Board Thread:Improvements and Issues/@comment-36620412-20191115231026/@comment-36620412-20191119033057

Yyp wrote: I honestly dont see the issue here either. She is listed as female throughout bar the trivia, which is quite clear in what it says but also somewhat marginalised by being in the trivia instead of being more prominent.

Maybe Im wrong here but in real life in this part of the world anyway I and I expect others would refer to someone who was born a male and changed to female with female pronouns so as not to insult them, but in some cases also to avoid having to talk about it (like it or not that is a very common attitude - people will accept/"accept" it so long as they dont have to confront it head on). The point being he was asked about something else, not directly about the gender question (which I honestly wish he had been asked about alongside several other niggling things, but that doesnt really fit in with the interview.

no, you misunderstand. the only thing i ever implied was that the notes i left should have been added to the article as further clarification that there is confusion about her gender. I have no problem with the note that's already there, nor the way the article was referring to her/him. I have no idea where the assumption that i wanted the note removed came from, i only suggested that a reference should be added to it, because on my own wikis i require notes and most people, quite frankly, appreciate that!

but, oh well... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯