Talk:Narcissa Wright/Archive 1

Archive 1

"Unemployed"

Apologies if I am using this format incorrectly, as I have not been properly trained.

In the profile box, where it says "Occupation", it says "unemployed" alongside "speedrunner". Isn't this inaccurate and unnecessary, considering that Cosmo's main source of income is advertisement revenue from his streams (in addition to donations from his fans)? It seems to me that it is less a statement of fact and more of a pejorative remark on his career choice. - 1/14/2015, 11:43 CST

I agree with you that this is unnecessary. From the history of this page one can see that this statement is a remnant from some persons vandalizing spree. I will remove it now. Kadmium (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Ahhh that makes sense. Thank you for taking care of that! - OP, 1/14/2015, 13:12 CST — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.120.120.249 (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

This page should not be speedy deleted because...

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (I am still working on the article, i only used another article for a template, the finished article will have citations and will look proper.) --Hamza725 (talk) 01:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the speedy deletion template as the claim to significance "world record speedrunner" has been satisfied for the purposes of CSD A7, however the article may still be deleted due to poor sourcing. I've suggested on your talkpage that you move it and save it as a draft elsewhere. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 02:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... (I only used other information for a template, the finished article will not look like a hoax) --Hamza725 (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... (your reason here) --80.111.71.69 (talk) 02:16, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because what is stated is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.108.195.19 (talk) 02:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... (your reason here) --69.17.170.114 (talk) 02:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Cosmo is a shit speedrunner and nothing is speedy about him Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... (your reason here) --74.192.220.23 (talk) 02:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC) This man is actually legit in case some of wikipedia people didnt know. Sure this isnt complete by any means but dont delete he created a huge online community and deserves credit Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because the information written in it is true, it can be gotten from Cosmos'Twitch channel as well from SpeedRunsLive. Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... Cosmo Wright is real --95.176.45.181 (talk) 02:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because SpeedRunsLive has hosted charity stream that have raised totals of over 1 million dollars for different charities and non-profits. This would not be possible if Cosmo did not help co-found SpeedRunsLive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.41.120.105 (talk) 02:37, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (Cosmo is notable for holding world records in multiple popular games, many of which are listed on the wikipedia page "games notable for speedrunning".) --Hamza725 (talk) 02:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC) I have removed the speedy deletion template as the claim to significance "world record speedrunner" has been satisfied for the purposes of CSD A7, however the article may still be deleted due to poor sourcing. I've suggested on your talkpage that you move it and save it as a draft elsewhere. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 02:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Are World Record Speedrunners important?

Every game that has been run has a world record, possibly more. The records listed on this page have all been held by multiple people. As for SpeedRunsLive: The website is mostly a stream listing and an IRC Bot. Are these relevant enough to justify a page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.199.57 (talk) 03:24, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I believe the article should say, I mean it's well referenced. I feel Wright is notible not just 'because he has a world record', but also because he has been able to make a living off of it, and due to this, has had significant coverage in the gaming press and further afield 193.61.255.84 (talk) 12:08, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I feel the same way. However, notability on Wikipedia cannot be established by our feelings. The articles references are dodgy, and hardly meet the policy on reliable sources. The article looks good otherwise, so if more reliable sources could be found to establish the notability of the subject, the article should be fine. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 12:11, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright violations

See comparison. Simply changing some of the words will not do. This must be mended quickly. I'll be so bold as to ping @Thehack771 and @Hamza725 as they are the major contributors to the article. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 22:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The text wording has changed and been abbreviated with sections now being condensed to focus more on Cosmo himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamza725 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

"Since 2010, SpeedRunsLive has teamed up with Speed Demos Archive to host live marathons"...

As per the edit comment I feel it is best to discuss this here rather than start an edit war. The idea the SpeedRunsLive 'team up with' SpeedDemosArchive to host the 'GDQ marathons is incorrect; the marathons are organized solely by SDA and whilst SRL members may attend or even volunteer to help out at these marathons, SpeedRunsLive has absolutly nothing to do with their inception or organization of such marathons. Even the reference cited does not actively mention SRL in such a role. Skullbird11 (talk) 17:22, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

My perception from the billing of the GDQ marathons is that it is a cooperative effort - the stream's title for the last three marathons included both SRL and SDA's name in the title and all speedrunners participating came from both communities. Would wording it 'SRL participates in the GDQ marathons hosted by SDA' seem like a reasonable compromise or would you rather have something else? Happy to work to find the most accurate wording. Thanks for the dialogue, Skullbird11! --Slazenger (Contact Me) 04:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I removed that section before seeing this discussion so my apologies. The source didn't support the claim that SRL and SDA had teamed up - if SRL are merely participating in an SDA hosted event I don't see how that's notable but would appreciate thoughts on this. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Unreliable sources - proposal

• Proposal- that this article be stubified back to what is contained in the lead and the keep the reliable sources. Almost the entire content after the lead is unsourced. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:40, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
• Concur: I listed the article for a deletion discussion yesterday. After reviewing additional sources, I have come to the conclusion that it likely meets the basic notability guidelines. However, everything other than the lead has elements of plagiarism and copyvio. We should make into a stub with just the sourced lead. Nick Pascal (talk) 05:50, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
• Of course - Sources are fine, but a lot of the content isn't appropriately supported by the references. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 05:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Do we have consensus? - if so I will take the article back to a stub based on what is currently in the lead. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The section "Speedrunning" has now been sourced from a video on cosmo's official channel in which cosmo himself talks about his history in the speedrunning world which correlates with whats written in the paragraph.Thehack771 (talk) 04:34, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

It is already established with better sources that he is a speedrunner, I don't see how that section is necessary - especially with a youtube source. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I have removed everything but the lead and added a stub template. There were only two sources given for all of the content and both were primary. On another article I'd be content to tag with {{fact}} but this is a BLP. --Chris (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Cosmo confirmed everthing on this page via stream

Cosmo read this page on his stream, a video of this can be seen here (http://www.twitch.tv/cosmowright/b/499789992 skip to 4:03:50). He has confirmed that everything written on the page is indeed true. I'm not too experienced with references but could this video also be used as a source for uncited information such as his birthday since he says himself that the uncited date is really his birthday? Thehack771 (talk) 07:57, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Interesting question. For any information that could in any way be considered to be controversial, the video would definitely not be a good source due to a conflict of interest. However, if it could be used when it comes to simple facts (such as his birth date), I'm not sure. I'd actually love to get an answer to this. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 22:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

For simple facts unlikely to be contested something like this is perfectly fine.AioftheStorm (talk) 00:56, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:SELFPUB, this is indeed allowable by BLP standards as a verifiable source without issue of conflict of interest. There is no controversy involved and the material is being offered directly by the subject of the article. --Slazenger (Contact Me) 10:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

"Speedrunning" section

The following text has been restored by another editor:

Around 2006, Wright began browsing through the Speed Demos Archive forums. During this time more exploits were being discovered in many different games, most notably The Legend of Zelda series. As time went on many new unexpected glitches and exploits were discovered in the The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time that would range from something as simple as skipping single items, to skipping the entirety of the first three dungeons. Some users contributed to finding glitches without speed running, but instead tested and experimented with the new found glitches in attempts to get them consistent and understand them better. Wright at first began as a lurker, merely reading the discussions, but he soon became interested in speedrunning the game and spent hours learning some of the speedrunning skills and glitches that were not intended by the developers.

Is it just me, or does this seem more applicable to the speedrun article? Very little of this content has anything to do with Wright, and the entire section could be summarized as follows:

Wright began speedrunning some time in 2006 after browsing the Speed Demos Archive forums.

The rest has to do with speedrunning in general and has only a weak association to Wright. --Chris (talk) 20:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, this is really just puffery IMO and should be removed Flat Out let's discuss it 02:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Issues

The sections and Speedrunning and SpeedRunsLive' are still not necessary in my view. The first confirms he is a speed runner and adds nothing to the subject that isn't in the lead. Much of this paragraph is about Speedrunning, not Cosmo. The second confirms he co-founded the website, then go on to describe the mission of the site rather than his part in founding the site. Again it doesn't really add anything about the subject that isn't in the lead. I contend that both of these sections should be removed. Flat Out let's discuss it 03:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree. The rather small amount of sourced, substantive content directly relevant to Wright should either be moved to the lead, or (if the content is already summarized in the lead) removed. --Chris (talk) 19:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done I have removed these sections and moved some refs and a single sentence about SpeedRunsLive into the lead. As far as I can see, there is nothing of note about the subject that has been removed. We have an article on Speedrunning so there is no need to document history here. Please seek consensus before reinstating. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:55, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I think the sections should stay because they give the reader a history about both wright and speedrunning as a whole. This page is a biography so writing about Wright's history should be encouraged especially since the history of speedrunning is not that well known to the average reader. The speedruns live section should also stay because it is part of the reason why Cosmo is really popular, the website he cofounded is the leading website for speedrunners , so by writing about how large the site is and its features adds to the article because it leads to how cosmo has gained fame and changed the speedrunning community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamza725 (talk • contribs) 08:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

As they were written they were less about Wright and more about the website and speedrunning in general. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Possible sources

I had a draft sitting in my userspace, but it looks like someone beat me to it. Here are the sources I had saved, in case anyone's interested:

 czar ♔ 12:19, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Abysmal photograph

Wikipedia permits the use of original images with the understanding that their contents can be verified by visual inspection. However, the subject of File:Cosmo Wright Nails.png is covering his face with his hands, which renders such verification impossible. I suggest removal of this photograph from the article. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:25, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

• That is definitely Cosmo, he did a stream earlier today on his official twitch channel and purposefully made that pose for this page. I can give the exact link for reference if necessary. This picture should be allowed because Cosmo himself gave permission for it to be used specifically for this page.

Thehack771 (talk) 04:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Redirect page

The page Cosmo Wright should redirect to existing page Narcissa Wright. On November 3rd, 2015, Narcissa announced her name change on Twitter here. I tried to change it, but it got changed back automatically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sqronce (talk • contribs) 00:34, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• A picture of some medication and a twitter handle change is not confirmation of a name and gender change. 107.147.202.119 (talk) 12:40, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• That's not just "some" medication, and it's not only her Twitter name that was changed. She changed her Twitch username, too, and that's hard to get approval for, and could easily result in a backlash from the Twitch user community. Tell me why she would go to this extent if she still wanted to be called "Cosmo"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otterbatchh (talk • contribs) 21:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to give some points. First off, please stop accusing one another for "vandalizing" as, even if you do not agree with someone's changes, all edits that are made based on Narcissa's identity are in good faith. I am not talking to anyone in specific here: this is just something I have seen thrown around in the edit notes and it is nonsensical. My second point is that I am personally still waiting for somekind of post that is more clear than what we have thusfar. Basically everyone who's opinion I've found through Google since Narcissa made her Carpe Diem post agrees that this means she is transitioning. Sadly, this is very unspecific and Narcissa herself hasn't done more than sharing one picture and changing her name. I wish someone could just ask her, or that some reliable publication would say something about this. Would make our life so much easier.

Right now, it is for us to decide whether Narcissa's post and behavior was explicit enough. I personally believe it was and recommend the Cosmo-article to become a redirect. I don't have too much issue with Narcissa becoming a redirect, but if that happens, I assume it would only be temporary. The situation we are in right now is ridiculous and definitely against Wikipedia's guidelines, but it doesn't really matter much. I just hope we'll get more information soon. ~Mable (chat) 14:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• I don't see in what way this is not explicit enough. There's nothing unspecific whatsoever about the situation - she posted a picture of very specific pair of prescription medications, Estradiol and Spironolactone. You don't just randomly come across this pair of medications by accident, and you don't change your name to a distinctly feminine name at the same time as posting them just for the fun of it. Furthermore, her username on Twitch was changed which was completely unprecedented - Twitch has a strict policy against name changes for their partnered streamers. She is the first Twitch partner to have ever gotten a name change, which points to extenuating circumstances - this was not done on a whim. It is incredibly offensive to Narcissa to continue listing her name and gender as male. Think about it another way: if you properly list her name and gender as female now, the absolute worst that can happen is that later she clarifies that "No, actually, despite all the evidence to the contrary I didn't actually transition" and we revert the article as if nothing happened. If we continue with this farce of listing her name and gender as Cosmo/male, the bad case is a much bigger issue - offensive degradation of a trans* person by refusing to acknowledge their gender identity. Please stop this nonsense. 2601:346:400:660:5D1F:29CB:9674:AB31 (talk) 16:24, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I really want to agree, and this is why it pains me that their still hasn't been a clear "this is what is going on" post or article yet. We can't assume that she still prefers male pronouns (though it is not out of the question - I have no idea if she is non-binary or what) - nor can we make big decisions based on a photograph and a username change.

Does anyone have any sources for Narcissa's gender identity? Has she ever mentioned this before? I don't know her well enough to say much about her. If someone could actually contact her about this, that would be great. ~Mable (chat) 17:01, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

She has never mentioned this before publicly, and there are no public sources confirming it, but I think the evidence goes well beyond any reasonable doubt. If any further evidence is needed, one could point to the fact that she received several dozen tweets congratulating or supporting her for transitioning and she did not reply that she wasn't transitioning - that seems like a pretty large misunderstanding you'd want to clear up if it were actually a misunderstanding, no? If one insists on 100% confirmation rather than evidence beyond a reasonable doubt (which I think is an unnecessary requirement given the minimal cost involved with reverting later if a mistake was made vs. the real cost of offending if a mistake was made), the easiest way at this point to contact her or otherwise confirm is likely going to be able to catch one of her livestreams. She has streamed once since the announcement, but I did not catch it and her broadcast archive is locked to paid subscribers so I can't check it yet for possible 100% confirmation. 2601:346:400:660:5D1F:29CB:9674:AB31 (talk) 17:25, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, I'll give it another day and then I'll turn this into a redirect again. If anyone is against this, I'll hear it before then. I don't want an edit war happening and, on Wikipedia, there is never a hurry. I'd rather hear opinions of people against this move than that people just mindlessly keep moving back and forth without any discussion happening. I'm sorry for the slow response time of our website, but you know bureaucracy, right ^_^" Gotta keep to those guidelines. ~Mable (chat) 18:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Please redirect it. I've already tried once and someone undid it with the reasoning that Narcissa's accounts (all of them, even the one that's hard to get a username change for) could have just been hacked. lol. Otterbatchh (talk) 19:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

That's a bad argument, and will become especially moot as more time passes. ~Mable (chat) 19:22, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Narcissa is streaming again, so I am happy to inform you that I now have 100% confirmation (though I still think there wasn't much to doubt to begin with). Can we go ahead and get this redirected? This is something of a sensitive issue and there's no longer anything to discuss at this point - any edit warring at this point would almost certainly be bad faith edits that should be dealt with appropriately. 2601:346:400:660:5D1F:29CB:9674:AB31 (talk) 21:03, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Alright, there we go. If someone wants to revert, discuss it here first please. No more edit warring and accusing people of vandalism. ~Mable (chat) 21:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Materialscientist:, you're editing against consensus. Explain yourself.

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

The page cannot be moved manually, i have requested for it to be moved to Narcissa Wright. Please don't edit the redirects until this is complete.Thehack771 (talk) 21:31, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 5 November 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. → AA ^(talk) — 16:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

---

Cosmo Wright → Narcissa Wright – Cosmo is transitioning to female and took the name Narcissa Thehack771 (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• Move - The article subject came out as transgender and declared that she wished to be addressed as Narcissa. We should retitle our article accordingly, as per our precedent on dealing with transgender article subjects. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
• Comment: does WP:COMMONNAME override the transgender policy? --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 21:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: Absolutely not. Trans* identity is far more important; keeping the old name amounts to discrimination. A guideline for general article names in no way justifies trans* discrimination. 2601:346:400:660:5D1F:29CB:9674:AB31 (talk) 21:44, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• Can I please have an official precedent on that? --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 21:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• I'm saddened that "don't discriminate" needs an official precedent or policy, but here you go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gender_identity#Common_name 2601:346:400:660:5D1F:29CB:9674:AB31 (talk) 21:54, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

This is an essay, though I'm not keen to split hairs. Apparently she changed her twitter handle from Cosmo to Narcissa, and locked the old one. It's a mess that there are no secondary sources to talk about this. Do you think this is a permanent transition, then? --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 22:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Kiyoshiendo Please read the "gender identity" section of WP:IDENTITY ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 22:03, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I have not seen any sources beyond her Twitter and this page, which leads me to think this policy is poorly written and in need of some discussion on another page. Regardless, assuming that Narcissa thought deeply about this, it is necessary to change the page to reflect her choice. --

Narcissa has confirmed it directly on a livestream today to the chat. This is definite proof from a primary source. The stream has been saved as a vod and can be seen here: http://www.twitch.tv/narcissawright/v/24150269 Thehack771 (talk) 22:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Kiyoshiendo (talk) 22:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• Move In addition to the twitter pictures, Narcissa has confirmed on stream of the transition in progress and has changed her social media accounts from Cosmo to Narcissa.Thehack771 (talk) 21:58, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
• Move per WP:GENDERIDENTITY. It's not costly to the encyclopedia to reflect a real human being's preferences with respect to name and gender identity before reliable sources catch up. If this were a hoax or not a "permanent transition" (barf!), which this does not seem to be the case, it's not costly to the encyclopedia to revert these changes either. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• Move Despite no secondary sources being currently available, the article should be moved per WP:GENDERIDENTITY. --Kjp993 (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

• Move (coming from WT:VG) per above, but please note that if existing sources on her notability all use the previous transition name Cosmo, that has to be kept somewhere in the article to avoid making it confusing between our article and the pre-transition sources. --MASEM (t) 00:06, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

• Note, urgh, every day I am looking around for sources, but it is like Wright being transgender isn't notable to reliable sources... I will keep looking and I hope a reliable source will eventually cover Narcissa in some form :s Oh yeah, and move, btw, because apparently we still don't have consensus somehow? ~Mable (chat) 10:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

• The fact that Narcissa is Narcissa is not really news article worthy. I feel like it's completely unnecessary to cite sources for this in the first place, so it bothers me that there are [citation needed] tags in the article. Wikipedia does not require citations for people's names or genders typically, so why is an unfair standard being applied to Narcissa that requires that this article have a citation for her name and gender? She herself has made it clear what her name and gender are, we do not need it to show up in an article for this to be accepted as fact. 2601:346:400:660:52E5:49FF:FE43:BC83 (talk) 11:35, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

• We do need to cite sources for information about living people. I don't mind the use of a primary source in this case, but it definitely needs to be sourced.--IDV^talk 11:59, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

• Move per above, but add a source ASAP (primary should be okay if no secondary ones can be found).--IDV^talk 11:59, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

• Move. This is an odd case because the subject is not notable enough for coverage in a reliable source, but the Twitch username change is a clear indication that the subject is trans. ONR (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

• Excuse me getting all angry, but why hasn't this been moved yet? Materialscientist has just locked it into its masculine state again, while we've had consensus for ages. ~Mable (chat) 06:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

BLP issues

From what I can see, the BLP claims being added appear to be true; but reliable sources are needed. The article has been temporarily protected due to the BLP issue. Once appropriate reliable sources are found, the BLP isse will be resolved and the material can be restored. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:42, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if this counts as a reliable source, but Narcissa talks about being trans and the name change and everything a lot on her stream on Twitch. My doubt about it counting is just because you need to be a subscriber to watch the vods, so, I can link one such VOD (like http://www.twitch.tv/narcissawright/v/24603144) but most people won't be able to actually watch it. Can someone who knows more about Wikipedia weigh in on whether this counts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.209.63.31 (talk) 00:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, seeing as we had consensus all week about the change in name and pronouns, I don't see why the article is still locked into "Cosmo Wright." That being said, I am sure a primary source like that is fine if someone can check it and if someone could figure out how to cite it (Probably through Template:Cite AV media; if someone could get a nice quote or something like that would be great).

With [1] still locked behind a paywall, could someone please at least extract a quote from it? If nicely formatting is too much to ask, I'd still like to be able for this to be verified in some form. Getting the time in which statements on Narcissa's coming out were made would also greatly improve verifiability. ~Mable (chat) 19:00, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Career Section

The career section includes negligible, personal information without appropriate citation. This is strange, considering the thirteen citations for the first paragraph.

In addition, this seems to be self-promotional, these make it seem that it was written by Cosmo/Narcissa themself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.179.67 (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

I definitely agree with the former; the article needs work and needs more inline citations in the prose. Maybe some of the citations used in the lead section could be used to verify content in the career section. ~Mable (chat) 08:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2015

Since they are not legally a female, I suggest keeping pronouns either gender neutral or male. Sanicross (talk) 19:05, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

•  Not done Please read MOS:IDENTITY and WP:Gender identity carefully for Wikipedia's policy on such matters. General Ization ^Talk 19:17, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, Wikipedia does not care if someone's legal identity is male or female - we follow the last known expressed gender identity of the person, and as far as I know, Wright identifies as female. See MOS:IDENTITY.--IDV^talk 19:19, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Deleted Twitch

https://twitter.com/narcissawright/status/718203768416772096 https://www.twitch.tv/narcissawright

It appears that she has deleted her twitch account, should the links to it be removed? Or just note that they were deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WindedCone (talk • contribs) 23:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not even surprised, with all the harassment she's been getting on this Wikipedia page alone :s I don't really know how to handle this. My mind's telling me to just delete the external link from the article, but it seems odd to have an article for a streamer without a place for her to stream... Does anyone know any other notable streamers that have deleted their account? ~Mable (chat) 04:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Trans citation

I don't doubt this is true, but the citation is behind a paywalled video, and needs something else. 86.152.192.133 (talk) 05:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually, no. Something that isn't "hidden" behind a paywall would be preferable (assuming it's still a high-quality, reliable source), but we don't require sources to be available for free. See WP:SOURCEACCESS. --IDV^talk 08:02, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

However, I would very much appreciate a direct quotation, as well as to know at what point of the video this topic was discussed, to make it easier for future editors to verify this claim. ~Mable (chat) 09:29, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, definitely.--IDV^talk 09:47, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

It would be great if more information was given on her gender transition. The point of wikipedia is to give out information for free. It would be pointless for the Least squares article to just cite an expensive statistics book in the article and not explain anything about the subject. Thanks. Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 23:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, we should keep in mind that Nacissa being transgender is not the main topic of the article, and that her gaming career is what makes her notable. But yeah, that's why it would be nice to have a direct quotation as well. ~Mable (chat) 09:49, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

@Jakub.mach: related to this discussion, I'd like to ask you to stop removing a source. Rather, I'd like people to put in some effort verifying the content of this source. ~Mable (chat) 23:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Do you realize that verifying the content of this source means paying Narcissa in order to turn the biography to a correct state? How do you *put effort*, when *putting effort* means giving the person this article is about money? Couldn't this fall under Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest? Jakub.mach (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome to look for a better citation, but the fact that the one we have isn't free (and regardless of who might profit from it) is not a valid reason to remove the existing reference, nor does it place this biography in an "incorrect state". General Ization ^Talk 00:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to contact someone who is able to verify the source without paying "extra money". Hell, feel free to contact Narcissa herself and ask her about it. ~Mable (chat) 10:33, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

If Wikipedia could only use free sources, it would not be very useful. Some sources cost money (like books). We just have to wait until someone who has access to the source can give us the relevant information. And then, we kind of just have to trust it (or get access to the "book" itself) unless someone else has reasonable basis for doubt. Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I am going to remove the citation because it appears that the video has actually been deleted, so it can't even be verified anymore (unless it can be found on another site). --Chris (talk) 21:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Urgh, I wish someone would have at least gotten a quote from it before this happened. I'll check if Narcissa has posted anything on this topic since, though. ~Mable (chat) 22:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I still can't find anything on this. Whenever Narcissa is asked about it on Twitter, someone else replies for her. The only thing we have to go on is the "Carpe Diem" Twitter post, the username change on all websites, and the community's interpretation... This is starting to get really awkward. ~Mable (chat) 22:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm assuming this would work as definite proof? http://kotaku.com/one-of-the-worlds-best-speedrunners-cant-speedrun-anymo-1752274907 Thehack771 (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that's perfect. Thank you.--IDV^talk 11:00, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I should note that that source is also really amazing for other content; lots of information in that interview that is useful for us! ~Mable (chat) 11:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Similar to the Kotaku source, the recently added source by Crave Online has a lot of content that would be of use in this article. If anyone ever intends to bring Narcissa Wright up to c-class or even b-class, I'm pretty sure that's doable with these two sources. ~Mable (chat) 09:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Harassment being point-of-view?

@Thehack771: Is Wright getting harassed WP:POV? The Crave article seems to accept it as fact, and I don't see much reason not to believe it (especially after all the reverting I've had to do on this article...). Is there a reason to believe Wright has not been harassed? I don't really like the way in which the sentence is phrased now, as it feels as though the source suggests this may not actually be true. ~Mable (chat) 20:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Kotaku also seems to suggest that there may have been something going on, asking questions like "In light of negativity you’ve received pre- and post-transition, have you ever had moments where you considered leaving the public eye? Even regardless of people being garbage-spewing toilet monsters, does it all just get exhausting, essentially being on stage all the time?". ~Mable (chat) 20:36, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@Maplestrip: Well it doesn't really matter either way now, she has restored her twitch account so its no longer worth mentioning.Thehack771 (talk) 04:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

It is worth mentioning that she had deleted her Twitch account and reported a large amount of harassment, as it has been noted by a reliable source. Deleting one's Twitch account when you're a professional streamer sounds pretty notable to me, even if she undid the action later-on. We note this kind of stuff for people like Laci Green as well, don't we? ~Mable (chat) 06:00, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Okay you can add it back in to the page if you want, i won't change it. I still don't like writing the harrasment as a fact, i like the way this article phrases it: http://www.polygon.com/2016/4/8/11394378/famed-speedrunner-narcissa-wright-deletes-twitch-account-citing-abuse as "citing abuse" unlike the other articles which don't write it from her pov. Either way, Whichever you decide i won't change.Thehack771 (talk) 17:38, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Also Narcissa suggests on twitter that she herself didn't restore the twitch account but it randomly came back. I'm not sure if that tweet is meant as a joke, but its worth noting in the deleted twitch section that she didn't restore it on her own.Thehack771 (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

I think both can agree that the article doesn't give misinformation now, and is nicely neutral :) ~Mable (chat) 18:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Perfect thanks! Thehack771 (talk) 19:17, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

..Unrelated note

Also on an unrelated note, there is a lot of info in the polygon and Kotaku article that we can use to update the career and personal life sections, these sections don't mention anything about her stream post-transition which is very different . Also if anyone here is a subscriber to Narcissa on twitch, please ask for her to pose for a picture or let us have permission to grab a screen capture of her stream to use as an infobox pic. She has allowed it in the past (before her transition) so I'm sure she would allow it especially because it would replace the artwork of her on the google instant search with a picture she would like more. Thehack771 (talk) 19:17, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2016

correcting vandalism and unnecessary revisions made by a previous editor.

Emberlaine (talk) 15:46, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

 Not done. Unsure what you mean. GAB^gab 15:50, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2017

A picture should be provided and updated regularly. Maracont (talk) 13:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Maracont: Do you know of a picture that is freely available, ie a photo released under a free license by the photographer? If so, great, link it here and we'll take a look at it.-IDV^talk 14:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

source for twitch ban

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xm9yd/one-of-zeldas-greatest-speedrunners-was-just-banned-from-twitch 71.3.195.32 (talk) 22:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

I've replaced the deleted tweet with this source. Thanks for the suggestion. --Chris (talk) 23:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

I've been out of the loop on her for a while. Seeing this video (backup link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXvBVDR3W1Q ) kinda is saddening. Hope she sorts out her mental issues and makes a return to speedrunning once she's able to stabilize. I'll try to work on this article a little bit this weekend. 71.3.195.32 (talk) 06:55, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2019

She returned to speedrunning 4 months later, with games such as 'Beetle Adventure Racing!' and 'Cadence of Hyrule.' On August 20th, 2019, Narcissa began crowdfunding for a documentary of her and her accomplishments. This goal was met on September 21, 2019. As of August 31, 2019, Narcissa Wright has found, and has, a job. ILoweeI (talk) 23:38, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

References

@ILoweeI, are there any secondary sources we could cite for this? The Kickstarter page is a self-published source that's not clearly written by the subject, so we shouldn't cite it. The last statement is seemingly not relevant enough to mention and the source for it is not good enough. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:11, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on July 21st, 2021

Narcissa has confirmed her birthday on her YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLEQJvsQ_GA -- please undo the edit from Homechallenge55 who removed the birthday.

 Done --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 13:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Article needs to be updated to cover her return to and subsequent re-ban from Twitch

I don't know enough about the sequence of events to make such an addition myself, nor do I know how to properly source such a thing. Hopefully someone more informed on the situation can add the relevant info and sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarioLuigi0404 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 27 April 2022 (UTC)