Talk:Emma Portner

LGBT category

She is now with man, so she should be removed from LGBT categories, if she does not officially announce she is lesbian, or bisexual. This can be offensive to some people, include me.--78.102.53.207 (talk) 17:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Someone's orientation does not change based on who they're in a relationship with. Also, Elliot Page has not said that he's a man, only that he's trans and uses he/they pronouns. Spock of Vulcan (talk) 21:46, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Right, but now we have a bunch of unsourced categories on this page. StAnselm (talk) 01:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

So "he" is not a man, but we're all supposed to call "him" a him? If "he" doesn't claim to be a man, then what is he "trans-ing" into? A kangaroo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:BC01:9B0:74A5:8E56:5473:A6EA (talk) 20:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

We know now that he identifies as a man. Even if he didn't though, nonbinary people exist. 50.111.96.104 (talk) 04:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Inclusion of fact that Elliot Page is transgender?

This seems like it might be an area of contention. I noticed that @Vaselineeeeeeee previously reverted the same edit that I just made, so I thought I'd make a section to discuss it and reach a consensus. It's my understanding that articles are to focus on their subject area and nothing else. Including a sentence in Emma Portner's personal life section that just says her spouse came out as transgender doesn't seem necessary. Unless the sentence includes information about Portner's reaction to the announcement or her support for her spouse as he has undergone his transition or something like that, it's irrelevant. Unless I'm missing a rule that necessitates the inclusion of an explanatory sentence about Page coming out as transgender on his wife's Wikipedia article? TJScalzo (talk) 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@TJScalzo: Portner married a woman at the time of her marriage. To write "Elliot" with no context seems as though Portner is heterosexual. Maybe a note is a better option. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 21:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@TJScalzo and Vaselineeeeeeee: I've removed the note as WP:UNDUE weight. Just because someone has a masculine-sounding name doesn't mean a mention of them in relation to marriage needs a note. GreenComputer (talk) 22:22, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@GreenComputer: If you say so. The reader, many of those who have no idea of her personal life, will have to click on Page's article to find that out and put two and two together. Seems very round-about. But I won't revert further so no worries. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@GreenComputer: I think that makes the most sense. I wasn't sure what the exact Wikipedia policy was, but I felt like it wasn't needed within this context. There just isn't enough public information about Portner's relationship with Page beyond supportive comments on social media. TJScalzo (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't particularly understand this. Article says "In January 2018, actor Elliot Page announced his marriage to Portner on an unspecified date"

This is simply false. Emma Portner married a woman called Ellen Page. Emma Portner is a lesbian. FerranValls (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

We do not use deadnames. Elliott Page is their name and as such, we refer to him as Elliott in this article and his own. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:08, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2020

She was born on 26. Nov. 1994. Some of the sources: https://marriedbiography.com/emma-portner-biography/ https://www.listal.com/emma-portner https://www.dreshare.com/emma-portner/ Yearnst (talk) 05:37, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done --TheImaCow (talk) 06:07, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

LGBT categories

I recognize that we make an effort not to deadname or misgender people, but it's absurd to suggest that we can no longer categorize someone who married a partner of the same sex as LGBT because that partner subsequently came out as genderqueer/trans. I suggest that we restore the LGBT categories, even if not the lesbian ones. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for the categories? StAnselm (talk) 02:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

By the way, there was already a discussion started on this above. StAnselm (talk) 02:11, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@StAnselm: Porter has been very public about her marriage to a woman, and the article continues to note her marriage to Page, although Page came out as genderqueer after they were married. This is not some secret or scandal. I'm sure you could also google a source as to Porter's specific self-identification, but "very proudly and publicly in a same-sex marriage" is sufficient to categorize someone as LGBT. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Is that a quote from somewhere? We would need a reliable source that *Porter* considered it to be a same-sex marriage. StAnselm (talk) 18:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, now you're just trolling. Please stop, it's not funny and it's not respectful to the article subject or to the editors who are trying to contribute to the encyclopedia in good faith. Our guidelines exist to ensure that we refer to LGBT subjects respectfully, not as a figleaf of an excuse to disrespect their choice to come out publicly and shove them back in the closet.

As for how to elaborate the article text, the easiest thing might just be to add "(who came out as trans in December 2020)" or something like that to the line about their marriage. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Here is evidence that Portner does not now consider herself to be heterosexual, so back go the categories. It's about the 4th article on a Google search, not at all hard to find. Really, I do not think someone's spouse coming out as trans should lead us to make any assumptions that their own sexuality has changed. The burden of proof would be on whoever wanted to change the article in those situations. The Land (talk) 19:04, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I guess that's the source we're after, but I note she does say "I hope you know my sexual preferences and gender identity are none of your business." StAnselm (talk) 19:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Birthdate

An editor falsely wrote in an edit summary here that the inclusion of a poorly cited birthdate was "per editrequest." There is no such edit request in the history of this page, and the cited source, MarriedBiography.com, is in no way, shape or form WP:RS for WP:BLP. I've restored RS-cited "Birth based on age as of date" template.--Tenebrae (talk) 20:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Something weird with one edit

Much heat, no light The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The edit I evidently made here — there's something wrong with it.

First, I would never have summarily removed tags. Second, I did not write the two paragraphs beginning "In 2019, she was nominated for Arena Dance..." — those grafs are filled with non-encyclopedic tone and WP:PUFFERY, and anyone who knows my edits knows I do not write like that. Third, this edit removed the name of a newspaper from a citation — I would never remove the name of the source.

I'm not saying I was hacked. But I genuinely have no idea about those three specific edits. My best guess is I copy-pasted part of an older version. But those three things I mention above, plus any weird odd or end I may have missed, are not me, and my apparently putting them in was accidental and inadvertent.--Tenebrae (talk) 16:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You could have easily corrected it by making another edit. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 18:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I didn't realize it until User:Praxidicae pointed it out. Please show good-faith: I mean, look at my edits today from 16:52 to 17:02. I make mistakes sometimes. Everyone does. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Please stop pinging me. VAXIDICAE💉 18:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Per the timestamp on your original comment above, you were aware of it almost two hours before I commented here. You could have corrected it in that time. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 18:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm a little confused because, in all seriousness, I have to assume you know what the word "realize" means, so I say again: "I didn't realize it until User:Praxidicae pointed it out." I'm not sure how I could have fixed something I didn't realize was broken.

Praxidicae pointed it out to me at 15:58, barely one hour after I'd made the accidental edits, and by the time Prax notified me, they had already made the correction. I did something accidentally and owned up to it when it was pointed out. When you asked, I told you I didn't realize it until Prax pointed it out. So you not dropping the stick is beginning to feel like you're bullying me.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:02, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Can we all just let this go and not worry about who's to blame? It's fixed now. Mo Billings (talk) 19:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I would love to. And then Abbyjjjj96 continues to bully me with a needlessly aggressive edit summary . I did give a reason. It was an accident. I came to this talk page of my own volition to own up to it. Human beings make mistakes and have accidents. Attacking me in an edit summary was completely unnecessary and harassing.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

The correction Praxidicae made was your removal of the AfD notice. In your first comment in this section, you acknowledge your edit had numerous problems, not just the AfD notice, which you claimed were "accidental and inadvertent" but made no effort to correct. Don't cry 'bullying' because someone points out your inconsistency. My edit summary was not aggressive – I explained the change I made and why. I wasn't going to revert something that wasn't obvious vandalism without giving a reason. Your comments are not only misleading but incredibly inflammatory and I won't be responding further. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 19:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, wow, I'm deciding to comment here again after all because your comments were even more misleading than I thought. At the AfD for this article, you added some of the same details which you later added to this article but claimed not to have written ("Second, I did not write the two paragraphs beginning "In 2019, she was nominated for Arena Dance..." — those grafs are filled with non-encyclopedic tone and WP:PUFFERY, and anyone who knows my edits knows I do not write like that."). Okay... Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I think what Tenebrae is saying is that although the two paragraphs got inserted with his edit, he doesn't know how it happened. He didn't write them - they were in the article until this edit removed them. It was some kind of mistake, it happened, and you fixed it. Please, let's all take a step back and let this drop instead of throwing accusations at each other. Mo Billings (talk) 21:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

The issue was not that they made a mistake with their edit, which is fair (and it was more than adding those two paragraphs, they also removed citation parameters and sourced biographical information; it's odd that they acknowledged an accident but then did not reinclude those things in the article), but that in the other thread, they falsely presented things and made accusations towards me using aggressive language. There's been no indication they think that was a mistake, but sure. Bye. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 22:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Here is your aggressive language: "Partial revert of Tenebrae's edit removing a bunch of sourced information without giving a reason." I did you give a reason: It was an accident. Look at my editing history: I don't add puffery. I would certainly never remove a newspaper name in a citation. Why are you being so relentlessly cruel? Why are you crucifying me? I didn't re-include those things because I thought User:Praxidicae did. Jesus...just stop! You're making me take Ativan. You're just lashing at out me over and over and over. I must have copy-pasted something accidentally. It was an accident. I came right here and acknowledged it. What else am I supposed to do. Please just stop!--Tenebrae (talk) 00:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

...That is not aggressive language. I already explained above that my edit summary was to explain why I am making a partial revert (for all I knew, you had a reason for removing it that you forgot to mention, and I would risk being scolded if I reverted you without an explanation). You seem to think that I read this talk page before I made that revert: I didn't, and the revision history will show I made the reversion before commenting here. Again, as I have already explained, there's nothing wrong with making a mistake with your edit, everyone is bound to do that at some point. However, you have repeatedly made inconsistent claims and misrepresented the situation, and apparently if I point that out, I am, according to you, a bully, aggressive, harassing and attacking you, and now relentlessly cruel, crucifying you, and lashing out? That is aggressive language. "Please just stop"? I already did stop. But apparently it's fine for you to start it up again and then I'm the one in the wrong for defending myself from yet another misrepresentation and more accusations? You stop! Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 02:06, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Don't you dare try to gaslight me and say I "made inconsistent claims". That is patently untrue. Why are you dong this? Why are you hammering at me relentlessly? What did I ever do to you to make you dig at me and dig at me? What did I ever do to you that you now make false statements about "inconsistent claims"? I made a mistake and I owned up to it. What do I have to do, take this ANI to make you stop attacking me and making false claims? There's more in people's lives than Wikipedia...I had a cousin my age, who takes the same precautions that I do, die of COVID-19. I can't get my aged father vaccinated due to state mismanagement of the vaccine. And now I have someone here who can't accept that I made a freaking mistake, copy-pasted something carelessly, evidently, and who seems to take delight in someone's fragile emotional state ... and who apparently, from your FKA Twigs edit, is wiki-stalking me. Please just stop coming after me. I never did anything to you.--Tenebrae (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

It should be clear by now that I am only responding to defend myself. If you stopped making wild accusations against me, I would not have anything to respond to. Gaslighting? That's rich. Let's recap: I arrived at the article, saw a bunch of useful information had been removed, and so I put it back (with the explanation that it had been removed without a reason). I then saw your comment on the talk page mentioning multiple errors in your "accidental and inadvertent" edit. I found it odd that you had written that but not corrected the errors, so I commented here. You replied to say you hadn't realized until it was pointed out; that was also odd to me as almost two hours had passed since you first commented acknowledging it, which I then pointed out. You said you didn't make the correction because Praxidicae had already done so, but link to their edit which shows they fixed only one of the many errors you had previously acknowledged (and this is where you first bring up bullying). That is why I found you inconsistent. Before I can even respond, you replied to Mo Billings using hostile language towards me. Your words were completely over the top. You also made a misrepresentation there by saying that my edit summary for the correction I made in the article was continued bullying. Not only was it not bullying at all, but I made that edit before I even began commenting on the talk page, so it was not a continuation of anything. You later said you thought Praxidicae had made all of the corrections, not just one, but by that point you already had made, and then continued to make, overblown accusations against me.

Do you think that you are the only person here with a life outside of Wikipedia? Are you under the impression that I am somehow immune from the pandemic? I have made it clear time and time again that a mere editing mistake is not why I have kept responding (so you claiming that I can't accept your mistake is another misrepresentation). And now I'm taking "delight in someone's fragile emotional state"? Frankly, your accusations against me come across as unhinged. I would advise taking a break away from your computer, but this exchange began over a day ago and yet you continue. You have repeatedly made misrepresentations, used aggressive language, and, again to be frank, appear to be trying to weaponize your personal issues as an attempt at emotional manipulation.

As for the stalking accusation... if you look at the revision history at FKA Twigs, you will see I have edited her article numerous times before. If you read the conversation at Talk:FKA Twigs#Incorrect birthday (which I linked to in my edit summary when I reverted you there), you will see that I myself created that section back in January. So when I checked on an article I have previously edited, and saw that someone had unknowingly put the incorrect birthdate back in, of course I reverted it, and made sure everything was explained on the talk page. I hesitated before I made the correction, having recognised your username, and winced, wondering if it would prompt another accusation (clearly I was right to be wary). I chose to make the reversion anyway as I wasn't going to leave incorrect information up.

At this point, I disagree with your statement that you never did anything to me. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 01:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Who did she marry?

Ellen Page or Elliot Page? Which name is on her marriage certificate? 120.21.218.131 (talk) 15:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)