[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 15 KB, 600x384, 12B82107-EC2A-4989-9659-5E5CEDEF4F7B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19640708 No.19640708 [Reply] [Original]

>go on wikipedia page of novel from the 1800's
>there's section championing "transgender theory" about a character who is undoubtedly a woman with a vagina
>the section posits the woman is really a tranny with no textual evidence (citing only an introduction written by a literal who in which the literal who admits it's all speculative and that there's no textual evidence to it) and despite the fact that in the sequel the woman has a son
I'm so tired of it all. I deleted the tranny section and saw in the edit history some troon had restored it when another had deleted it earlier for being textually false.

>> No.19640718

>>19640708
Tell us what novel so I can know if you're right or not

>> No.19640721

>>19640708
You're a liar.

>> No.19640723

>>19640718
Wikipedia page for Milday de Winter from The Three Musketeers.

>> No.19640731

>>19640723
*Milady de Winter

>> No.19640741

>>19640718
>>19640721
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Milady_de_Winter

>> No.19640744

>>19640741
It was changed again, found it on the page history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Milady_de_Winter&oldid=1050709345

>> No.19640785

>>19640744
There's apparently been a war over this stretching back to 2016. No doubt some tranny janny on Wikipedia will restore the transgender theory section soon. This is just another reason that I will never trust anything on Wikipedia. It's not even a legitimate viewpoint on this character.

>> No.19640809

>>19640741
>>19640744
>>19640785
It's not even mentioned in the french version.

This said, you create perhaps "an interpretation"/notes/trivia section, you can drown the tranny stuff among others theories or notes, commentaries made by critics or writers on the character, inspirations of this figure in later works, etc.

This will forbids the tranophile to put back the fanfic as an important matter in the future

>> No.19640825

>tranny gets murdered at the end with no remorse
sounds pretty based to me

>> No.19640848

We should be doing what they do. You know, go to war on Wikipedia. Stonewall these fags.
We should form a legion of /lit/ anons, interested in promoting truth on Wikipedia.

>> No.19640853

>>19640708
>I deleted the tranny section
Gave up on that. Don't want my IP/account to get me in trouble with the tranny police 3 years from now

>> No.19640854

>>19640848
They just end up reporting your account and eventually you will lose editing priveleges. Sometimes they lock pages so only certain "trusted" individuals can edit a page. Like anyone celebrity who is a tranny, their page is locked so you can't misgender them to point out they indeed have a penis.

>> No.19640858

>>19640848
have you ever tried to convince an autist they're wrong? its near impossible

>> No.19640917

>>19640708
>trannies don't care about reality
What else is new?

>> No.19641198

come on, learn to pick your battles
what >>19640809 suggests is far better than removing shit
as an editor, you (theoretically) don't have the right to choose what interpretation is correct or not, so nobody will let you delete an entire section

>> No.19641211

>>19641198
>Woman births son from her vagina
>200 years later
>actually that person was a tranny
Are you listening to yourself? It's not even a credible interpretation. All textual evidence points to the contrary. The one thing the trannyphile cited as evidence said itself that the """theory""" was mere speculation which had no basis for being proposed.

>> No.19641335

>>19641211
Yes anon we know it's bullshit. But that person is probably a moderator or something on Wikipedia.
It's like the evola page where he is called a super fascist, and they cite an article written by a woman saying "it doesn't nessecarily mean he's a fascist".

>> No.19641408

>>19640708
>this uninformed take
Not you living in the last century, chile I-

>> No.19641433

>>19641335
>But that person is probably a moderator or something on Wikipedia.
I just have some experience with editing there.

>>19641211
I'm not saying anything about the validity of the interpretation. I'm only talking about what you can/cannot do with the article.
Actually, after reading the section in full, I think you can seriously dispute its relevance. Is the reading used elsewhere else by other scholars? Wikipedia doesn't have to cover every obscure idea in existence.
Also,
>Additionally, Dumas describes her in terms that may indicate a variance from the binary genders. Dumas attributes to her “strength apparently above that of a woman.” <ref>{{Cite book|last=Dumas|first=Alexander|title=The Three Musketeers|publisher=The Fountain Press|year=1949|pages=295}}</ref>
is definitely deletion-worthy, because it is most likely "original research", it isn't sourced from the preface.
(The fact that the interpretation is from 1952 is quite surprising, btw.)

>> No.19641755

>>19641433
The source was written by a homosexual Lord who killed himself. Not surprising since he was probably a tranny himself.