Talk:Charlize Theron/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Application of WP:MOSBIO and WP:OPENPARA

I believe the intent of WP:MOSBIO and WP:OPENPARA is that the nationality a subject held at the time they became notable is important and shouldn't be glossed over. In this particular case, the subject was a notable South African actress for 12 years before becoming an American citizen. Shouldn't she be described as a South African actress who became an American citizen rather than with the inaccurate monstrosity "South African-born American"? Yworo (talk) 06:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I really do not see the issue here. Is there any evidence that she is not longer a RSA citizen? As far as I am aware she holds dual citizenship [1] (as do many other actors) and the article should reflect that. Though she will always be thought of as South African by South Africans, Charlize herself will be Americanized by now. Most of her working career was spend in the USA and naturally her life and the article will reflect that. Call her African-American if you like, or Afrikaner-America if the color of her skin excludes her from being Africa-American. --NJR_ZA (talk) 07:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

This article is even older than her US citizenship - it is even written in SA English. She achieved the primary "notability criterion" - the Oscar - before she became American. That being said, the real issue here is about the principle in WP:MOSBIO, not just this single article. Many other BIOS of people who changed citizenship after achieving notability will also be affected, so I think this discussion should be "taken upstairs" to be pursued at a MOS level. Roger (talk) 07:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Yworo has received official admin approval for his edit-warring over this trivial issue, so he wins, and he can chortle all day long at this hollow victory. One thing we don't want to do is make wikipedia look stupid: As you well know, she did all her filming in South Africa until she became an American citizen. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

The fact she is South African is obviously of primary importance. It's where she was born, it's where she grew up, and it's the only nationality she held when she first achieved fame. She is not "South African-born" (although I see nothing wrong with that construction and it is used in many other articles where people emigrated at a young age and are overwhelmingly associated with their adoptive country), since, as far as anyone knows, she still retains South African citizenship and is still considered by many to be a South African (c.f. Jerry Springer, for example, who was born in Britain but has lived in America since he was a child and would not be considered by most people to be British in any way); she is still therefore first and foremost "South African". However, the fact she now also holds American nationality is significant and should be included in the opening paragraph.

A similar situation may be found with British actor Anthony Hopkins, who has also taken American nationality. Despite this, he is still British (and Welsh), and attempts to describe him as an "American actor" ("Welsh-born" or otherwise) have justifiably been reverted. He is not American; he has dual nationality. He was born in Britain, grew up in Britain, sounds British, achieved prominence in Britain, has spent most of his career in Britain, was knighted by Britain, and is still primarily associated with Britain. Nevertheless, the fact he now also has American nationality is (and should be) mentioned in the opening paragraph. Theron is in exactly the same situation and should be dealt with in exactly the same way. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I think she should be called South African born. It dosn't seem like that big of a deal to me either way.Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 23:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

South African seems consistent with WP:MOSBIO. She retains South African citizenship and was South African when she became notable. However, she was only 16 when she came to the U.S. An alternate way to deal with this would be to call her "South African American." A similar approach was taken with Robert Goulet, who, like Theron, held dual citizenship (Canadian American). Sunray (talk) 07:54, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

That, however, suggests she was born in America of South African descent. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Which is precisely why MOS:BIO is written the way it is. Nationality, for purposes of the lead sentence, is usually the nation in which the subject was raised and in which their intellectual development occurred. If notability is attained while still a national of the country in which the subject is raised, there is no real doubt that this is what should be used in the lead sentence. In such a case, becoming a citizen of another country while already notable is simply one of many events in the subject's life. If this event is summarized in the lead section, then it should be placed more or less in chronological order if the lead is more or less chronologically organized. If the adopted citizenship is especially significant to the subject's notability, then mention of this event could occur as early as the second sentence or maybe even at the end of the first sentence, if there is a consensus to do so. Yworo (talk) 09:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey, how about an application of WP:COMMONSENSE, since it seems to be in seriously short supply here. Point one: WP:MOSBIO is a guideline not a hard and fast policy which must be followed come hell or high water. In this case, "South African" is not an ethinicity, it's a nationality. Since Theron was born and grew up in South Africa, it's appropriate that the article indicate where her origins were. At the same time, as a person who has since taken American citizenship -- which precludes any other citizenship -- she is now an American. To ignore that is not providng our readers with all the information available The description of her as a "South African-born American actress" covers all those bases properly, without misleading our readers, the way "South African" or "American" would. (Remember, we're here to serve our readers, not to serve our own political or social prejudices). I suggest that we leave that description as the best compromise between the various parties. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I'd also suggest that the lede could refer to her simplye as an "actress", and the details of her birth citizenship and subsquent change of citizenship can be introduced later in the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The problem with that idea is that she became notable while she was still a South African actress. In fact she hasn't won a single significant award (which is the specific qualifier for notability of actors) since taking US citizenship.

I am concerned that we are busy discussing this matter as if the issue pertains to only this one article. In fact there are numerous articles about people who changed their citizenship at various stages in their lives - before or after becoming notable. I really feel we should be discussing this as a possible ammendment of the rule in MOSBIO itself, not as a single isolated exceptional case. Roger (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this and suggest that what I have written just above be proposed as guidance in this particular sort of case. The issue of people who moved as children or changed their citizenship before becoming notable will of course require a different approach and different guidance. Yworo (talk) 09:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken, American citizenship does not preclude holding other citizenships and has not for a long time. Dual citizenship is common. It was ruled by the Supreme Court in the 1950s and 1960s that dual citizenship is a "status long recognized in the law" and that "a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both. The mere fact he asserts the rights of one citizenship does not without more mean that he renounces the other". Yworo (talk) 10:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

That is true of people born with dual citizenship, but for people who have been naturalized "People who go through US naturalization are required to state under oath that they are renouncing their old citizenship, and conduct inconsistent with this pledge could theoretically lead to loss of one's US status."[2] Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

It is not enforced, based on the Supreme Court rulings just mentioned. And the source you cite is certainly not a reliable one. And you are reading it selectively, see point 2 "However, most of the laws forbidding dual citizenship were struck down by the US Supreme Court in two cases: a 1967 decision, Afroyim v. Rusk, as well as a second ruling in 1980, Vance v. Terrazas." Yworo (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it is you who are reading it selectively, and not recognizing the difference between those born with dual citizenship and those who are naturalized. The United States has every right to set up whatever conditions it feels are necessary for those who want to become American citizens (since there is no right to become an American citizen), and they have decided that those who want to be U.S. citizens must give up any other citizenship. You may not like that, but those are the facts on the ground. Theron, having become an American citizen, is no longer a South African citizen, having renounced it to become a U.S. citizen. Your unwillingness to accept this appears to be what's behind your totally unreasonable unwillingnes to accept a commonsense compromise, and as such, I leave the discussion to you and other bureaucratic pettifoggers with more gumption than sense. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

@Dodger67: It does not matter in the least when she became notable. Our encyclopedia is not stuck in the past, it represents (we hope) the state of knowledge of the world right now. Before she took American citizenship,. it is indisputable that Theron was a South African actress, but things have changed, as things in the world are wont to do, and it is our duty to our reader to present them with the best verifiable information about the world at this moment. Right now, Theron is no longer a "South African actress" she is an actress who was born in South Africa who has taken up American citizenship -- that makes her a "South African-born American actress" or whatever other construction can be agrees on. If WP:MOSBIO doesn't support that, than (dare I say it?) MOSBIO is flat-out wrong and needs to be updated. In the meantime, we should not kowtow to an incorrect guideline simply because it is a guideline, we should use our God-given ability to think to do what is right for4 the article in question. If the guideline needs to catch up with reality, that's an entirely different question, but to be held back by a badly conceived guideline is very bad for the project, since it suggests we're not interested in mirroring reality', but in following bureaucratic rules for their own sake. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

MOS:BIO correctly intends that we attribute nationality to the culture in which the subject was raised and became notable. It does not say we use citizenship, which is a much different concept than nationality. Yworo (talk) 10:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Really? What's the difference? Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, one example is in the UK. People born in the UK are British citizens who may be of English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh nationality. Or you could just use Wikipedia, the article on nationality explains it in the lead sentence "Nationality is membership of a nation or sovereign state, usually determined by their citizenship, but sometimes by ethnicity or place of residence, or based on their sense of national identity." Citizenship is a strictly legal concept, nationality is a broader cultural concept. Yworo (talk) 10:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken - I'm sorry but in this case you are flat out wrong. MOSBIO specifically and explicitly states that citizenship or nationality when the person became notable is what we are required to state in the first sentence. Changes of citizenship after achieving notability are mentioned later. This is in fact was has been done in this article. As it stands now the lead of this article is in full and complete compliance with the letter of MOSBIO. I repeat my position that deviation from this would require that we ammend MOSBIO itself. That is why I propose that we move this issue to the MOSBIO talk page and discuss a possible change to the guideline itself rather than getting bogged down in nationalistic chauvanisms and other personal biases. The principle applies to many other articles, Charlize Theron is not the only notable person in the entire history of the known universe to have changed their citizenship.

Wikipedia is absolutely not concernened exclusively with the "here and now" - to make such a claim is patently absurd. We have thousands of articles about dead people, countries, languages, nations, civilisations, animals, even entire continents - that no longer exist. Roger (talk) 10:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

So let's do that then. here Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 11:02, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Please note that whatever the United States may like to say about taking American citizenship, people who do so have not automatically renounced their "former" citizenship - that's not how it works. To do this requires them to formally renounce their citizenship to the government of that country, and most do not do this (and, as has already been established, the United States does not bother to enforce it as a condition of citizenship, whatever may be written into the rules and the declaration). Therefore, whatever the United States may claim, most naturalised people do retain their previous citizenship and hold dual nationality. You may be surprised, Beyond My Ken, to know that just because the United States says something is true does not necessarily mean it is true outside the United States! Since we have no proof that Theron has formally renounced her South African citizenship to the government of South Africa, we must assume she retains it and thus under international law (if not US law) has dual nationality. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

As an update, it appears that, unlike many countries, South Africa does consider its citizenship renounced automatically if citizenship of another country is adopted. However, this can be waived if a dispensation is obtained. We do not know whether Theron obtained such a dispensation, but if she did not then I would support "South African-born American" as entirely accurate. As long as we do not know either way, then I believe the status quo should be maintained. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I see no problem with "South African-born American." It's accurate. ScottyBerg (talk) 14:38, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree with South African-born American This seems to be the most accurate statement on the topic.Coaster92 (talk) 23:56, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Theron is however known to hold dual citizenship, as reported here. It is all over the web, you can't miss it, but this seems to be the original source article. Plus WP:MOSBIO says we use citizenship at the time the subject became notable, which would apply even if she did not hold dual citizenship. Yworo (talk) 00:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

It was also discussed in an interview with David Letterman as reported here: "Charlize Theron appeared on Letterman last night and announced some big news. No, she's not pregnant. She's now an official U.S. citizen. Charlize is originally from South Africa, so she had to take a test in order to grant her dual citizenship." Yworo (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Here's a third, more reliable, source, with more in-depth coverage: [3]. Yworo (talk) 00:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Question to the people who says she is no longer a South African: Kirsten Dunst recently got German citizenship. Is she now an "American-born German actress"? Nymf _hideliho! 07:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Good question. I knew there had to be a reverse example, but couldn't think of one offhand. Yworo (talk) 07:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Great example. The MoS is clear. The rationale for such is clear. There is no reason we cannot mention here American citizenship later in the lead, but it doesn't need included in the first five words. Can we nip this in the bud now, please? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it's not. Pretty sure Kirsten Dunst doesn't live in Germany, make it her home, and do the vast majority of her work there. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:OPENPARA doesn't take any of those things into account. Just what nationality the subject was when they became notable. This is not the place to pursue any change to that guideline. Take it to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies if you have a problem with the current guideline or its application. The intent is to give credit where credit is due, to the country which was home to and nurtured the subject to notability. And to minimize edit wars, with a clear guideline that makes sense based on both the subject's sense of nationalism and the nurturing country's sense of pride. Take that away and the edit wars will be endless. Now, there is an end. Yworo (talk) 05:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

The US recognizes but does not encourage dual citizenship [4]. Nobody Ent (Gerardw) 21:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

• Notability, please! Kirsten Dunst is known (notable) as an American actress. She's to be denoted as an American actress who recently obtained German citizenship. If Marion Cotillard tomorrow takes up American citizenship and continues to be notable for her work, as an Amercin actress, she would still be referred to, in Wikipedia, as a French actress. Because that's how she became notable. Charlize Theron became known for her work as a South African actress working in the United States - and, later on, obtained American citizenship. She is a "South African actress, who became an American citizen in [date X]." -The Gnome (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
• Currently she is a SA born American, if she moved to Canada or Mexico it would change to SAb Mexican or Canadian. When she dies we should change it to South African woman that x'd in x and then moved to x and x'd. But for now it's an accurate term. If South Africans find the wording annoying it could be changed to South African-American or something like that.LuciferWildCat (talk) 18:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree with South African-born American This seems to be the most accurate statement on the topic. Furthermore, this issue is just not worthy of this much time and effort. Please conclude it and move on. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

• Agree with South African-born American - Ironically I recently inserted this phrace into the lead, completely unaware of the discussion which had taken place above! I think we can agree that Theron has fair claim to be called BOTH South African and American. The lead should state that simply. NickCT (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

US in Lead Sentence

Who the heck keeps on reverting the lead sentence to remove all mention of the US? "Charlize Theron is a South African actress" gives the impression that she has worked as an actress in South Africa. This is misleading. She only started acting after moving to the US, and her entire career has been based in the US. The lead sentence should either state: "Charlize Theron is a South-African-born actress", or Charlize Theron is a "South African actress who works in the United States". It should not give the false impression that she has a South African acting career. FurrySings (talk) 10:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It is stated in the very next sentence, so there is no "false impression" of anything, or whatever. Look at the discussion above. Nymf _hideliho! 10:11, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The nationality stated in the lead sentence is the nationality of the subject, not the nationality of the works they appear in. Yworo (talk) 15:34, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It does not state in the next sentence that she has never worked as an actress in S. Africa. Which is, as I stated, very misleading. I'll fix that in the second sentence since you insist. FurrySings (talk) 14:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

tv appearance....

should we put her guest appearance on Top Chef? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.154.55.27 (talk) 04:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

African American

Isn't she African American? Shouldn't we note that she's the second African American to win best actress? --Golbez 16:36, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

she is NOT African American guys. She's a white South African which makes her Caucasian (a lot of South Africa is Caucasian). African-American refers to ancestry - it is a racial group (it is just conventional). There is no doubt she is African, but African-American implies colour. ~Similar to the way we refer to Asians as being not the people of Asia, but rather Orientals, such as Chinese, Japanese, Filipino etc. We usually don't refer to, say, Middle Eastern or Indian people as Asian, even though they are technically from Asia. ~Also similar to the way we refer to US residents as Americans. Although America refers to the whole of two continents (North and South America), the word 'American' implies someone living in the USA. These are common misconceptions which have made their way into everyday convention. Thus, saying that she is African American would just confuse the hell out of people and cause pointless debates over racial identity, even identity crises of celebrities, and we don't want to do that. google me (talk) 04:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually in the UK 'Asian' predominantly means South Asian (ie from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh), these terms vary in their use in different parts of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.199.227 (talk) 15:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

We should do so only if she has citizenship in the United States. The article currently implies (but does not state) that she has South African citizenship and I'm unsure as to whether the U.S. allows dual citizenship with South Africa (it does not, for example, with the United Kingdom). In other words, she may not be the second African American to win best actress because she may not be American. If so, it is probably worth noting, however. --Yamla 16:55, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

Without trying to stray too far off topic, the US does not object to dual citizenship. Specifically, I am a UK citizen, born and bred in the UK with dual US citizenship. Your statement is dated and no longer correct (I believe the US changed its attitude to dual citizenship in the late 80s).

According to google, her citizenship is "pending". --Golbez 17:55, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

Assuming she did not have American citizenship when she won the award, I do not believe we should count her as the second african american to win best actress. As are you, I am slightly concerned that it would lead to a flame war anyway, but hey. So long as we stay factually accurate. --Yamla 19:37, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

After reading African American and discussing it a bit, I withdraw my objection. American English has chosen it prefers having a term where the words don't match the meaning. So be it; wikipedia's job is to use the labels we have. --Golbez 09:04, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough, I concur. Obviously, African American, as used in the United States, doesn't actually mean what the words mean. Instead, it refers to a racial makeup. Additionally, it looks likely that Charlize was not American, at least not at the time she won the award. --Yamla 16:03, 2005 Feb 9 (UTC)

If and when Ms. Theron receives American citizenship, wouldn't she be "Afrikaner American" instead of "African American". Specificity of cultural heritage should always be encouraged. -Acjelen 22:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I've heard that Ms. Theron self-identifies as African American. I'm currently looking for a citation. --Llewdor 00:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who denies that she is African American, legally recognized or not, is a colorist. NorthernThunder 16:29, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The definition of African American is an American from African descent. Therefore Ms Theron is African American - if she has American citizenship. --Scotteh 16:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Does she have American citizenship? I think she is being slighted because she is White. If she was a Black African, I think no one would question calling her an African-American, even if she was not legally recognized as such. NorthernThunder 18:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

What!? I'm rather surprised at the number of people here who would have changed the article to 'African American' simply if she had American citizenship. Having looked over the African American article - and using my prior knowledge, the term African American is a politically-correct way of refering to a black person, or a person of color - clearly Charlize Theron is not black, neither a person of color - she is Caucasian (or white). This is similar to how the word Asian is used to refer to someone that looks like they are Chinese-Japanese-Korean-Etc (or yellow if you like). Caucasian is how we refer to white people. If you read the African American article, it refers to Americans with an African ancestory, just as Caucasians are "White-skinned, of European origin".
Please do not change the article to refer to Charlize Theron as African-American at any point, even if she does receive American citizenship.
Rfwoolf 17:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

can i just say 'Rfwoolf' not all black people are amercian so the term african-amercian is not refering to a black person, but a amercian with aficia desent. and another thing you said "neither a person of colour" well white is a skin colour and a race in it's own right so Charlize is a person of colour EVERYONE IS! but yes i think if you put afician amercian on there it might cause some confusion. But if she likes to be self-identified as afician-amercian then we should except that as really she kinder is and amercian with afician desent —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.178.60 (talk) 02:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

All right, so African American refers to Americans with African descent, in the same way that Asian American refers to Americans of Asiatic descent. To label Charlize Theron as African American would strongly imply that she's black, that her ancestors originated from Africa, that her grandparents' grandparents' grandparents' were born and raised in Africa. None of that is true. If you read African American it will describe over and over again about the black ancestry thing, and here's one particular quote from the article:

Since 1977, the United States officially categorized black people (revised to black or African American in 1997) are classified as A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.

As you can see, that certainly doesn't describe Charlize Theron. As for the term 'person of colour', I do appologise if anyone is offended in any way, I am from South africa where the term does not have an offensive meaning, and even according to the US meaning (at here: Colored) it is only offensive depending on its context. It says colored generally refers to "everyone except white people" (at least in the USA). So you are almost correct that everyone is colored, but the term still takes on a meaning of non-white, and Charlize Theron is white.

Finally, since there are no references saying that Charlize Theron identifies as African American (I have read many articles on her and interviews and she never says that) we cannot call her that. Even if she did identify herself that way, it would be unfounded unless she has a black person in her bloodline.

In closing, nobody is denying that Charlize theron is originally from Africa, and as I am a South African I'm proud of her, South Africa is proud of her, and Africa should be proud of her - to think that an oscar-winning actress can come from South Africa or Africa is fantastic. But make no mistake, she did not come to America as a slave several hundred years ago, she was not previously disadvantaged. I hope this clears things up. Rfwoolf (talk) 06:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Personally, to use the term "African-American" simply to refer to black people (and I mean all black people.....whether or not they are even American at all or not....which I see happening all the time.....in the United States......ALL black people are commonly referred to as "African-Americans") is idiotic to say the least. It seems to me that all of these "-American" terms apply to any American from another land of origin regardless their color, except for "African-American." This idiotic oversight and rigidness is the reason I simply refer to people as black and white, etc. These new PC labels, when there really is no logic being used with regard to how they are applied, just show how idiotic they (the labels) really are (and I consider myself to quite liberal). I mean does the term "Administrative Assistant" make you any less a secretary? Not anymore than these dumb labels make you any less what you really are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.189 (talk) 01:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Surely she is just South African, she was born and raised there. Not everyone who decides to move to the US has their nationality suffixed with American. Look at Kiefer Sutherland and countless other Canadians - or are they Canadian-Americans? Brylaw (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Not at all comparable. Sutherland lives in the U.S. but does not hold U.S. citizenship. Theron does. Also "Canadian-American" is a really, really weird term, as hyphenated American identity refers to ethnicity and not necessarily national origin, which is precisely why the article doesn't call her a "South African-America" or worse an African-American. CAVincent (talk) 05:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

So how do you explain the very widely used "Italian-American" or "German-American"? Neither are ethnicity descriptors. Roger (talk) 07:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Um, in the U.S. they certainly are ethnicity descriptors. All of the Italian-American and German-American people I know were born in the U.S. and if anyone described themselves to me as such I would assume they were simply American citizens using the term to describe their heritage. Where are these terms used, very widely or not, to describe anything else than ethnicity? CAVincent (talk) 19:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

German, Italian, Scottish, etc, are definitely not ethnicities, they are nationalities or languages. Can you distinguish, just by how they look, between a German-American and one of British descent? Roger (talk) 19:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Of course not. But let me underline in the United States German-American, Italian-American, Scottish-American etc. are unquestionably considered ethnicities. Since you refer to "how they look" I am guessing you are confusing race with ethnicity, but they are not the same. And, yes, in American history German-American were once the object of prejudice from English-Americans, as were Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans and others you couldn't tell apart from looking at them. CAVincent (talk) 20:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I know I should not, but I find this whole heading topic hilarious. There would have to be someone who would propose this. While not being an expert on this, I think Wikipedia has a policy of using "common english" as its foundational editing policy, no? Then, doesn't the moniker "African American" refer primarily to those Americans who grew up in the US as the descendants of slaves? Yes, some get begrudgingly accepted into the definition (Obama) but broadly speaking this is where it's at. Charlize is, undeniably, an African of European heritage. But, she hardly fits the definition of "African American" however much the trolls would wish it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:41CD:3800:C979:AC7C:76D6:D643 (talk) 07:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Re:African American

hey african americans are black , she isn't black but you could say souyth african-american

She qualifies as the first African to win the Best Actress Oscar then. I agree that the term African-American is a racial term applying to Negroids and visible decendants of that racial type. If you "look black" or, as I like to tell someone that down plays racial appearance, "you'd have been forced to the back of the bus in 1950's Alabama" then you're now called African American.

Ok, she's african, she's american. Don't put your color predujices on me man, she's african american. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.153.68 (talk) 21:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

---

1. Freaked out my university when people from South Africa showed up claiming African-American on the paperwork: one person had seven degrees and likely had financial assistance. My university is an activist university that believes no white man should be educated. It turned out the United States military sponsors lots of education and many white men were military, including me, who gained formal university in addition to military education. The impact in that so called multicultural environment of foreigners surrounded by millions of United States natives in the State was not lost. Labels do matter including the informal ones including the African-American label.

2. Any Black person looking for special recognition should understand that after a few generations in North America you are part of North America and the Western World and need to know your United States or Canadian citizenship. There is nothing wrong with pride of heritage, but beware of the labels you use.

3. Charlize Theron is a beautiful African-American from South America with the ability to make any white guy sit up and pay attention. 172.191.36.167 15:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: "Charlize Theron is a beautiful African-American from South America^? with the ability to make any white guy sit up and pay attention." -- No, Charlize Theron is neither African-American, nor South American, nor black. She could be considered: Caucasian, South African American, American, or South African. Get it? Got it? Good! Rfwoolf 17:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

African-American clearly means American of African descent. And yes, I'm Black, and proud of it. But if you call me African-American, you're lying to yourself - The best I can do is point to Africa on a map; I - and most Black people - couldn't even tell you what tribe or village I descend from. It's all that political correctness that makes one want to call a Black person African-American, when they've never seen a grain of sand in Africa! I oppose that term for anyone who has never even been to the Continent.

141.154.59.188 11:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC) miyna

172.191.36.167 - She is from South Africa. God, idiot!--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 14:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Your defamatory response, "God, idiot" is a personal attack, and is not in line with Wikipolicy. Even if the person was a troll, or if she was lying, etc, I still find your response inappropriate. Rfwoolf 17:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Jesus, you guys, who is the person who said Charlize was an "African American from South America"? lol People in "South America" are Amerindian, not black. Anyway, I would say leave her as being from South Africa, even if she is naturalized American, because it'll create confusion if it's changed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Prophetess mar (talk • contribs) 03:38, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

I would just like to point out that Africa is a continent and that South Africa is a country. If you must label people, please be consistent. People that are wanting to say that she is South African-American, I say to you, then why do we not trace everyone to their exact country in Africa and call them accordingly? No, we combine the continent in which they came with the country in which they reside in now. If you are being consistent and equal, she is African-American. Ace Fool (talk) 04:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I have changed it to say she is South African. We all know that African American refers to Black Americans. That is not negotiable, and people who try to make an issue about White Africans being from Africa is still incorrect, since all White Africans are decendents of immigrants/colonialists. Belgium, Dutch, Austrian etc. Thus they get to keep their decendent nationalities. Most black americans had their ancestories wiped out, thus they can't necessarily point out if they were decendents from say Nigeria or Kenya. You'd think by 2000 we would be beyond such trivial stuff. MPA 19:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MPA (talk • contribs)

Er, I am a white South African, and we do not keep our descendant nationalities. Unlike Americans, we do not place much emphasis on our European heritage. We see ourselves as South Africans, not descendants of the Dutch, British and French colonists who settled here 400 years ago. Charlize Theron is therefore African-American. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.145.121.225 (talk) 16:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

As someone who was also born is Africa and is a naturalized citizen I would call charlize african american. The term African american doesn't mean color Malcolm X and the black americans started this to get closer to what they call the homeland. Charlize knows more about Africa than any black american would ever know about and black americans know more about America that Charlize would every know about. The person who knows about africa and has been there, was born there, and speaks the language needs to keep the name "Africa" as part of their identity. Since Africa is a continent with white and black people. What gives black americans the right to tell white Africaans not to call them selves African american you cant take someones identity just because they are not black. You canT compare Asian Americans to black americans bc asian americans can identify with a country, and a culture black Americans identify themselves with a continent not a country (what other group does this), and they identify with american culture. Asians have a strong bond with their ancestry, and asians dont have a slavery history that stretches past 3 continents making it difficult to form an identity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.228.13 (talk) 01:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

All this conversation is ridiculous. It's incredible how the people of USA are so worried to classify this woman. She's hot, the rest doesn't matter. And to the person that said that south americans are native americans, i just say this, here in Brazil we have the biggest black population outside Africa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.60.103.199 (talk) 17:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm of British origin, an American citizen, lived 8 years in sub-Saharan Africa. Does that make me an African American? Of course not, and neither is Ms. Theron. African-American is a rather ugly term that we've adopted to replace the word "negro", which is really a more accurate description, but carries too much historical baggage.Nigelrg (talk) 00:49, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

U.S. citizen

Does anyone know if she is a naturalized US citizen? I removed the "American models" category because I am certain that she is not.

Theron is a US citizen, as of 2007. She stated so in her recent Vogue interview. See the link on her page for her comments.

She is not a US citizen. If so, indicate it somewhere in the article and put a reference right next to it. I don't see any Vogue magazine interview link where she talk about her naturalization. So please do not write such false information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shady19 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, holding my breath and assuming good faith here. Yes, she is now a US citizen. Add a fact cite tag if you want and maybe someone will find a decent confirmation, but please do not write such false information. CAVincent (talk) 17:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead and add the fact tag. Then we can do the really hard job of hunting for a source. May I suggest starting with CBS, Digital Spy, Reuters, The Courier-Mail, among other places? Tabercil (talk) 17:45, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

"Charlize Theron (born August 7, 1975) is an Academy Award-winning Afrikaner actress who was born in South Africa."

Should'n it read, a South African actress? ��Dr.Poison 20:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Sigh, it's a long story (just look through the page history). It always was "South African acress", until someone went and changed it to "Boer", which was subsequently changed to "Afrikaner", with the "born in South Africa" part tacked on. My vote is still for the original, simple "South African acress", since her ethnicity/country of birth doesn't really enter into it. At best, it can be a note in the introductory paragraphs. dewet|✉ 21:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I actually support this. Our good friend User:Alcatel, who really likes pushing this POV, originally changed it to Boer ... I changed it to Afrikaner and it further degenerated after that, which even caused one of my edits to be reverted ... first time that's ever happened to me ... hah ... Elf-friend 07:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I thinkit's rediculous putting the words "Afrikaner actress" on a biography in the 21st century. Come on. The word Afrikaner only existed in the years of apartheid. I am sure Charlize cringes at the thought of being called that. Why not just say South African actress. That is what she is. Afrikaners shouldnt still be existing. Might as well put "Nazi actress" on some German womans bio. It's rediculous. Just correct it. PLEASE

I agree, she should be called South African, not Afrikaner Jamandell (d69) 15:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Absolute nonsense. The statement: The word Afrikaner only existed in the years of apartheid. I am sure Charlize cringes at the thought of being called that. could only be made by someone completely unfamiliar with South Africa, apartheid, and Afrikaners. To compare the usage of Afrikaner with Nazi is completely offensive (However, this is probably intended - there is plenty of evidence to suggest that, for some reason, making racist or offensive statements about or towards Afrikaners is deemed acceptable by certain people who imagine themselves enlightened). I suggest the ignorant person who typed this load of unadulterated twaddle should educate him/herself before making such outrageous statements. Start by reading this book: http://www.upress.virginia.edu/books/giliomee.html

Then learn to read some Afrikaans, so that you can read the various interviews conducted in Afrikaans with Charlize Theron. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.157.160 (talk) 08:09, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

LOL "Boer". That term isn't even used anymore, and if it is used, it anyway refers to the male form of farmers, lol. --Scotteh 16:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Input from a South African: South Africa is a multi-cultural nation, and within its white/caucasian population alone you could categorise people into various groups such as: Afrikaners, English South Africans, Portugeuse South Africans, Greek South Africans, etc. These only refer to some of their inheritance, or in the case of Afrikaners the language they speak. So that is primarily why it is silly to categorise her as an 'Afrikaner' actress (which would indicate more that she has acted in a lot of Afrikaans things). Also, calling her only Afrikaans (and not South African) would exclude the fact that she's South African, whereas calling her South African, would technically include that she might be Afrikaans, understand?
In this case we all need to decide exactly what we want to communicate:

Charlize Theron is an Academy Award winning actress

She is South African

Charlize Theron is a South African Award winning actress

She is part of the Afrikaans culture

Charlize Theron is a South African Award winning actress [...] [...Later in the document...] Charlize Theron speaks fluent Afrikaans, and [and if absolutely necessary] can be considered culturally as an Afrikaans South African.

Rfwoolf 17:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

South African-American or African-American?

I think the former is considerably more precise and is of course verifiable. If there is a reason I am unaware of to use the latter, here would be the place to discuss it. --John 04:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Changing back to more formal African-American. Not all African-American are black. Soryy for being politically incorect.71.99.141.217 04:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Changing back to the more accurate South African-American. Are you familiar with WP:POINT? It may be worth a read. If you continue to restore this incorrect description you will be at risk of another block. --John 04:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree with John on this point. African-American is an ethnic group which she most certainly does not belong to, but neither is there a "South African-American" group which is the impression that the hyphen creates. The concept of American ancestry in the form of the Hyphenated American is complex. We only need to describe her nationality here and a fuller description such as South African (naturalized American citizen since 2007). --Deon Steyn 06:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

South African American? Yet I guarantee a black "South African American" would be simply "African American" - why do only blacks from that continent have a mortgage on the term? This whole discussion simply points out how absurd this PC term is.70.189.213.149 (talk) 05:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Can we just take all of the editors who want to label Theron as African-American and throw them all into pits full of hungry crocodiles? The world would be better off without these morons.CAVincent (talk) 08:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Okay, per Rfwoolf comments below, I was out of line on the personal attacks. I hereby replace the hungry crocodiles with flatulent poodles. CAVincent (talk) 03:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

CAVincent, please please believe me I strongly agree with the sentiment you expressed, but we shan't be using any form of personal attacks now can we? You didn't specify anybody in particular so that's why it should be okay. Everybody, look up, you'll see this discussion has been broached three times now. Charlize Theron is not African-American, nor will she ever ever ever be. Not when she gets American citizenship, not when she gets dual-citizenship, not when she identifies as African-American, never. South African-American would be problematic because of the hyphen, which leaves us with South African American which is also problematic. At the end of the day she is a South African-born American, or just South African. When her citizenship is verifiable we might consider her just American. Rfwoolf (talk) 11:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I am learning more now about how racist this concept of American hyphenization is. Frankly, I always thought that since it was an American-centric issue that it doesn't belong on Wikipedia, at least not as categories. NorthernThunder (talk) 08:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

South African-born

She is no longer a South African citizen, so describing her as South African is inaccurate. It is more accurate to describe her as South African-born. MOS:BIO is a guideline, not a policy. Accuracy is most important here. 24.163.38.235 (talk) 02:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually she is still a South African citizen. When has dual citizenship, USA and RSA. Becoming a USA citizen does not automatically revoke her RSA citizenship. --NJR_ZA (talk) 07:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

The 'American' part of her identity needs to be removed, it is the birth nationality that is of essence, you may later introduce that someone has taken foreign citizenship but not in the lead paragraph, Theron is still a South African citizen and has no plans to deny her citizenship, removed.Twobells (talk) 14:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Manual of Style on nationality

WP:MOSBIO is quite clear: we use the nationality held at the time the subject became notable. If she became notable as a South African national, then later changes citizenship, she is still described as South African in the lead. No one is ever described using -born:

3.Context (location, nationality, or ethnicity);

1. In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable.

2. Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability.

Yworo (talk) 02:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

To any editors who wish to discuss this issue, I repeat: MOS:BIO is a guideline, not a policy. Guidelines do not trump consensus. The issue here is accuracy, not dogmatic adherence to a guideline. And I also repeat: there is no a policy against describing someone as South African-born, especially if it is accurate. 24.163.38.235 (talk) 02:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

• My opinion. MOSBIO seems to suggest that "South African-born" is inappropriate per point 2. Therefore she should be either "American", "South African" or "South African-American". I would normally favour the latter, but if she indeed no longer holds South African citizenship then the only option which is not misleading is "American". Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 03:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

"South African-born" is in no way misleading and in every way accurate, just not a rigid adherence to a guideline so that accuracy can be achieved. 24.163.38.235 (talk) 03:23, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree with the above. Anyone with long experience with Wikipedia knows that guidelines are not policies for the simple reason that no guideline can possibly apply to every case, given the infinite variety of human circumstances. Given the specific particularities of this individual case, "South-African-born" seems the most apt and accurate. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Please review this thread at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies/2009 archive. The issue of the construction xxx-born yyy was discussed. It was decided that it should be avoided, and the language ""Previous nationalities and/or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability" was added specifically to discourage this construction. Yworo (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Then you should call her simply "American", because that's what she is now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

First, naturalization does not require the giving up of previous citizenship. She has not changed from a South African citizen to an American citizen. She is a South African citizen who has added American citizenship. WP:MOSBIO clearly states "the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable." Check her credits, she has 12 years of notability as a South African national, and only four since adding American citizenship. Yworo (talk) 05:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Nowhere in the article does it say she retained her South African citizenship. And her being South African-born has nothing to do with her notability. She's notable as an actress in American movies. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Nowhere in the article does it say she gave up her South African citizenship. We in fact do not know. The lead sentence is the nationality of the subject, not the nationality of the works she appears in. From 1995 to 2007, she was a South African actress who appeared in American films. She achieved notability for doing this as a South African. Yworo (talk) 05:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

So you can't say she's South African, because you don't know. You do know she's South African born, and you do know she's American. You also know (or should) that you've broken the 3-revert rule. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:59, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

My last edit was not a revert, it was an attempt at a compromise which had not yet been tried. Yworo (talk) 06:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

It's still edit-warring, and I've reported you for it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

So becoming an American citizen allows you to simply vanish her 12 years of notability as a South African actress? That's exactly what the wording of WP:MOSBIO was meant to stop people from doing. Yworo (talk) 06:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

You need to stop edit-warring, and search for consensus here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

And you need to stop nationalizing people to your country of preference who achieved notability as a citizen of another county. Try changing all the Irish-born Americans to say they are American if you want to see why WP:MOSBIO says what it does. Yworo (talk) 06:09, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

She's South African born and is American. If you have evidence to the contrary, let's hear it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

It's always been this way, because its not appropriate to "Americanize" someone who achieved notability as a foreign national. Take it up at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies - if you're not afraid of being proven wrong about the intent of WP:MOSBIO. Yworo (talk) 06:09, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Her notability was due to being an actress in American films, not due to being of South African birth. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Boy, are you in for a surprise. It ain't that way. I'll let other knowledgeable editors apply the cluestick to the appropriate area of your anatomy. Yworo (talk) 06:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Why are you so hung up on this? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Maybe I'm South African. Yworo (talk) 06:30, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

And maybe I'm from Shangri-La. But I'm more interested in common sense than in "rules"-that-aren't-actually-rules. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

You are really missing the intent and spirit of this one, but I'll be back in a day or two and I expect it will have been explained to you. Yworo (talk) 06:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

When the going gets tough, the tough get going. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

"No one is ever described using -born." Er, yes they are, in many biographical articles. Just to take three examples at random: John Mahoney, Anna Wintour and Jerry Springer. There are countless other examples. Contrary to claims above, it was never decided that this construction should be avoided. Some supported it, some opposed it. And as stated above, taking another nationality does not necessarily mean renouncing your previous nationality. Most people retain dual nationality. So she is probably (unless explicitly proven otherwise) still South African as well as American. Therefore she should probably be described in the lead as "a South African actress who has also taken American nationality" or something similar. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:23, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I have updated the first paragraph to read correctly, wiki readers are confused by the opening paragraph thinking that Theron is of joint South African and American parentage which she is not. I have edited it to read as per the facts, that Theron was born and is of South African nationality who later became a dual national South African and American citizen. This should stop the fight over who 'owns' her.Twobells (talk) 14:18, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Application of WP:MOSBIO and WP:OPENPARA

I believe the intent of WP:MOSBIO and WP:OPENPARA is that the nationality a subject held at the time they became notable is important and shouldn't be glossed over. In this particular case, the subject was a notable South African actress for 12 years before becoming an American citizen. Shouldn't she be described as a South African actress who became an American citizen rather than with the inaccurate monstrosity "South African-born American"? Yworo (talk) 06:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I really do not see the issue here. Is there any evidence that she is not longer a RSA citizen? As far as I am aware she holds dual citizenship [5] (as do many other actors) and the article should reflect that. Though she will always be thought of as South African by South Africans, Charlize herself will be Americanized by now. Most of her working career was spend in the USA and naturally her life and the article will reflect that. Call her African-American if you like, or Afrikaner-America if the color of her skin excludes her from being Africa-American. --NJR_ZA (talk) 07:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

This article is even older than her US citizenship - it is even written in SA English. She achieved the primary "notability criterion" - the Oscar - before she became American. That being said, the real issue here is about the principle in WP:MOSBIO, not just this single article. Many other BIOS of people who changed citizenship after achieving notability will also be affected, so I think this discussion should be "taken upstairs" to be pursued at a MOS level. Roger (talk) 07:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Yworo has received official admin approval for his edit-warring over this trivial issue, so he wins, and he can chortle all day long at this hollow victory. One thing we don't want to do is make wikipedia look stupid: As you well know, she did all her filming in South Africa until she became an American citizen. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

The fact she is South African is obviously of primary importance. It's where she was born, it's where she grew up, and it's the only nationality she held when she first achieved fame. She is not "South African-born" (although I see nothing wrong with that construction and it is used in many other articles where people emigrated at a young age and are overwhelmingly associated with their adoptive country), since, as far as anyone knows, she still retains South African citizenship and is still considered by many to be a South African (c.f. Jerry Springer, for example, who was born in Britain but has lived in America since he was a child and would not be considered by most people to be British in any way); she is still therefore first and foremost "South African". However, the fact she now also holds American nationality is significant and should be included in the opening paragraph.

A similar situation may be found with British actor Anthony Hopkins, who has also taken American nationality. Despite this, he is still British (and Welsh), and attempts to describe him as an "American actor" ("Welsh-born" or otherwise) have justifiably been reverted. He is not American; he has dual nationality. He was born in Britain, grew up in Britain, sounds British, achieved prominence in Britain, has spent most of his career in Britain, was knighted by Britain, and is still primarily associated with Britain. Nevertheless, the fact he now also has American nationality is (and should be) mentioned in the opening paragraph. Theron is in exactly the same situation and should be dealt with in exactly the same way. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I think she should be called South African born. It dosn't seem like that big of a deal to me either way.Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 23:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

South African seems consistent with WP:MOSBIO. She retains South African citizenship and was South African when she became notable. However, she was only 16 when she came to the U.S. An alternate way to deal with this would be to call her "South African American." A similar approach was taken with Robert Goulet, who, like Theron, held dual citizenship (Canadian American). Sunray (talk) 07:54, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

That, however, suggests she was born in America of South African descent. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Which is precisely why MOS:BIO is written the way it is. Nationality, for purposes of the lead sentence, is usually the nation in which the subject was raised and in which their intellectual development occurred. If notability is attained while still a national of the country in which the subject is raised, there is no real doubt that this is what should be used in the lead sentence. In such a case, becoming a citizen of another country while already notable is simply one of many events in the subject's life. If this event is summarized in the lead section, then it should be placed more or less in chronological order if the lead is more or less chronologically organized. If the adopted citizenship is especially significant to the subject's notability, then mention of this event could occur as early as the second sentence or maybe even at the end of the first sentence, if there is a consensus to do so. Yworo (talk) 09:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey, how about an application of WP:COMMONSENSE, since it seems to be in seriously short supply here. Point one: WP:MOSBIO is a guideline not a hard and fast policy which must be followed come hell or high water. In this case, "South African" is not an ethinicity, it's a nationality. Since Theron was born and grew up in South Africa, it's appropriate that the article indicate where her origins were. At the same time, as a person who has since taken American citizenship -- which precludes any other citizenship -- she is now an American. To ignore that is not providng our readers with all the information available The description of her as a "South African-born American actress" covers all those bases properly, without misleading our readers, the way "South African" or "American" would. (Remember, we're here to serve our readers, not to serve our own political or social prejudices). I suggest that we leave that description as the best compromise between the various parties. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I'd also suggest that the lede could refer to her simplye as an "actress", and the details of her birth citizenship and subsquent change of citizenship can be introduced later in the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The problem with that idea is that she became notable while she was still a South African actress. In fact she hasn't won a single significant award (which is the specific qualifier for notability of actors) since taking US citizenship.

I am concerned that we are busy discussing this matter as if the issue pertains to only this one article. In fact there are numerous articles about people who changed their citizenship at various stages in their lives - before or after becoming notable. I really feel we should be discussing this as a possible ammendment of the rule in MOSBIO itself, not as a single isolated exceptional case. Roger (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this and suggest that what I have written just above be proposed as guidance in this particular sort of case. The issue of people who moved as children or changed their citizenship before becoming notable will of course require a different approach and different guidance. Yworo (talk) 09:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken, American citizenship does not preclude holding other citizenships and has not for a long time. Dual citizenship is common. It was ruled by the Supreme Court in the 1950s and 1960s that dual citizenship is a "status long recognized in the law" and that "a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both. The mere fact he asserts the rights of one citizenship does not without more mean that he renounces the other". Yworo (talk) 10:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

That is true of people born with dual citizenship, but for people who have been naturalized "People who go through US naturalization are required to state under oath that they are renouncing their old citizenship, and conduct inconsistent with this pledge could theoretically lead to loss of one's US status."[6] Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

It is not enforced, based on the Supreme Court rulings just mentioned. And the source you cite is certainly not a reliable one. And you are reading it selectively, see point 2 "However, most of the laws forbidding dual citizenship were struck down by the US Supreme Court in two cases: a 1967 decision, Afroyim v. Rusk, as well as a second ruling in 1980, Vance v. Terrazas." Yworo (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it is you who are reading it selectively, and not recognizing the difference between those born with dual citizenship and those who are naturalized. The United States has every right to set up whatever conditions it feels are necessary for those who want to become American citizens (since there is no right to become an American citizen), and they have decided that those who want to be U.S. citizens must give up any other citizenship. You may not like that, but those are the facts on the ground. Theron, having become an American citizen, is no longer a South African citizen, having renounced it to become a U.S. citizen. Your unwillingness to accept this appears to be what's behind your totally unreasonable unwillingnes to accept a commonsense compromise, and as such, I leave the discussion to you and other bureaucratic pettifoggers with more gumption than sense. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

@Dodger67: It does not matter in the least when she became notable. Our encyclopedia is not stuck in the past, it represents (we hope) the state of knowledge of the world right now. Before she took American citizenship,. it is indisputable that Theron was a South African actress, but things have changed, as things in the world are wont to do, and it is our duty to our reader to present them with the best verifiable information about the world at this moment. Right now, Theron is no longer a "South African actress" she is an actress who was born in South Africa who has taken up American citizenship -- that makes her a "South African-born American actress" or whatever other construction can be agrees on. If WP:MOSBIO doesn't support that, than (dare I say it?) MOSBIO is flat-out wrong and needs to be updated. In the meantime, we should not kowtow to an incorrect guideline simply because it is a guideline, we should use our God-given ability to think to do what is right for4 the article in question. If the guideline needs to catch up with reality, that's an entirely different question, but to be held back by a badly conceived guideline is very bad for the project, since it suggests we're not interested in mirroring reality', but in following bureaucratic rules for their own sake. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

MOS:BIO correctly intends that we attribute nationality to the culture in which the subject was raised and became notable. It does not say we use citizenship, which is a much different concept than nationality. Yworo (talk) 10:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Really? What's the difference? Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, one example is in the UK. People born in the UK are British citizens who may be of English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh nationality. Or you could just use Wikipedia, the article on nationality explains it in the lead sentence "Nationality is membership of a nation or sovereign state, usually determined by their citizenship, but sometimes by ethnicity or place of residence, or based on their sense of national identity." Citizenship is a strictly legal concept, nationality is a broader cultural concept. Yworo (talk) 10:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken - I'm sorry but in this case you are flat out wrong. MOSBIO specifically and explicitly states that citizenship or nationality when the person became notable is what we are required to state in the first sentence. Changes of citizenship after achieving notability are mentioned later. This is in fact was has been done in this article. As it stands now the lead of this article is in full and complete compliance with the letter of MOSBIO. I repeat my position that deviation from this would require that we ammend MOSBIO itself. That is why I propose that we move this issue to the MOSBIO talk page and discuss a possible change to the guideline itself rather than getting bogged down in nationalistic chauvanisms and other personal biases. The principle applies to many other articles, Charlize Theron is not the only notable person in the entire history of the known universe to have changed their citizenship.

Wikipedia is absolutely not concernened exclusively with the "here and now" - to make such a claim is patently absurd. We have thousands of articles about dead people, countries, languages, nations, civilisations, animals, even entire continents - that no longer exist. Roger (talk) 10:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

So let's do that then. here Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 11:02, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Please note that whatever the United States may like to say about taking American citizenship, people who do so have not automatically renounced their "former" citizenship - that's not how it works. To do this requires them to formally renounce their citizenship to the government of that country, and most do not do this (and, as has already been established, the United States does not bother to enforce it as a condition of citizenship, whatever may be written into the rules and the declaration). Therefore, whatever the United States may claim, most naturalised people do retain their previous citizenship and hold dual nationality. You may be surprised, Beyond My Ken, to know that just because the United States says something is true does not necessarily mean it is true outside the United States! Since we have no proof that Theron has formally renounced her South African citizenship to the government of South Africa, we must assume she retains it and thus under international law (if not US law) has dual nationality. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

As an update, it appears that, unlike many countries, South Africa does consider its citizenship renounced automatically if citizenship of another country is adopted. However, this can be waived if a dispensation is obtained. We do not know whether Theron obtained such a dispensation, but if she did not then I would support "South African-born American" as entirely accurate. As long as we do not know either way, then I believe the status quo should be maintained. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I see no problem with "South African-born American." It's accurate. ScottyBerg (talk) 14:38, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree with South African-born American This seems to be the most accurate statement on the topic.Coaster92 (talk) 23:56, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Theron is however known to hold dual citizenship, as reported here. It is all over the web, you can't miss it, but this seems to be the original source article. Plus WP:MOSBIO says we use citizenship at the time the subject became notable, which would apply even if she did not hold dual citizenship. Yworo (talk) 00:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

It was also discussed in an interview with David Letterman as reported here: "Charlize Theron appeared on Letterman last night and announced some big news. No, she's not pregnant. She's now an official U.S. citizen. Charlize is originally from South Africa, so she had to take a test in order to grant her dual citizenship." Yworo (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Here's a third, more reliable, source, with more in-depth coverage: [7]. Yworo (talk) 00:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Question to the people who says she is no longer a South African: Kirsten Dunst recently got German citizenship. Is she now an "American-born German actress"? Nymf _hideliho! 07:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Good question. I knew there had to be a reverse example, but couldn't think of one offhand. Yworo (talk) 07:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Great example. The MoS is clear. The rationale for such is clear. There is no reason we cannot mention here American citizenship later in the lead, but it doesn't need included in the first five words. Can we nip this in the bud now, please? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it's not. Pretty sure Kirsten Dunst doesn't live in Germany, make it her home, and do the vast majority of her work there. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:OPENPARA doesn't take any of those things into account. Just what nationality the subject was when they became notable. This is not the place to pursue any change to that guideline. Take it to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies if you have a problem with the current guideline or its application. The intent is to give credit where credit is due, to the country which was home to and nurtured the subject to notability. And to minimize edit wars, with a clear guideline that makes sense based on both the subject's sense of nationalism and the nurturing country's sense of pride. Take that away and the edit wars will be endless. Now, there is an end. Yworo (talk) 05:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

The US recognizes but does not encourage dual citizenship [8]. Nobody Ent (Gerardw) 21:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

• Notability, please! Kirsten Dunst is known (notable) as an American actress. She's to be denoted as an American actress who recently obtained German citizenship. If Marion Cotillard tomorrow takes up American citizenship and continues to be notable for her work, as an Amercin actress, she would still be referred to, in Wikipedia, as a French actress. Because that's how she became notable. Charlize Theron became known for her work as a South African actress working in the United States - and, later on, obtained American citizenship. She is a "South African actress, who became an American citizen in [date X]." -The Gnome (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
• Currently she is a SA born American, if she moved to Canada or Mexico it would change to SAb Mexican or Canadian. When she dies we should change it to South African woman that x'd in x and then moved to x and x'd. But for now it's an accurate term. If South Africans find the wording annoying it could be changed to South African-American or something like that.LuciferWildCat (talk) 18:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree with South African-born American This seems to be the most accurate statement on the topic. Furthermore, this issue is just not worthy of this much time and effort. Please conclude it and move on. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

• Agree with South African-born American - Ironically I recently inserted this phrace into the lead, completely unaware of the discussion which had taken place above! I think we can agree that Theron has fair claim to be called BOTH South African and American. The lead should state that simply. NickCT (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)