Carefully keeping an open secret

[Ming]

Ming sees in Dramaland that BigDwiki (T-C-L) is in trouble over insistence in including the birth name of Jazz Jennings (T-H-L), a transsexual activist. What is striking about this is that the information isn't all that hidden: Jennings gives it in a youtube video. The strategy, however, in, well, censoring the article is to deny that any of the sources that give it is reliable. This seems to be being abetted by MSM avoidance, so that apparently the only outlet to supply it is the accursed Daily Mail. But it's not a secret.

The outcome of this is that BigDwiki is probably going to get a topic ban, and that the following rather peculiar sentences are likely to continue to lead off the meat of the article:

Jennings was born in South Florida to parents Greg and Jeanette ("Jennings" is a pseudonym).[8][9] The family is Jewish,[10] and their last name is "a very Jewish, long last name."[11] Jennings has an older sister, Ari, and two older brothers, twins Sander and Griffen.

The next sentence is, "Jennings was assigned male at birth," the current euphemism for "is biologically male," as there is no indication of any physical irregularity given. Of course BLP sensitivity is the ultimate cover reason for this, but Ming does find it rather peculiar that a person is not a reliable source for their own name.

[Poetlister]

At present, the Portuguese Wikipedia says "Foi registrada como Jaron Bloshinsky[6] ("Jennings" é um pseudônimo).[7][8]" reference 6 is this video.

[Ming]

Ming presumes that the excuse is that the person in question isn't being interviewed by a Reliable Source and therefore what that person says doesn't count.

[Poetlister]

Ming presumes that the excuse is that the person in question isn't being interviewed by a Reliable Source and therefore what that person says doesn't count.

It's a primary source. We need a reliable secondary source.

[Zoloft]

It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind.

[DanMurphy]

It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind.

Is it?

[Ming]

It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind.

But for other people, it's perfectly fine, acto the MOS. And the issue isn't so much "refer to" as it is "say at all".

[Anroth]

It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind.

In general yes. In this case her surname isnt listed in the show (its obfuscated to Jennings as a privacy issue) and she freely states her (former) first name on the show, which is a show entirely about her. Its a ridiculous argument to state a biography cannot include the previous name when the subject openly uses it in her own TV show. (The talk page is full of ridiculous arguments actually, mostly by Kosh to be fair. I think his 'We cant use a primary source because she has a COI regarding her own name' is one of the stupidest things I have seen on wikipedia, ever.)

The real problem no one seems to want to address is that the subject is only notable for...being trans. Its not like Caitlyn Jenner or Chelsea Manning - who are both notable regardless of their gender. Nor is she someone who became famous after transitioning. Her show is about being trans. Her activity on social media is about being trans. Her parents no doubt raking in the money from TV spots as a child were about being trans etc etc. She has no other claim to notability. And being trans by its definition requires both a before and an after. Denying someones prior existance as a different gender when they are only notable for their change of gender is just.. I cant think of an accurate enough word to describe it, 'stupid' doesnt really encompass it.

[Midsize Jake]

...She has no other claim to notability. And being trans by its definition requires both a before and an after. Denying someones prior existance as a different gender when they are only notable for their change of gender is just.. I cant think of an accurate enough word to describe it, 'stupid' doesnt really encompass it.

Well, obviously what you're describing is Post-Transition Biographical Gender Revisionism, or PTBGR, which is sometimes spoken as "Potburger," or more pejoratively, "Pootbugger." Needless to say, some people don't like the idea of calling it that, so they're working on a neologism that everyone can agree on. Unfortunately, the only thing they've been able to come up with so far is "splunge."

We've seen these kinds of problems affect Wikipedia before, when some "notable" life-aspect applies to a very small number of people. The number of people who are both TG and were also famous enough to warrant their being encyclopedic biography subjects during their pre-Transition years is teensy-tiny, so things like this often get put on the back-burner for word-inventors, most of whom are excessively busy at their day-jobs working for drug companies.

[Ming]

The real problem no one seems to want to address is that the subject is only notable for...being trans. Its not like Caitlyn Jenner or Chelsea Manning - who are both notable regardless of their gender.

Yes, at least there's not the deeply confusing ex post facto pronoun issues of those articles. And it's rather ironic, BTW, that Kosh got a topic ban back in 2013 for insisting that it had to be "Bradley Manning".