Talk:Devon Price

No evidence of Autism diagnosis

There is no citation of his autism diagnosis. He is a proponent of self diagnosis and claims it is as valid as professional diagnosis. That is just his opinion, not an objective fact, and most of the psychology profession disagrees with it. It should therefore be made clear in this article if he has been professionally diagnosed or self diagnosed. 203.30.2.7 (talk) 05:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

There appear to already be reliable sources cited within the article that label Price autistic. The current revision of the article doesn't specify whether he was formally diagnosed or self-diagnosed, so I'm failing to see what your issue is with the citations in question. If you want to state that Price was self-diagnosed, find a reliable source that says that and cite it. If you want to state that Price was formally diagnosed, find a reliable source that says that and cite it. If you're trying to say it's inappropriate to label Price autistic without a source that includes such a detail, you're incorrect. DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 08:36, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

pronouns?

If it does use he/him as well, why should we stay consistent for the article? Seems a bit like degendering to pick the less controversial and more binary set? Directed to prev editor. ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 02:33, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@LordCollaboration ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 02:34, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I am saying we should use either he/him throughout or it/its throughout. Your change only changed a couple usages, keeping he/him in other places, and I think that is confusing. LordCollaboration (talk) 02:37, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

people with multiple sets of pronouns generally prefer to have all sets used interchangeably, unless specified otherwise. i will recheck what pronouns price currently uses actually but i think if it is multiple we should respect this as editors. ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 02:39, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

The article does need to be consistent throughout: that's Wikipedia policy, and it helps readers follow the article. There are a couple of issues to consider:

1. How is the subject identified in independent sources? Granted, that will take time for a change to show up.
2. How the subject self-identifies. If they are changing that, then there may be multiple pronoun sets on social media home pages.
3. The verified status of social media sites, if we're using that as our benchmark. In other words, how sure are we that the subject is the one controlling the site?
4. MOS:NEOPRONOUNS and it/its: The use of it/its for an individual is non-standard enough that the guidance to use they/them pronouns instead may prevail.

—C.Fred (talk) 02:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

where is it said that pronouns have to be consistent throughout?? and i ask this genuinely. 1, most of mentions seem to be in he/him style language, 2, devon price is currently non-binary transmasculine. 3, fairly easy check, i presume. we do already talk about its tumblr blog in the main text. 4, where does mos:neopronouns talk about it/its?? i feel like that’s somewhat misgendering, and it does mention we should bring devon’s it/its pronouns up in a footnote at least. haven’t noticed that in the text but do correct me if i’m wrong. also, could not find any new information about price using he/him pronouns. i’d say we revert to they/them, if truly necessary? ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

i say all this in good faith. ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 02:55, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

My understanding of MOS:NEOPRONOUNS is that any pronouns that aren't he/him, she/her, or they/them are considered neopronouns ('newly formed word, term, or phrase').

Could we see which pronoun(s) are most recently established by Price? I couldn't find Price's tumblr non-trivially.

I'm sure there's a guideline somewhere on Wikipedia that pronouns should be consistently applied, but I agree that if necessary, sticking to 'they/them' with a footnote of Price's most recent preferred pronouns sounds like the best option in my opinion.

I do suspect that 'people with multiple sets of pronouns generally prefer to have all sets used interchangeably, unless specified otherwise' may not be accurate or relevant to Wikipedia. MSWS (talk) 03:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

i wouldn’t say they’re strictly neopronouns, as they’ve existed for a good while, but their usage for non-dehumanized human beings is quite new, so i would personally accept this to be the case for sure.

some posts i found that might indicate it/its pronouns:

https://www.tumblr.com/demonprincex/801859631999860736/have-you-ever-thought-about-what-neopronouns-might?source=share

https://www.tumblr.com/demonprincex/800494622798430208/hey-so-itits-pronouns-arent-a-thing-in?source=share

price’s bio itself strictly says "it/its". price tends to not use pronouns in other bios, because it has been purposefully misgendered because of this before. devon itself does not seem to consider it/its to be neopronouns. ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 03:45, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I think it's just a general policy that names, etc. should be used the same throughout the article to avoid confusion. (See MOS:CONSISTENT). And at the top of the MOS:NEOPRONOUNS page it says: This page sets out guidelines for achieving visual and textual consistency in biographical articles and in biographical information in other articles; such consistency allows Wikipedia to be used more easily.

I am fine with changing all occurrences to "they" and giving some more information in a footnote or something, until we get more information. LordCollaboration (talk) 03:39, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

i will say pronouns and gender identity are a bit of a different issue than general lingual consistency, but i’m fine with the they/them pronouns alternative as well. actually, does anybody have an article about somebody else that uses it/its (exclusively) so we can maybe be consistent with language used in other wikipedia articles? ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 03:50, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

That's a good reason to not change the article just yet: leave it as is until we see if there is some guidance. This is likely not the first time this wheel has needed invented. —C.Fred (talk) 03:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

i do believe we should simply switch to they/them with a footnote for this one, however this does seem like a topic there should be a clearer consensus on. many people we may need articles on are now using mixed set 'unusual' pronouns, and we will likely eventually see enough controversy around it or simply decide we need to mull over that. make the edit if you must, i’ll probably be away from my mobile sometime soon. ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 04:11, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

It looks like the community considered this before, but it went nowhere: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Gender identity/Archive 2#it/its as a personal pronoun. —C.Fred (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

hold on, will go through that. side note; quite popular hacker (pseud) maia arson crimew heavily prefers it/its, which we mention on its page, but we do revert to she/her (its secondary set of pronouns) so that does not seem to be of much help. ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 04:02, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

oh lmfao seems like that was considered ~2025-44041-66 (talk) 04:02, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Additional context: Price describes its pronoun preferences in this Substack article: https://drdevonprice.substack.com/p/some-effects-of-testosterone-gave/. "I am transitioning again — into a weird wild it/its rather than the palatable but ignored they/them or the respected but repressed he/him." Its professional university website avoids using third-person pronouns entirely: https://www.luc.edu/scps/about/facultyandstaff/profiles/pricedevon.shtml. The same is true for its Psychology Today profile, another professional context: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/contributors/devon-price-phd. Its Instagram and Tumblr profiles both list it/its only. Its personal pronoun preferences is definitely it/its only. Among he/him, she/her, and they/them, if those are the only options, he/him is probably best - its author blurb at its publishing house uses he/him, as an example: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/authors/2294535/devon-price-phd/. I would strongly oppose using they/them, which appears to be a worse option than either it/its or he/him. I will enquire on the MOS:NEOPRONOUNS page to see if there is an established practice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Gender_identity#c-Izzy_Grosof-20260110090900-Exclusive_it/its_preference_(Devon_Price) ). An additional option appears to be avoiding pronouns completely, as was done with Thomas Baty. This should be a better option than they/them or he/him pronouns, as it matches Price's professional websites. Izzy Grosof (talk) 08:31, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Additional evidence for avoiding pronouns being a second-best option: this piece at the NY Times avoids using pronouns for Price: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/03/well/mind/masking-autism-adhd.html. The part involving Price is short enough that it's unclear if the avoidance is intentional, however. More secondary sources would help. Izzy Grosof (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Note that while he/him or it/its is listed on Price's Medium about page here: https://devonprice.medium.com/about, that text has been unchanged since at least August 2022 (https://web.archive.org/web/20220804002733/https://devonprice.medium.com/about), while other blog sources (Medium/Substack post above) and social media sources (Tumblr, Instagram) switched to it/its exclusively around September 2025. So the Medium about page is probably outdated. Also, Price's Medium homepage switched to just "it" sometime between September and November 2025: https://web.archive.org/web/20251104085010/https://devonprice.medium.com/ Izzy Grosof (talk) 07:11, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Updated article to remove pronouns

I went ahead and made the edit to remove all use of pronouns from the page. This was based on the following information:

• Price exclusively specifies it/its pronouns for itself on its blog and social media platforms, making the switch to it/its exclusively around 1 September 2025. On its professional website, it noticeably avoids using pronouns for itself.
• No reliable sources have been found using it/its pronouns for Price, nor any other pronouns for Price after 1 September 2025. It is unclear whether this is intentional avoidance or not.
• The relevant guidelines and RfCs at MOS:NEOPRONOUN and MOS:GIDINFO do not clearly establish how to handle it/its pronouns. There is no clear consensus on whether to handle it/its like neopronouns such as ze/hir, or pronouns which have long been in use in English but which have only recently seen substantial personal-preference use, such as they/them, or in another way. MOS:GIDINFO says that if consensus cannot be reached, an option is to avoid pronouns entirely.
• No other pages have been found about people who exclusively use it/its pronouns, so there is no precedent. For instance, maia arson crimew strongly prefers it/its, especially informally, but is fine with she/her pronouns in formal contexts.

If you have thoughts on this choice, please discuss on the talk page before reverting or changing to a different pronoun usage. If you have any other information on the above points, that would be much appreciated. Izzy Grosof (talk) 06:38, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

awesome work ! ~2026-27769-20 (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Definition of autism for this page: Inclusive of self-diagnosis, aligning with sources

There has been discussion around whether to describe Price as autistic in this article. This question was discussed back in October in Talk:Devon_Price#No evidence of Autism diagnosis, and again in @Qwertyuiorhi's edit on 13 March 2026. The argument presented against describing Price as autistic is made by editors who advocate for a definition of autism that only includes people who have been medically diagnosed with autism, which no source has stated about Price. The argument in favor of describing Price as autistic is that reliable sources describe Price as autistic, and thus implicitly do not use a diagnosis-only definition. This was implicit in sources already present in the article, but do to this difference of opinion I added three reliable sources that explicitly state that Price is autistic:

• NPR interview
• WBEZ Chicago interview
• Chicago Tribune article

No reliable source has stated that Price is not autistic, to the best of my knowledge. If people know of any such sources, they should be posted here, and we'll try to come to a consensus on how best to phrase things.

Wikipedia's standard for verifiability (WP:PROOF) states that claims which are backed up by reliable sources should not be removed unless the removing editor articulates a specific issue with the claim, such as a problem with the sources provided or differing claims between different sources.

However, other changes that don't involve removing this claim might be helpful. For instance, a footnote stating that the use of the word "autistic" in this article is inclusive of self-diagnosis, might be helpful to readers who are unfamiliar with this usage. Do people think that such a change might be helpful, or are there other suggestions of changes that don't involve removing this claim? Izzy Grosof (talk) 04:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for this clarification, I am still relatively new to editing and wasn’t sure if there was an established standard around how the term was used! I will follow this going forward.

Price’s work is quite radical in its wholesale rejection of autism as a diagnostic category. As a result, Price often uses ‘autism’ and ‘autistic’ to mean different things from their mainstream definitions (describing personality traits, a person’s sense of belonging to a particular group, etc., as opposed to using them to describe a diagnosable biopsychosocial impairment or disability).

If others think it would work, I think a clarifying footnote would be a great option— to keep with Wikipedia best practices re: following reliable sources, while also noting that ‘autistic’ in this context may mean something different from what the average reader might assume! Qwertyuiorhi (talk) 14:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your perspective, and glad you're learning to edit! I've added a footnote along the lines we discussed.

For context, I'm much more familiar with the diagnostic-optional definition of autism than the diagnostic-only definition, so having your perspective is helpful. Izzy Grosof (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2026 (UTC)