talk:Egrabczewski|talk]]) 08:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)


== Ancestry.com and Archives.com Sources ==
:Alas, there seem to be no [[public domain]], [[CC-by]], [[CC-by-SA]], or [[freely licensed]] pictures of Wendy Carlos after her transition. The image that you ask about is clearly marked as {{tq|All Rights Reserved}}. [[User:Peaceray|Peaceray]] ([[User talk:Peaceray|talk]]) 03:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)


Are sources such as ancestry.com and archives.com reliable enough sources for a biography, if the information is based on official state records? [[User:Egrabczewski|Egrabczewski]] ([[User talk:Egrabczewski|talk]]) 08:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::Also, the high school yearbook photo has [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wendy_Carlos&curid=34113&diff=1192002067&oldid=1189413141 found its way] back into the article. This was discussed [[Talk:Wendy_Carlos/Archive_1#Inclusion_of_pre-transition_photo|here]] and I'm not sure if it is a good idea to have this.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 10:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:23, 27 December 2024


Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

synthpop? jazz?

[edit]

I don't recall that any of her works could be categorised as "synthpop". Can you provide any examples or should we remove that label? And how about jazz? --80.221.189.8 (talk) 14:58, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz is at least somewhat attested in the NYT review of Switched-On Bach that's cited. I've removed synthpop pending a mention in the article and a source. Good catch. Remsense诉 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be easier to read if the period of Carlos' life before the gender/sex change was referred to as "he"

[edit]

Since Carlos began gender/sex changes around 1968, it would be much easier and factually correct to refer to the earlier period as "he" rather than "she". Perhaps consider using "they" to highlight that the gender of the earlier period is not plain vanilla "she"... Cawag98 (talk) 00:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Switching pronouns would be more confusing and less correct. The Manual of Style says not to do this. Please see WP:GENDERID, particularly the Retroactivity section. We can't use "they" for people who have not chosen "they", or at least disclaimed everything else. DanielRigal (talk) 12:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to what DanielRigal stated, Wendy herself has stated she always felt female. "Didn't see why her parents didn't see it clearly" and all that. For this reason referring to her as "her" throughout her life seems like the kind and respectful thing to do. Rcarlberg (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using Amanda Sewell's book as a reference

[edit]

I note that somewhere in the past year some of the passages from Amanda Sewell's book about Carlos--which Wendy herself has called "fiction"--have been woven into the narrative of her life. Rather than just dive in & remove them, I'd like to ask the assembled community: do we really want to reproduce allegations that Carlos became suicidal on being asked to perform live, when she herself disputes this? Rcarlberg (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Amanda Sewell book should not be used for controversial claims with BLP issues. Carlos did not want a biography at all, and although most of the Sewell book is uncontroversial, some of it has been specifically denied by Carlos.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:24, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So will you, or one of the other senior editors, take on the task of removing disproven content?
Rcarlberg (talk) 00:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't be removed. We don't remove legitimate sources simply because the subject disputed them. Anything noteworthy should be kept, with a note that Carlos disputes it when appropriate.—Chowbok ☠ 16:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has a presumption of privacy for living persons. If a controversial claim about a living person is only being made in a single source, then we likely should be removing the content from Wikipedia articles. Per WP:BLPPUBLIC, there should be "multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident" (emphasis included in policy) or else it should be removed from the article. – notwally (talk) 20:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you KIDDING me??? "We don't remove legitimate sources simply because the subject disputed them"? Wendy herself says Sewell's book is "fiction." Why would you propagate untrue assertions when the subject herself says they're untrue? You need to rethink your biases, Chowbok. (And this is why I no longer have any desire to contribute to Wikipedia...)
Rcarlberg (talk) 21:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As do you. We do not act as stenographers for the subjects of articles. If she disputes a claim, we can quote that dispute, but we're not going to entirely chuck out a biography by a subject matter expert from one of the world's most reputable publishers. Especially since Carlos " hasn't liked anything anyone's written about her for 45 years" [1] Gamaliel (talk) 01:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per notwally (above): "Per WP:BLPPUBLIC, there should be "multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident" (emphasis included in policy) or else it should be removed from the article." You won't find any other sources that corroborate Sewell's allegations. Is that clear enough?
Rcarlberg (talk) 01:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oxford publishing is very reliable, despite the predictable complaint by Carlos. We are not throwing out the Sewell book simply because Carlos said it was fiction. Binksternet (talk) 04:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Binksternet, Gamaliel, Chowbok et al: May I recommend you read, if you have not already, the discussion and resolution of this issue four years ago? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wendy_Carlos/Archive_2
Back then, a particularly-belligerent editor was banned, he created a sock puppet to advocate against the banning, and then was permanently banned when his deceit was uncovered. I don't know if any of you are also sock puppets, but you're making the same argument. Rcarlberg (talk) 19:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This accusation is out of line. You said above you had no desire to contribute to Wikipedia; I strongly suggest you follow your (lack of) desire.—Chowbok ☠ 20:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an accusation, Chow, it's a fact. This argument has all been covered－and I thought resolved－four years ago. If current editors are unwilling to follow Wiki's own guidelines (WP:BLPPUBLIC) then the lack of adult supervision here makes Wikipedia useless as a public resource.Rcarlberg (talk) 01:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But you're right. Ongoing vandalism is not my responsibility. I shall try to forget it exists. Rcarlberg (talk) 01:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sewell clearly states her sources after every chapter. Since she has scoured practically every source available then it would be practically impossible to write anything about Carlos beyond what is on Carlos's website and in her Playboy interview. Dismissing a whole book as fiction by Carlos seems to me a bit extreme without some qualification. Best compromise is to highlight disputed facts but not to dismiss an entire book. We prefer secondary sources to primary sources and Sewell's book is a secondary source. Egrabczewski (talk) 08:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry.com and Archives.com Sources

[edit]

Are sources such as ancestry.com and archives.com reliable enough sources for a biography, if the information is based on official state records? Egrabczewski (talk) 08:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wendy_Carlos&oldid=1265561490"