Talk:Juno Dawson

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

LGBT studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles

Children's literature Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Women writers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Juno Dawson is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Notability[edit]

Just wanted to establish Dawson's notability since a notability template was added to this page. Dawson has received significant coverage both for her writing (she is a well-known young adult author) and for her work on LGBT advocacy and her writing about her transition. As such, there are plenty of reliable, secondary sources covering her life and works - many of which are cited at the bottom of the article. She has attended several of the most prestigious literary festivals including Hay Festival and the London Literature Festival, published bestselling works of fiction, and has won or been shortlisted for various awards. ---Supervegan (talk) 14:35, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

deadnaming and book titles[edit]

There have been accusations in edit summaries about "deadnaming". The issue is nothing to do with transgendering as such, but only about name changes. People change their names for a wide variety of reasons, the commonest being the change of surname by women on getting married or divorced. In fact probably nearly half the population changes their name at some stage. Use of an outdated form of name is not offensive as such, though it might be in particular cases.

When talking of time past, it is reasonable to use the form of a name that was current at that time. When quoting book titles it is most helpful to make reference to the form of the author's name with which the book was published. A good example is given by Pope Francis#Writings. Are we to see that as "deadnaming"? Do we need a separate RS when quoting the title of a book? This all seems a bit ridiculous. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 18:13, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! your change has been undone by a number of editors, both because it is unsourced (the "source" you provide is not a reliable source usable on here) and for other reasons provided in the edit summaries. You need both reliable sourcing and consensus for your edit, and AFAICT you have neither. -sche (talk) 19:18, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As for sourcing, the whole of the Works section was unsourced except for the reference to Spot the Difference, so why should a higher standard of sourcing be required for my modest clarification? SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:13, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A list of books (or other published works) should show the author's name as it actually appears on the work concerned. We should not change history: if you have the book concerned and it said "James Dawson" on the cover when you bought it, it won't have magically changed to "Juno Dawson" whilst sitting on your shelf. Consider it a nom de plume - some authors wrote books under more than one different name - Robert A. Heinlein, for example, published under at least six different names.

For books that were published under the name "James Dawson", a source should be simple to find - a book review dating from around the time of publication is certain to show the author's name as it appears on the cover. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're so right. Thanks very much. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 13:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All the books mentioned have since been republished under her proper name, so if you want the name 'as it actually appears on the work concerned', Juno Dawson is the right name. In the 'Life and career' section there is already mention of her deadname, which would suffice to make the link, and I believe adding her deadname under the books section as well, would be putting WP:UNDUE weight on her deadname. Just because one person agrees with you here, while multiple people have disagreed and reverted your edits, doesn't mean you can just add it in again. Achaea (talk) 07:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on a procedural note, using citation templates in article text is not supposed to be done AFAIK (they're for formatting references, in ref tags or at least in Works cited / Further reading / References sections. For a bibliography, AFAIK the norm is just to list title and date. Wikipedia is not a card catalogue (there are, indeed, a lot of things Wikipedia is WP:NOT), and given that we're merely listening the books this person wrote (not that on this one the name was originally given in serif font while on that one it was originally sans, and on this one the middle initial is included, and so on, at least in other articles), and especially that they've been republished under this name, I don't see a basis for giving the other name so much weight. -sche (talk) 06:28, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has been discussion of this subject at User talk:Ivanvector/Archive 14#Juno Dawson edit war. It might be good to continue it here. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SamuelTheGhost: No it wouldn't - WP:TALKFORK, WP:MULTI, WP:FORUMSHOP etc. etc. all apply. Please remember that discussions about an article's content belong on the talk page of that article, i.e. right here. In short: keep it in one place. Also notifying Ivanvector so that they are made aware of this existing thread. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:04, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Perhaps I should explain that you have completely misunderstood my remark above. When I wrote "continue it here" I meant here, that is Talk:Juno Dawson. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 22:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some responses to the remarks above:

I was the first to take this disagreement to the talk page. The arguments I gave there were completely ignored by -sche and then Achaea. For instance the example I gave of Pope Francis#Writings was intended as a real question,, but no answer has been given for cases like that. No real dialogue was on offer.
The initial source I provided for my editing was entirely adequate in the context, but subsequently I provided much fuller sourcing and my latest version, here is far better sourced than the current version on display here
Those two editors have both appealed to WP:WEIGHT. That section includes the words: "Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public." So, looking at the current form of the article, we have in the sources Juno: about 7; James: about 6; and in the article's own text, Juno about 4; James 0 (that's zero), so the "weight" argument actually goes the other way.
I've noticed in wikipedia over the years that the word "consensus" is almost only ever used when consensus is absent. Consensus means that everyone agrees, so when that is the case it is not necessary to say so. Appeal to consensus never takes a discussion forward; it is a way of avoiding argument, not of assisting it. I am willing to engage in rational discussion about this article, if others are too. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 13:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deadnaming is considered highly offensive in the trans community and Juno is a trans person. She has clearly made efforts to change old publications and does not want to be referred to by her deadname. Please do not keep on referring to her by this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.23.22 (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and therefore should represent the world as-is, not as one would want it to be. Dawson's work up to and including Mind Your Head was first published under her deadname, which means that Dawson was notable by that name. Had Dawson never been published previously, the removal of the deadname would be non-controversial. But as she was, it is a fact which should at least be acknowledged - without giving undue weight to it. H. Carver (talk) 02:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dawson was notable under her former name, so per MOS:GENDERID this name should be mentioned in the article. The guidelines also say "In source citations, do not remove names of authors, or references to former names in titles of works. If the author is notable, the current name may be given, for example as "X (writing as Y)"." If a book or article she published is still only available under her former name, we should use that name. Fences&Windows 18:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

Dawson's books were first published under the 'James Dawson' name, up to and including Mind Your Head. As a result, Dawson has prior notability under the deadname. The information has been carefully added per the guidelines given in MOS:DEADNAME. H. Carver (talk) 17:10, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Assigned male"[edit]

should read born Male. Biology is not assigned. 82.25.110.150 (talk) 20:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]