Talk:Joely Collins

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Not a biological daughter of the English artist

Joely is not the biological daughter of Phil Collins. Should be stated in the article. Calle Widmann (talk) 18:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is now. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship

Moved from Talk:Geraldo Perez#Relationship

Being adopted doesn’t make one full or half-siblings to other kids from the adoptive parent(s). Full and half sibling relationships refer to biological connections, not adoptive ones. T v x1 23:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect. They refer to legal relationships. An adopted person is fully part of the family, it is not some lesser relationship. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. Not all adoptions automatically give the same perks to adopted children and biological children. Also the terms full and half siblings only refer to biological bonds. Nothing else. Adoptive siblings are adoptive siblings. Please read sibling.T v x1 23:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No adoption gives full rights - an apopted person is fully part of the family in all ways. Also what matters is how the family refers to each other and how they treat each other. It is demeaning to tag a person with with labels that imply not a real child or not a real sibling. It is also unnecessary in an article to tag family relationships with biological trivia when it is still correct to call a person's adoptive daughter his daughter and a persons adoptive sister, their sister. The extra tagging adds no value and is unnecessary. The details of the relationships are better served by text in the article instead of modifiers on a general relationship term. The article was correct and complete before you made your changes. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't that simple. There are different kinds of adoptions with different consequences. Most importantly they don't turn people into half or full siblings. Please read the article I linked too here and stop your disruptive reverts.T v x1 23:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is never incorrect to drop the modifiers. And it is demeaning to add them for adopted people as it implies that they are lesser relationships. It is always better in a bio article to be sensitive to the person the article is about. Details are better described in plain text. And yes an adoption does turn the adopted person into a full child and a full sibling to the other children they have. Adoptive parents don't consider their adopted children as anything other than fully their children. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again please read the article I have linked to here. Terms like half and full (and threequarter) siblings ONLY refer to biological relationships. They do not in any case ever refer to adoptive relationships. I honestly cannot understand what I have to do to get this through to you? Also, I was actually adding and correcting modifiers, not removing any. Why on earth is it impossible to consider for you that you could be wrong?? T v x1 00:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are ignoring what I am saying. The added modifiers are unnecessary and demeaning to the subject of the article, and the relationship info is correct without them. It is, at most, added information, that is better covered in plain text in the article itself, which, in the articles in question, it is. There was nothing missing or wrong in the articles before you changed them. Basically you don't need to refer to a person's daughter as their adopted-daughter, it is still fully correct to just say it is their daughter and explain how separately. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather say that you're ignoring what I'm saying. I pointed you to an article that clearly explains how these terms are NOT used in the way you claim. I really don't know what I have to do to make you accept that. We don't make up our down definitions of what terms mean. And you should make a judgement of what is demeaning to someone. That's not for you to do. My changes described their family relations acurately and neutrally. There is nothing wrong with that. Your version actually misleads the readers. You claim for instance that Phil is Joely's father, when in reality her physical father is completely different man who has not ceased to exist just because Phil adopted her. T v x1 00:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) (talk page watcher) I agree with Geraldo, for the most part. I think the confusion stems from the fact you, Tvx1, assume that full sibling means biologically. Or, put another way, blood related. That's not necessarily the case. All it means is that, especially after they've been adopted for quite a while, it's like they might as well have been born from the adoptive mother, especially if they're really close with the family. As an only child, I have several good friends who are family to me, like brothers, sisters, etc., that I love. We're not blood related, but they're still family to me. It's not quite the same as adoption since children there live with their adopted parents during their pre-adult years, whereas not that's necessarily the case with close friends, especially not before the legal adult age of 18, but it's similar enough. Amaury • 00:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the best place to discuss this, though. You should have started this discussion on Talk:Joely Collins, where you can get a wider audience. Amaury • 00:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amaury, then why does our article on siblings cleary explain that terms like full and half siblings are only used for blood relatives? You might use them differently informally in your family, that doesn't mean that is the correct way of usage. We're writing for a wide audience here and we should limit ourselves to the most widely accepted definitions, so as to avoid confusion as much as possible.

In any case I started a discussion on Phil Collins' talk page because this affects multiple subjects and that is likely to attest the widest audience.T v x1 00:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Above moved from my talk page to continue the discussion here. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion is continuing at Talk:Phil Collins § Description of his relationships to his children and between his children among them in their articles. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]