Talk:Zuby

Untitled

This new article was rejected by GoingBatty because it lacked references that: "show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject"

So.... I've added more sources, all of which fulfill the above criteria:

a) the new sources are articles dedicated to Zuby (not just passing mentions), and, b) the new sources are some of the largest newspapers in the world (and, presumably, are published, reliable, secondary sources, independent of Zuby).

The_Sun_(United_Kingdom) (largest newspaper in the UK) wrote article dedicated to Zuby:

The Times wrote article dedicated to Zuby:

Washington Examiner wrote article dedicated to Zuby:

RT_(TV_network) (Russian TV network) wrote article dedicated to Zuby.

Sky News dedicated article:

Spiked_(magazine) dedicated article:

BBC dedicated article:

All of these references are very large news organizations, and independent of Zuby. Thus, this article should now be included in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisefroggy (talk • contribs) 23:01, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Requested move 17 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Wrong forum. If you believe he does not meet notability guidelines, nominate the article for deletion at WP:AFD. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:25, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Zuby (rapper) → ? – This page does not meet notability guidelines, all information and sources relate to one controversial story, and one news report of an incident that does not relate to him as a person. I have done a good faith search and he has released music, but isn't notable for it (not reviewed in the press, or talked about in general) He does however have a large twitter following, but this isn't necessarily notable in itself unless he was noted for it in other secondary sources. For that reason I believe the title should be changed according to the notability guidelines to reflect the incident, not the person.- Benakt (talk) 18:09, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

• Comment It seems like he passes WP:GNG, and he is referred to as Zuby, and rapper by profession in the references. I say leave as is, unless someone has another disambiguator that makes more sense.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

  I don't think he does, in notability guidelines it says that they can't only be notable for one specific event, with the example of if someone were to be murdered it should be titled "The murder of Jane Doe." not "Jane Doe (Musician)" even if she was. All but one of the articles use rapper as a qualifier rather than an absolute ('Nzube Udezue, a rapper' rather than 'Zuby, the rapper') and one of the sources specifically says "Zuby, who shot to internet fame after tweeting a video last year in which he claimed he was identifying as a woman in order to "destroy" the British women's deadlifting record". If the incident itself isn't notable enough to warrant a specific new title (which I'm inclined to agree with you about) I don't believe that we should keep a non-notable person as a notability figure and after this discussion is up, put it up for a deletion debate. Or maybe to change the name to the incident he is known for, then assess that article on its own (about whether it should stay or go). Either way I do think the WP:GNG says you can't be known for one incident- and he is. One other thought is maybe merging into an article more closely related to Trans Men and Women in sports? 81.98.50.184 (talk) 19:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

  Hi 81.98.50.184: the article Zuby (rapper) has had substantial material and sources added since you last voiced your opinion. Please re-evaluate the latest version so we can include your opinion. Thanks! Wisefroggy (talk) 04:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

• Leave as-is. Seems to easily pass WP:GNG - as a person he is notable - he has had articles written specifically about him by large news organizations, and is interviewed at least semi-regularly. As Benakt pointed out, he does have a large twitter following, and his tweets are quoted by large newspapers (Washington Post, for example ). Further, material has been added to the article since the original requested move - the current article should be re-evaluated by anyone proposing a move. Wisefroggy (talk) 04:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

• I completely disagree with the statement that the articles are dedicated to him- as mentioned above, they are dedicated to incidents, not to him (which is specifically mentioned as not passing WP:GNG)- he isn’t famous in his own right. As a person he is not notable for his body of work- something which notability specifically mentions. At the very least he does not meet the guidelines to be posted as a musician, and when posting him as a media personality (which would be far more appropriate given the sources Wisefroggy just added) it would be more appropriate to name an/the article about specific incidents, but then I feel these incidents aren’t specifically notable in their own right either, and should be added to articles relating to their subject matter. There isn’t one singular interview with Zuby that is a piece just about him, or even about his music, that I could find. I think deletion is most appropriate. Benakt (talk) 10:01, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

  Benakt said "There isn’t one singular interview with Zuby that is a piece just about him". Here is one, from the largest news organization (perhaps? not sure) in USA:, where he is interviewed on a range of various topics including race, Kanye West, and politics. Importantly, this interview does not even mention the transgender weightlifting incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisefroggy (talk • contribs) 04:26, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

• I looked at the additional sources added by Wisefroggy and I don’t believe they are about him as a figure, they are about incidents (incidents which I don’t believe merit their own article). I would say that this page should be deleted with the relevant incidents incorporated into a Discrimination in Sport/Discrimination within the police article or something 81.98.50.184 (talk) 18:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Here is one example "about him as a figure".Wisefroggy (talk) 03:46, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Current Consensus:

Wisefroggy(contribs): Leave as-is. Note this user (me) has hundreds of edits spanning many years.

Ortizesp(contribs): Leave as-is. Note this user has untold thousands (or even tens of thousands!?) of edits.

User:Benakt(contribs): Change to '?' - Benakt is the originator of this renaming request, but did not propose a new name (only suggested a question mark - see top of this section). Further:

user Benakt is a SPA (see contribs))

user Benakt appears to have engaged in sockpuppetry with 81.98.50.184 - evidence of puppetry:

Both users are SPA (see contribs here and here)

Both users were created on the same day

Both users have their very first edits 29 minutes apart

Both users forward the same arguments (see above: 'this article is all "about incidents"' not "the person", and similar such), and have similar WP:SIM.

for the above reasons, Benakt's opinion should be either ignored, or at least weighted less.

User 81.98.50.184: this anonymous user (and likely sockpuppet) should be ignored completely.

Wisefroggy I don’t really have any way of disproving your accusations, (also I’m new, what does SPA mean- I tried googling but it only came up with a health spa) but I do think accusing me of sock-puppetry instead of finding a single article about Zuby as a rapper, not as part of a controversy unrelated to his supposed music career is an admission that whatever happens, the deletion of the page is appropriate. When I signed up I was under the impression that it wasn’t about how many edits you had made, it was about the facts, and about meeting the notability guidelines. This article clearly doesn’t meet said guidelines and surely the fact you have made thousands of edits in the past should not allow you to bend the rules. I think that destroys the sanctity of Wikipedia. Looking through the article History it seems you tried for ages to get this page created too, and many others disagreed with the initial creation. You threw sources at the wall, mischaracterised them to create a page which according to the guidelines shouldn’t have been made, a rapper page for a commentator and controversialist who wants to be known as a rapper. I joined Wikipedia because I was trying to find a source for claims Zuby made on twitter and it turned out that his Wikipedia was filled with unsubstantiated claims too, so I tried to help rectify that. I don’t know why you’re so invested in an article that shouldn’t be here according to Wikipedia’s own guidelines but you’re very welcome to it- just know that I think that wanting your article to be up, maybe because of your ego, does damage to Wikipedia and lends credit to the argument to those who say “anyone could edit it” when discussing credibility of the site as a whole. If things like this are upheld I think they will be the eventual cause of distrust of Wikipedia. I’m disappointed but not surprised. Benakt (talk) 08:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

References

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Zuby (rapper)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bilorv (talk · contribs) 17:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Alright, let's just say the fourth GA criterion might be more important here than for the average article. Thoughts on a first pass (more to come if these are addressed):

• The article is using no pronouns to refer to Udezue during the time he claimed to identify as a transgender woman, and "he/him" otherwise, right? But my understanding is that we use the most recent pronoun (here, "he/him" I guess?) retroactively to refer to the person at all times in their life (see e.g. Elliot Page).

   Done Yeah that makes sense.

• "After Udezue expressed his views transgender people in sports ..." – Sentence is fine but belongs within the subsection "Transgender views" as it's still a comment related to that topic.

  I moved it to the subsection. To double check this was not referring to the sentence about his podcast appearances as they were very similiar?  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 20:56, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

  Yep, you got the right sentence, sorry didn't realise there was ambiguity. — Bilorv (talk) 01:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

• "known for his views on transgender people in sports" – Doesn't tell you what his views are. He could be strongly for or strongly against but those aren't the same thing. I'd say "known for his opposition to transgender women participating in women's sports".

   Done

• "and a police incident he was involved in, in 2008" – Even worse than the transgender sports, I think, because I don't want to leave a sentence like that without context in case it implies wrongdoing to some people. Maybe "and for being incorrectly stopped by police in 2008".

   Done Used apprehended.

• "Udezue at 5:24 pm boards a train" – Use past tense throughout for a past event. This is the way we would describe fiction but not fact, I think.

   Done

• "It added to the ongoing controversial issue of transgender people in sports" – Not a fan of "controversial" as you can communicate the idea that there are different views on the topic without that labelling e.g. "It added to the ongoing question of the role of transgender people in sports".

  I see your point but the transgender people in sports labels the topic controversial in the first sentence.

• "In 2019, The Times said he was from Southampton" – Either he is from Southampton (no attribution needed) or you can tell from the other sources that it's a mistake (don't include the sentence at all).

   Done Simplfied to just "and is from Southampton"

• The article needs another copyedit for small grammatical issues top to bottom. Here's some example issues that I know you can spot on another go through:
  • "Shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes" (occurs twice) – "shooting" should be lowercase and in the lead you need a "the" before it.

     Done

  • "From southern England, he lived in Saudi Arabia" – I think changing "he" to "Udezue" establishes the subject a bit better, as it's the first sentence of the paragraph.

     Done

  • "he graduated at St Edmund Hall, Oxford in computer science" – Graduated from.

     Done

  • "developed in interest" – Is this supposed to be "developed an interest for music"?

     Done

• What makes Disrn (not Dirsn as written) reliable? I can't even find an "About Us" page so I'm doubtful of good fact-checking reputation. Other sources are either reliable secondary sources (of which I think there's enough to show notability) or acceptable primary sources. There is some referencing inconsistency (e.g. in the way YouTube videos are cited) but that's not essential to fix for GA.

   Done Removed Disrn source and fixed YouTube ref inconsistency.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 21:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination and the work so far in aiming for neutrality on some heated topics. — Bilorv (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Thanks for the review I've addressed your comments above, the only thing I did not change was controversial label regarding transgender sports. Hopefully its neutral, its tricky dealing with a musician who is not noted in RSs for his music.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 23:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

The "controversial" label I'm not too adamant about, so that's fine. But I said "The article needs another copyedit for small grammatical issues top to bottom", so solving the individual examples I pointed out is not enough. Looking again I see within a few seconds: "Emmanuel and Chika are his father and mother; He is a respected doctor" ("he" shouldn't be capitalised); and "After promoting his music and selling his CDs in Southampton, Udezue at 5:24 pm boarded a train destined to Bournemouth (30 miles away from Basingstoke) and shortly thereafter British Transport Police (BLP), after being notified by Hampshire Police, believed he is a suspect possibly involved in the Basingstoke incident." (should be "believed he was", but also hard to follow the sentence as it's too long). These two issues need solving but you also need to re-read the rest of the content and find and address any other prose issues. Thank you for the work so far. — Bilorv (talk) 01:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: I have fixed those two issues and have re-read the article myself and fixed these issues [1], if it is still poor I could always request a WP:GOCE request.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 07:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Spy-cicle: I think we're still substantially below GA-quality prose, with phrases like "he graduated from St Edmund Hall, Oxford, in computer science" (rather than e.g. "with a degree in computer science") and "pursuing it full-time in 2011" (rather than "from 2011") and "he moved to live in Saudi Arabia where he attended an international school and his parents worked there for two decades" ("where ... his parents worked there" reads oddly) and "Aged 11, he attended a boarding school in the UK and frequently travelled" ("frequently travelled" is presumably about when he was at boarding school in general, but the sentence means "he frequently travelled while aged 11").

I think the standard GOCE waiting time is currently between weeks and months, so I can either put this on hold and give you a week (but you might not get a GOCE in that time) or I can close this as unsuccessful, you can do the GOCE out of process and then nominate for GA again. Let me know what you think. — Bilorv (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

In regards to those specific points you brought up I did not think it was worth specifying in the lead he recieved a degree from university since as I believe it is ubiquitous across universities but I can change it if deemed necessary. I changed "pursuing it full-time in 2011", to from and "Aged one, he moved to live in Saudi Arabia where he attended an international school and his parents worked there for two decades." to "Aged one, he and his parents moved to live in Saudi Arabia where he attended an international school. His parents worked there for two decades." I am not sure what you mean in regards to the meaning of the "frequently travelled" sentence. The sentence concludes with "frequently travelled between the two countries" i.e. flying back and forth between the UK ) and Saudi Arabia (presumably whilst 11 up until he left boarding school) so I am not sure how the meaning can be misconstrued. I have done another read over and copyedit and I am not sure how it does not meet 1.a.

@Bilorv: If you still strongly believe it does not meet 1.a. I will request a GOCE request but you could wait until the request is fulfilled before closing the review. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 15:28, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Some examples of prose concerns I have in the current version:

• "He started his rapping career in 2006, pursuing it full-time from 2011 and has since released six albums throughout his career" – Missing comma after "2011", right? Other I'm not sure what "has since" is attached to.

• Added a comma after 2011.

• "Aged 11, he attended a boarding school in the UK and frequently travelled between the two countries" – You ask about the issue with this. It says "Aged 11, he ... frequently travelled between the two countries". But this is talking about several years, right? (Maybe 11 to 18, even.) The source given doesn't say "I frequently travelled between Saudi Arabia and the UK when I was 11", but (in essence) "I frequently travelled when I was at boarding school". I guess maybe the confusion is that I didn't say I took issue with "Aged 11, he attended a boarding school in the UK" – an issue with my skim-reading. This has the same issue. I think "From the age of 11, he attended a boarding school in the UK and frequently travelled between the two countries" (or however you want to say it) would be what is needed here.

• Ah I think I see what you mean now. For reference the source said "when I was 11 I went boarding school at the age of 11. So I was back and forth between the two countries for a long time". So I changed it to "From the age of 11, he attended a boarding school in the UK and frequently travelled between the two countries".

• "As a child he played the piano and the trombone, the latter he played in a band ..." – Looks like a comma splice, as the two clauses in this sentence are independent.

• Changed "As a child he played the piano and the trombone, the latter he played in a band and during his teenage years became interested in hip-hop music." to "As a child he played the piano and the trombone; the latter of which he played in a band. Later, during his teenage years he became interested in hip-hop music."

• "In 2008, he lived in Bournemouth with his parents, and is from Southampton" – Last clause doesn't make sense in this context ("In 2008, he ... is from Southampton"? The sentence just doesn't track).

• Okay I will explain this since the sources are tricky to follow as to where Udezue is from. We know he was born in Luton. In a 2008, The Times (high quality RS) article states: "Mr Udezue lives in Bournemouth [...]". In a 2019, The Times article he it states: "Zuby, who is from Southampton [...]". I did orginally have it as In 2008, he lived in Bournemouth with his parents. In 2019, The Times said he was from Southampton. but I know you mentioned before we should not attributing this fact. Without using WP:OR like the subject moved from Bournemouth to Southampton between 2008 and 2019 or the possiblity that either one of these articles could have been mistaken (for reference the two areas are 30 miles away from each other) how is the best way to deal with this?  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 13:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

• I'm not sure my geography is good enough to answer this question: do you think someone might say a person is "from Southampton" if they were from Bournemouth, like you might say you were "from London" even if you're a bit outside it but it's the nearest well-known place? I would be tempted to ignore The Times unless they're giving a specific time he lived in a specific place, as it sounds like they're just giving broad context to where in the country Zuby is from. But my original issue was simply that the grammar of the sentence is wrong. The implied meaning is, "In 2008, he ... is from Southampton", which doesn't make sense. Someone can't be "from [a place] [originally]" with respect to a particular year. You just mean "He is from Southampton", so the concern I raised (which I see now is not the full picture) would have been fixed by separating that out into two sentences: "In 2008, he lived in Bournemouth with his parents. He is from Southampton." — Bilorv (talk) 15:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

• In regards to your question: (do you think someone might say a person is "from Southampton" if they were from Bournemouth, like you might say you were "from London" even if you're a bit outside it but it's the nearest well-known place?) It is it entirely possible, but it would be strange to do that since it is a UK newspaper, I believe Bournemouth is a reasonably known place (but could be biased since I know a reasonably bit of that part of England). Though Southampton is certainly more well-known of the two (big port). For reference we do know he arrived Bournemouth station during the police incident. In addition he lists where is from on Twitter as Southampton. But I believe it would WP:OR to conclude to dismiss one article in favour of another. Thoughts on how to process whilst avoiding OR?  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 14:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

• WP:OR is often quoted in situations like this, but the text of the policy refers only to text in articles, not to editorial decisions about what to include or exclude. In this case, I would still be inclined to omit the Times source as the information's provenance and scope is unclear ("he is from Southampton" is not really the sort of sentence we have in bios—much better are "he lived in X from Y to Z"). We're not bound to include every sentence from every source: there has to be some process by which you decide what information to select. I think it would be reasonable for you to disagree with my opinion, though, and just include it as a standalone sentence, perhaps at the start of the section. — Bilorv (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

• Ah I see where your coming from. Would help to tell you Zuby unequivocally said he lived in Southampton through his Twitter page (a primary source). User: Where do you live now out of interest? Zuby: Southampton (21 May 2020) [2] [3].  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 20:40, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

• Sure, still your choice about what to do. — Bilorv (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

This isn't supposed to be an exhaustive list, but illustrative examples of not meeting 1a from the initial sections of the article. As I didn't get to the stage in the review of doing a search for more sources (for broadness), source spotchecks or doing more than a first pass on content issues, I don't feel like it's worth waiting (potentially) several weeks for a GOCE in the way it could be if it was the last thing to check off the list. I don't like leaving GANs hanging indefinitely, particularly as in this case it could hit me with bad timing in this case, contingent on real life factors. However, if you want to ping me after the GOCE is done I will tell you if I could pick this up for a GA2 and then we'd be able to continue where we left off; if not then hopefully the article has benefitted from the suggestions so far and would be in a good place to sail through another reviewer's process. I'll default to putting this on hold for a week in 24 hours (some GOCEs might get done within a week) but tell me if you'd rather I fail it sooner. — Bilorv (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

• I have requested a GOCE copy edit.

Formally  On hold for seven days. — Bilorv (talk) 12:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Alright, it's a fail for GA at this time, but a second nomination is welcome once copyediting concerns have been fixed. — Bilorv (talk) 23:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Lead size

Please see MOS:LEADLENGTH article size fewer than 15,000 characters one or two paragraphs. Also, we don't start by stating what an individual is "known for," notable aspects speak for themselves. Additionally, biographical information peripheral to why the subject is notable - such as place of birth, education etc. is not relevant to the lead. Also, struggling with the "rapper" description, there is no evidence of notability in this field, and all of his recorded material is self-published, no records of sale, charting, release press coverage etc. Acousmana 10:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

BBC News, Sky News, The Times, Entertainment Weekly, The Washington Post, CTV News all describe him as a "rapper".

The Guardian, The Telegraph, "hip hop musician" and The Independent as "musician and author".

Fine he is not recieved much media coverage in regards to his actual rapping career but that is what most RSs describe him as.

I am not bothered about cutting it down to two paragraphs but I disagree about the twice added "identifying" as in quote marks as if he did not identify as such (sowing doubt which does not appear in RSs). Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 17:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

On "identification" point, the initial source for the claim was the tweet "P.S. I identified as a woman whilst lifting the weight. Don't be a bigot. - Face with tears of joy" and a number of other sources cited in the article stem from there: for example. You should also be very conscious of sensitivity surrounding gender identification, and the fact that people in the transgender community found this "joke" offensive. We should frame the "identification" aspect accurately, and we should also consider that there is a 'tears of joy' smiley face after the statement.Acousmana 19:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

So he said he identified as a woman whilst doing it with RSs like Sky News saying he did as well He claimed to identify as a woman while doing it. His word and identification is final, see MOS:GENDERID. Using a single emoiji, in a separate sentence, to counteract completely what he and other RSs just said seems like WP:OR. Whether or not people found it offensive is not really relevant unless it is signicantly sourced it can be added to the article.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 20:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

• The primary source for the claim was the tweet, that's indisputable. The emoji closes the statement, that's rather obvious.
• Note also, in the Times interview cited he states: “It was done in a humorous way" & "I posted it being a bit tongue-in-cheek, showing what I think is the obvious absurdity of their argument.”
• And why do you feel a source is usable for statements concerning his claims but not acceptable for detailing criticism such as "'Just deciding on a whim that Zuby says he’s identifying as a woman, that’s not how it works, said Dawn Ennis, managing editor of Outsports News, an LGBTQ sports publication." or "'What Zuby did was disappointing because it mocks the trans experience and I think that Zuby has fans who are LGBT who are not going to want to be his fans,' said Ennis, 'and he risks losing both LGBT and allies as fans.'" I'm sure we can find additional commentary if required.
• Can you explain how - Refer to any person whose gender might be questioned with gendered words (e.g. pronouns, "man/woman", "waiter/waitress") that reflect the person's latest expressed gender self-identification as reported in the most recent reliable sources, even if it does not match what is most common in sources applies to Zuby? Acousmana 21:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Scare quotes are not the right way to summarise the situation as they are not encyclopedic and the reader will raise more questions than are resolved by their usage. If it meets NPOV to discredit the identification then say "claimed to identify" or "pretended to identify" or similar. If it doesn't then the status quo is fine.

Acousmana, please don't upload copyright violations. I've removed the image from this page and see Spy-cicle correctly tagged it at Commons. Screenshots should never be claimed as "own work" because they are not. To take something I uploaded recently, File:Lichess Puzzle Streak.png is how you do it in the extremely rare cases of a website being freely licensed. If the claim is that the image doesn't show enough original content to meet copyright, such that it's in the public domain by default (not true here because of the profile picture and screenshot of the embedded video), then PD would be the right copyright. — Bilorv (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

• Quotes are used prominently in references the article uses, so we should follow suit.
• Times: The rapper, whose stage name is Zuby, was filmed last week smashing the British women’s deadlift record, in which the weights are raised from the ground to thigh level, while he said he was “identifying as a woman”.
• WQAD8: In the tweet Zuby said that he “identified as a woman whilst lifting the weight,” ultimately trolling the debate of transgender people competing in athletic events.
• Spiked: He has produced several viral videos in which he breaks British women’s weightlifting records while ‘identifying’ as a woman.Acousmana 11:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

• re:image - That was an error on my part, I had meant to use the fair use option, too much detail required, assumed for the purposes of discussion would could quickly claim as own - owning to screenshot nature. Acousmana 22:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

fair use version now added. Acousmana 10:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm quite happy with Acousmana's edits to the lead here. I think the sources chose to use those quotes for a reason, searching for more sources than the ones listed above I haven't yet found one that doesn't say he "identified as a woman" in quotes. Just stating that he identified as a woman in wikivoice would be deriving meaning out of sources where that meaning doesn't exist, or in other words, original research. There's also perhaps commentary on doubt over the sincerity of his identification to be made, but honestly most sources don't seem to really go into it explicitly. Where such commentary exists it would be helpful context for the body of the article, but if sources typically just leave it as a quote the commentary that exists over the sincerity wouldn't be due for the lead. For instance, stating in the lead that he "pretended to identify" or "claimed to identify" as a woman would be inserting an explicit expression of doubt that is comparatively rare for sources to make. Both of those two ends of the spectrum have issues, but I fail to see a an issue with just quoting Zuby directly like sources do, it's not an unencyclopedic instance of a scare quote, it's a literal quote. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 13:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

stating "identification" in wikivoice is the main issue, it's clear we shouldn't. We could also, based on the Times interview (“It was done in a humorous way" & "I posted it being a bit tongue-in-cheek, showing what I think is the obvious absurdity of their argument”) and the emoji in the primary source, write "he jokingly identified as a woman." I agree with the WQAD8 view that this was "ultimately trolling." It seems the subject then tried to recast it as "serious" commentary when it garnered wider attention. Acousmana 14:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree too that it's true that he was joking, but I don't think it would be due to state that in the lead if it's relatively rare for sources to explicitly claim. You could emphasize that it's a literal quote even more if you explicitly said that he said that he "identified as a woman", though that's kind of already implied in the sentence already: with a statement saying he broke the British women's deadlift record while "identifying as a woman." Commentary about the sincerity of his statement would make sense in the body of the article though. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 02:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• I do somewhat see where you coming across in regards the quoting but why do sources like Sky News do not. They say claimed to identify which does sow doubt in a different way which I think is more approriate than quotes.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 20:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

as evidenced, multiple sources use quotes, and the primary source, the tweet, is clearly someone joking/trolling/whatever you want to call it. We shouldn't use wikivoice, it lends credence to a dubious claim. Acousmana 20:57, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Categories

On 29 April 2021, an IP editor 2a02:c7f:1875:c800:a020:93e3:80f1:1bee Added two categories Category:Criticism of political correctness and Category:Discrimination against transgender people without sources or an edit summary [4]. Minutes later, this was reverted by Crossroads per "WP:CATPOV, WP:BLP, WP:LABEL" [5]. Today these categories were readded without sources to the article by Acousmana with the summary "not sure why these categories were removed" [6]. I shortly reverted with the summary "Criticism of political correctness" is not mentioned at all in this article. Nor the explict use of "discrimination" against transgender people. If RSs state he is discriminating against transgender people then we can readd the cat" [7]. Acousmana then reverted me saying "was suspended from Twitter over transgender spat, it's sourced, it's in the article" [8]. This was then reverted by Volteer1 saying "As spy-cicle said, I see nothing in the article about a criticism of political correctness. Regarding the twitter ban, I don't think violating Twitter TOS allows us to state that a living person is discriminating against transgender people unless reliable sources do" [9]. Acousmana then readded the Category:Discrimination against transgender people saying "both World Athletics and the IOC have provisions for the inclusion of transgender competitors, there are regulations, if adhered to, no issue - Zuby's pronouncements, per sources, discriminate against said competitors" [10]. Categories have to be defining and verifiable not A said B mean C hence add the C category. Nothing on the article explcitly states he is Discriminating against transgender people. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 17:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

It may be useful to quote WP:CATDEFINING here: a defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having. Regarding the the first category, he's clearly a critic of political correctness (he certainly talks about it a lot: [11][12][13]), if RS were to talk about what he's been doing post-viral tweet (ranting against political correctness or whatever else) we can add it to the article and the category would be fine to include, though I'm not sure anyone's really cared that much about his attempts to milk his 15 minutes of fame. Regarding the second, it matters little what we think discrimination is and what we think discrimination isn't, if reliable sources don't commonly and consistently describe Zuby as being a discriminator of trans people then it shouldn't be a category – we should be careful also to not rub up against WP:CATPOV here. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 17:58, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Concur.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 18:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I also agree that that the second category about transgender discrimination is not appropriate for these reasons, and per WP:BLP, such dubious categories should be excluded, not edit warred in. I consider the first category a questionable as well; I think both of them are meant to contain concepts, not people. Crossroads ^-talk- 02:31, 15 May 2021 (UTC)