Talk:deadname

Urban dictionary
Perhaps this page, along with quite a lot of really random-seeming words that would better belong in "Urban Dictionary" or the like should be considered for deletion. A lot of people use Wiktionary for learning the english language, and flooding it with terms that only a miniscule handful of people potentially ever use hampers that greatly. I see no benefit to this page here, as the term is definately not in use in common parlance, or even uncommon parlance. It is especially not helpful when it is so close to an another term. 87.92.152.36 22:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you should write your own dictionary, with only words you have personally approved of. DTLHS (talk) 22:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * We can gloss words as "rare", "slang", "neologism", etc. Perhaps this needs one or more of those (not outright deletion!). Equinox ◑ 17:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)


 * If we can't find citations from before 2014, "neologism" could be added. IMO it's not "slang" because academic discussions use it. It doesn't seem as rare as the things we normally label "rare" (we should possibly try to come up with criteria for when to label something as rare...), especially relative to how much or little the topic itself is discussed / other words for the concept are used. - -sche (discuss) 22:03, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Application to non-trans people
Re [//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=deadname&type=revision&diff=66294438&oldid=66290739 edit and revert here], yeah, it seems to rarely be used for non-trans changes; I heard someone tell an adoptee there shouldn't be paperwork with her deadname on it (both were cis), and on twitter someone said calling a clique of (cis) podcasters by their former group name was deadnaming. We could tweak "a person (especially a transgender person)" → "a person (originally and especially a transgender person)" or "a transgender person, or by extension anyone," perhaps. (I even see marginal references online to "deadnaming Kyiv" [as Kiev], albeit they seem to be intentionally invoking the trans concept to be offensive/"edgy", so one day there may be a second sense extended beyond even just "a person".) - -sche (discuss) 15:45, 31 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I believe that "a person (especially a transgender person)" sufficiently hits the nail on the head; it indicates that that is the primary use of the term, although it is not exclusive and may be used for others. I believe the alternatives you have proposed do not further clarify the utility of the word.
 * 1. "a person (originally and especially a transgender person)" Is it known that the origin of the word is in reference to transgender people? Perhaps so, but if anything this seems to be bolstering the idea that it is a word for transgender people and not for everyone rather than relaxing that notion.
 * 2. "a transgender person, or by extension anyone" In this case, (especially a transgender person) is simply the more succinct way of saying this; you offer a rather bizarre way of wording things, and simply not how definitions work. If by extension it applies to anyone, then why even reference trans people to begin with? The phrasing is awkward, unnecessary, and illogical, with nothing about the words "a transgender person" entailing that it should be extended to others. The word especially makes more sense here because it already applies to anyone, but in specific is usually used in reference to a certain group. You are essentially suggesting that the definition be something like "(x), and by extension (not x)," which doesn't really make any sense, whereas currently it is more like "(x), especially (subset of x)."
 * Both of these proposals are a step backwards. As it stands, I believe the definition is perfectly fine. If anything, the problem is with the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadnaming. It is not even acknowledged in this article that cis people may be "deadnamed;" I have tried to edit this article in the past to include this information, but there seems to be a militant reluctance to accept this idea, with anyone who attempts to include it being seen as hostile to the trans-community, when in reality they do not have a monopoly on this word. SpiralSource (talk) 00:18, 6 May 2022 (UTC)