Talk:Mauree Turner

Not to standards

Reading through the article, I think there's a good bit of work needed before this can get out of stub territory. Having a public figure such as a congressperson's date of birth be "1992 or 1993" and age be a range of two years is no where near worthy of an article, and with zero source to show where those facts come from, it's better off just not being mentioned at all than the way it currently is. I'll be axing the date of birth stuff and leave it blank until an actual source can be found giving their date of birth. More over, until this page can become more than simple statements and minimal sourcing, I don't see how it can't be a stub. No doubt it can become a phenomenal Wikipedia page, but with the assured new visitors who will come here to learn about this record setting congressperson this isn't what we should be giving them.

System Lag (talk) 03:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

A range of two years when the exact date is unknown is entirely normal.--Pokelova (talk) 06:07, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:07, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Mauree Turner is the first publicly non-binary individual elected to a U.S. state legislature?

• Reviewed: IOU Template:Did you know nominations/Peter Lagger

Created by TJMSmith (talk) and Muboshgu (talk). Nominated by Muboshgu (talk) at 23:30, 9 November 2020 (UTC).

• : Hi Muboshgu, review follows. Long enough, new enough, reasonably written, neutral, I'm struggling to get earwigs to work, but spotcheck suggests no problems w/ copyvio, sources seem reliable, all sources I spotchecked lined up. Hook is supported and is an interesting first. Just waiting on QPQ. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:41, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Eddie891, sorry for the delay. QPQ provided! – Muboshgu (talk) 05:25, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
    • QPQ is good. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:52, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Pronouns

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Consensus to use feminine (she/her/hers) pronouns. — Twassman [Talk·Contribs] 20:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

---

"Turner is queer and non-binary. Typically, non-binary persons use they/them and she/her pronouns. However, since she was genetically born a female, with two X chromosomes, she is biologically and scientifically a woman."

That paragraph reads a lot like a defence of why this article is written with the pronoun "she". What is Wikipedia's policy on pronouns? Does wikipedia use someone's preferred pronouns? --84.13.230.191 (talk) 14:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

WP policy is to use preferred pronouns, and the subject of this article uses she or they. Source [1] --84.13.230.191 (talk) 14:39, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Most of the sources we use for this article use "she", and her official website uses "she". I think we should as well. --GRuban (talk) 19:42, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Let's count what our sources in the article use to refer to the subject. Here is every single reference:

1. https://oklahoman.com/article/5675468/oklahoma-elects-first-muslim-nonbinary-state-legislator she/her
2. https://www.ardmoreite.com/story/special/2020/06/01/floyd-death-prompts-solidarity-march-in-ardmore/111893052/ she
3. https://www.cairoklahoma.com/blog/a-conversation-with-oklahomas-muslim-candidate/ she/her
4. https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/11/04/mauree-turner-first-non-binary-lawmaker-us-history/ they
5. https://oklahoman.com/article/5664622/house-district-88-democrat-faces-first-primary-challenge she/her
6. https://nondoc.com/2020/06/30/mauree-turner-takes-hd-88-ajay-pittman-retains-hd-99/ her
7. https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_House_of_Representatives_District_88 no pronouns
8. https://people.com/politics/election-2020-first-non-binary-state-legislator-and-first-muslim-oklahoma-lawmaker-elected/ she/her
9. https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/05/politics/first-nonbinary-and-muslim-oklahoma-lawmaker/index.html she/her
10. https://oklahoman.com/article/5671816/pete-buttigieg-endorses-okc-democrat-mauree-turner her
11. https://oklahoman.com/article/5673417/us-sen-elizabeth-warren-endorses-okc-legislative-candidate her
12. https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54806677 no pronouns

So that's 9 for she/her, 1 for they, and 2 that didn't use pronouns (they're one very short mention, and one automated form, so I don't think they went out of their way to avoid pronouns). And, possibly most important, as CNN writes, "On Turner's campaign website, Turner uses she/her." There hasn't been any other comment here for months, so I think we need to change to she/her, per clear preponderance of the sources, including the one controlled by the subject. --GRuban (talk) 17:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The pronouns have been changed several times since this small thread concluded (including today; the article currently uses they/them as a result of the most recent change), probably by well-meaning users who assume all nonbinary people use they or assume Turner would prefer they because it seems to be listed first in e.g. the representative's twitter bio. Turner's website uses she/her. I can't find anything else which clearly indicates a preference one way or the other, and recent news coverage is mostly too brief to use any pronouns, although this mentions and uses only they/them and discusses how people misgender Turner, so maybe the writer has some more recent information (or maybe not). -sche (talk) 01:46, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Since her website uses she/her, that's the one we should use per MOS:GENDERID. Mgasparin (talk) 09:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

This quote from the article illustrates the stupidity of using "they/them" for individuals, nonbinary or not:

"They are Muslims, raised in an interfaith Baptist and Muslim household."

Supposedly, "they" refers to her identification with both male and female, but she is still just one person, so she is "Muslim", not "Muslims". Furthermore, the verb in that sentence should be "is", since she is an individual. So "They is Muslim" is how that should read.

Gender Speak, as I call it, is one of the more bizarre and stupid things that we have gotten from trans people. It is, without a doubt, a politicized vocabulary which has NOT been accepted by a majority of people anywhere in the world; and for that reason alone, no encyclopedia should be using it. Furthermore, this example from the article shows how confusing it is. (Even people who use it don't know how to use it properly!) What good encyclopedia is written in confusing language? The answer is, None. Wikipedia, of course, is not a good encyclopedia, so I suppose it doesn't matter here.

The stupidity never stops in this place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.38.185.65 (talk) 07:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I changed the statement to They are Muslim, as that is how the singular they works. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

No, you have got it wrong. "They is Muslim" is how this trans lingo is supposed to work. "They are Muslim" suggests that Turner is two people; she is not. The word "they" is being used only because neither "she" nor "he" is correct because the person is nonbinary -- although in this case my understanding is that she doesn't mind being called "she". You have just proven my point that using Gender Speak is too confusing and should be abandoned.