Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a4591b4cb8bc2a83

Jump to content

Talk:Nicole Maines

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Misha Vargas in topic Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2026


Hi Matt,

[edit]

I totally understand why you needed to delete my stuff. I am in Grade 11 and this was a project I had to do for my social justice class. I may have to add some more edits just so I can save a pdf version of the revised article, and it's fine if you delete it after. It would be great if you could just leave it up for 30 mins max, so I can save a file or some screenshots to hand in. I realize that I am just a 16 year old, and I have no place to pretend I'm an expert on any topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by W1k1p3di65 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 21 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm not Matt but if you want to see a version of the article with your edits in it you can find it in under the View History tab above the article. Here is a link of the page with your edits. Rab V (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
Welcome to Wikipedia! Additionally, if you want to work on your own copy of the article (i.e. add more content), I'd recommend you do it in your user sandbox. You can copy over the source of this page at your revision to your sandbox and edit a local copy there rather than editing the live version. Additionally, you don't have to be an expert on any topic to contribute to Wikipedia! We try to base all article content on reliable sources, so the role of Wikipedia editors is to read those sources (and Wikipedia policies and guidelines) and work facts from those sources into the articles. Srey Srostalk 16:58, 21 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
@W1k1p3di65: Thanks for the level-headed reply here. I don't have too much more to add except to say that the tips above are good if you're looking to experiment and/or get screenshots. Good luck with your project.--MattMauler (talk) 03:05, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Monozygotic (identical) twins aka identical twin

[edit]

See Twin#Monozygotic (identical) twins

An editor has removed sourced content regarding the genetic relationship between Nicole and her brother. They are genetically identical twins, a term often used to describe siblings who may appear similar. Transitioning does not change the scientific fact of monozygotic twins. They may be of different appearance or, as certainly in this case, a different gender.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 20:51, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

If their appearances are different then they're not identical. I'm not upset at you here cos I know this wasn't your intention - as you were editing in good faith and I mean this as constructive criticism - but saying "Transitioning does not change the scientific fact of monozygotic twins" is equating sex and gender, which is transphobic. It's the same as telling a trans woman called Nikita (she/her): "transitioning does not change the fact that you were assigned male at birth, and therefore you are male". I'm not saying you're a transphobe ofc but that logic is transphobic. Nicole and her brother do not appear similar - as one is a transitioned woman - and the other is an AMAB man. That's a fact.
Also, two editors removed the content - not one. Stephanie921 (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
In my opinion, you're missing the point that "identical twins" means that they are from the same embryo and thus have the same genetic code, whatever the differences between them are now. There's a fundamental difference between monozygotic and dizygotic twins, and I think that distinction here is important in the context of Maines' relationship with her brother. Many sets of identical twins develop differences between them; we don't stop calling them identical twins just because they're no longer perfectly identical.
How about we use the technical term and just refer to them as monozygotic rather than identical? Would that solve the point of contention here?
As a side note, I'm disappointed in the edit warring which took place here - Stephanie921 made a change from the previous consensus, it was reverted, and at that point, it should have been brought here for discussion (IMHO by @Stephanie921) rather than being added and removed three times(!). stwalkerster (talk) 08:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Loriendrew, I am curious about your summary for this edit, namely, Genetics is not contentious. (1) What did you mean? and (2) why did you see that as a relevant justification to edit war to retain disputed content? Newimpartial (talk) 21:08, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Maybe this an American English thing? It's 100% clear to me and I assume all native speakers of American English that "identical" twins means monozygotic, i.e. came from the same embryo and have the same genes, and probably looked fairly indistinguishable initially. And I believe it's also common knowledge that "identical" twins are never truly identical and their phenotypes will diverge, sometimes subtly, sometimes dramatically. So if the issue is that "identical" twins means one thing in American English but implies something else in other dialects--and I don't know if this is the issue--but if it is, then maybe simply wiki-linking "identical" to Monozygotic would clear this up? Or using the term "monozygotic" instead of "identical", though I don't like that option as much, as IMHO it's too jargon-y/stilted. But maybe this isn't the issue? I'm honestly stumped. Yilloslime (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
I believe the primary concern of the OP is that since Nicole is female and her brother is, well, male, saying "they were twins" is unintentionally vague, because male/female twins do exist but are "fraternal twins", and if one does not notice or realise that she is transgender, one might make the assumption that she and her brother were fraternal twins. So, the crux of the issue is that it is awkward to say "identical twins" because she is female, but as mentioned above "monozygotic" is overly jargony, and saying "they were born as identical twins but they're not identical now because she has transitioned" is a bit wordy. Primefac (talk) 07:10, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, currently the page for Laverne Cox, a trans woman, refers to her brother M Lamar as her identical twin. Speaking a trans person myself, I'm fine with using the term "identical" when referring to a trans person's sibling(s) in the pre-transition ("Early life") part of a bio. Funcrunch (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
I think this points to my actual feeling about the text (which was not the reason for my essentially procedural revert). My problem was that the status quo ante phrase seemed to make them identical twins in the present; I personally would be fine with text saying something like "were adopted at birth as identical twins", or some such. Newimpartial (talk) 21:30, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Rewording the phrase may be worthy. The word ″identical″ was removed despite extensive reliable sourcing. If Maines (technically either sibling) is offended by the term, those sources could have had corrections or word retractions. One of the strongest sources is the Become Nicole biography, which appears to have been done with full cooperation of the family. If the term is kept, it should be wikilinked to the term above, or some form of note added explaining how it is meant in the context of her early life.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:54, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
OK, seems like rewording to something like "were adopted at birth as identical twins" should address any potential vagueness/cognitive dissonance, so I'll make the change. Yilloslime (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
[edit]

The external link to Twitter actually takes you to a anti-trans page in Nicole's deadname. Please can this be removed. ~2025-38490-15 (talk) 08:57, 5 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done. Also looking into wikidata to make sure that templates don't link to it again. — Misha Vargas (talk | contribs) 09:05, 5 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2026

[edit]

Please add the following to her bibliography:

  • Justice League: Dream Girls – A DC Pride Event #1–4 (with Jadzia Axelrod and various artists, 2026)[1]

(Because this miniseries has over half a dozen different pencilers, I don't know if listing them all is a good idea or not.)

And please change the following:

  • Secret Six #1–6 (with Stephen Segovia, 2025-present)

to

Done. Also, the source shows a special, Justice League Intergalactic Special #1, having come out at the end of April. Should I add that? ~ Misha Vargas (talk | contribs) 22:12, 20 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ↑ "DC Goes All In on Its DC Pride 2026 Publishing Lineup, Featuring Galaxy, Dreamer, and a New Four-Issue Justice League Event Series". DC Comics. March 18, 2026. Retrieved June 20, 2026.