Talk:Imane Khelif

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2024

Imane Khelif did not fail a gender test, nor does she have "XY Chromosomes," but rather had an elevated testosterone level, which could be caused by any number of medical, physiological or pharmacological means.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/c4ngr93d9pgo Ericawip33 (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done Yeah I don't know how that got there and I'm frankly kind of annoyed it didn't get taken down sooner. Thanks for flagging it. --AntiDionysius (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

A statement put out by the IBA has denied that an elevated level of testosterone was detected, but has not specified the actual criteria for the disqualification: https://www.iba.sport/news/statement-made-by-the-international-boxing-association-regarding-athletes-disqualifications-in-world-boxing-championships-2023/ 125.214.83.112 (talk) 23:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

The IBA explicitly stated that she was not disqualified due to a testosterone test but rather a separate test 188.172.111.106 (talk) 11:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how credible it is, but the Guardian article (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/jul/29/boxers-who-failed-gender-tests-at-world-championships-cleared-to-compete-at-olympics) cited in the wikipedia entry points to a quote of Umar Kremlev (https://tass.ru/sport/17370249):

"Based on the results of DNA tests, we identified a number of athletes who tried to deceive their colleagues and pretended to be women. Based on the results of the tests, it was proven that they have XY chromosomes. Such athletes were excluded from the competition," Kremlev said. (Google translation)

The same accusation of Khelif having XY chromosomes appears in a Wired.com story which takes the view that Khelif should be allowed to compete. https://www.wired.com/story/imane-khelif-olympic-boxer-controversy/

Umar Kremlev is the International Boxing Association president. https://www.iba.sport/about-iba/organizational-structure/iba-president/ A.y.huang (talk) 22:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

It's credible insofar as Kremlev did say it (I went and tracked down the original TASS report, for some reason only available on the Russian-language version of their website and not the English). The question is whether Kremlev is correct about the chromosome thing; this remains a somewhat murky issue. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me, but isn't she a biological man? One would assume that's what caused the elevated testosterone levels. It would be denying reality to think that it "could be caused by any number of medical, physiological, or pharmacological means". If she insists on being tested for those different causes, well, have at it. But the reason for her elevated testosterone levels is extremely likely the same as mine: being male. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.61.245.75 (talk) 13:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

No, it's not likely. Because higher T levels could be caused by any number of medical, physiological or pharmacological factors. Two seconds of googling for "elevated testosterone levels in cis women" will give you quite the list if you'd like it.

Even if it were "likely", we still wouldn't put it in the article unless it were verifiably true, which it is not. --AntiDionysius (talk) 13:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Polycystic Ovary Syndrome could very well be as plausible. Usually "transgender-identifying males: / "transgender women" would take an antiandrogen (testosterone reducer) to drop their testosterone levels as regular treatment.

I'd also like to shoehorn mention that intersex people exist (such as women that phenotypically look female while naked but have XY chromosomes without surgery. Even visa versa) 173.219.23.154 (talk) 05:13, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Does he/she have ovaries? 68.0.101.20 (talk) 13:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I really don't think any of us are in a position to know whether or not she has ovaries. It's also not super clear why that would be important. AntiDionysius (talk) 13:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

She is an intersex cis woman 74.71.162.63 (talk) 17:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Question

It seems like the most key piece of information about this controversial athlete and it is missing from the article.61.68.79.145 (talk) 19:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Although the following sentence isn't encyclopedic, many people claim that Imane Khelif is a female transgender. JacktheBrown (talk) 19:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

you're right, that would be extremely unencyclopaedic AntiDionysius (talk) 23:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

"She" was found to have XY chromosomes, it's not an allegation, it's a fact that Khelif is biologically male. 188.172.111.106 (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

A Y chromosome don't necessarily mean that someone is 'biologically male': https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome Jamougha (talk) 11:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Plus there is every possibility that the IBA president was flat out lying. The way the article is now is fine. It includes relevant things that have been claimed but sticks to the verifiable facts when speaking in Wikivoice. AntiDionysius (talk) 11:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@AntiDionysius I feel that if we do not have confirmation that the IBA president was speaking the truth his claim should be removed.

Or at least a note could be added that XY chromosomes doesn't necessarily mean that she's a man, because that claim is ruining her life at the moment. Karim Mezghiche (talk) 11:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Your claim here is preposterous. 2+2=5? Jordi2023 (talk) 06:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

What claim? AntiDionysius (talk) 08:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Regardless, such an opinion is WP:UNDUE in a WP:BLP article. I have restored the 17:49, 30 July 2024 version (no objection to going back to an earlier one if a further discussion and consensus is needed). M.Bitton (talk) 12:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

1) Kremlev's statement is a claim of fact, not an opinion.

2) It has been widely quoted in reliable sources: [1] [2] [3] [[4] [5] [6] [7]

3) It is important to the article because it is a statement from the president of the sporting organization in which Khelif competes, explaining why she was disqualified from the biggest match of her career thus far, which has also contributed in large part to her notability.

4) Space was given in the article not only to Kremlev's statement, but to Khelif's response.

This is not WP:UNDUE. I am undoing your revert. Please discuss further here. Astaire (talk) 12:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I thought the UNDUE issue was the reference to Barry McGuigan - and if that wasn't what M.Bitton meant, then I'd like to bring it up. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure I fully understand what it is that you want to bring up. M.Bitton (talk) 12:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, it's a moot point after your revert - just that I thought the line "IOC's decision was the subject of controversy and criticism, including from former boxing world champion Barry McGuigan." was giving undue weight to McGuigan. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I see. Are you happy with the way that subsection is now? To be honest, I'm not convinced it needs a title. M.Bitton (talk) 12:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm also not convinced it needs a title. Other than that it looks basically fine to me. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:53, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Great. I have removed the title. M.Bitton (talk) 12:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you familiarize yourself with our content policies and especially, WP:BLP and WP:ONUS. M.Bitton (talk) 12:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Your only objection was that Kremlev's statement was an opinion (it's not an opinion) that was undue (I explained why it's due). If you wish to dispute its inclusion, please make a new argument basing itself on WP policy or on my response. Astaire (talk) 12:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Whether it's an opinion or a claim in a dispute over a set of facts doesn't really matter for the application of WP:UNDUE. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Every one of those "trusted sources" is quoting from an RT or TASS article. Are those trusted sources? I suggest you actually check where each of those articles sources their information. The president of the IBA never said Khelif's name. He said certain boxers had been disqualified due to have "XY Chromosomes" yet never specified who. The IBA never released an official statement on what tests were performed. To state that she has "XY Chromosomes" or that the president of the IBA said she does is blatantly wrong. 2601:201:8C02:9120:A57C:56CB:E4F0:E307 (talk) 14:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Someone has gone and edited many of the pronouns of this boxer to the male pronoun, despite no evidence she is transgender (which is highly unlikely considering her extremely conservative country). This ought to be corrected. 2600:382:2B00:1C0:3CD3:A103:1781:6D8A (talk) 16:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

In Italy there are divisive newspaper articles: most of them claim that she's falsely accused of being a man, while others claim they're a female transgender (I use the singular they in case it's true). Has Imane Khelif changed sex? If yes, are there authoritative sources regarding Khelif's sex change? If there aren't, I doubt she's a female transgender. JacktheBrown (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I believe WP:BLPBALANCE comes into play here, doesn't it @JackkBrown? The principle is, if there is more than one well-reported perspective on a person, then those perspectives should be included, "so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone." If there are good reliable sources that set out a different perspective on this question then yes, a good article on a person will include those perspectives.MatthewDalhousie (talk) 01:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

As far as I can see, there's nothing to indicate she is male as such, or is transgender....BUT the IBA made a determination that she is XY chromosone, and she chose not to challenge that determination, and instead decided not to compete for the competition at that time. Despite the accusation, she has not personally confirmed it or denied it. ON balance, it would appear the sources indicate she is more likely to be XY chromosome, as there are sources that say she is XY and there aren't any sources denying this. That doesn't make her a man, but it may give her a physical advantage over a more "regularly chromosomed" woman. Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Deathlibrarian: your comment is PERFECT. Full support for this comment. JacktheBrown (talk) 19:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

See this source about the IBA. M.Bitton (talk) 19:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: the newspaper isn't free. JacktheBrown (talk) 19:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

This comment has some quotes from it. M.Bitton (talk) 19:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll add the quote here:

A person with knowledge of last year’s disqualifications from worlds but not authorized to speak publicly called Khelif and Lin’s banishments “classic IBA disinformation.” Three people familiar with the details of the women’s case pointed out that the disqualifications came three days after Khelif defeated Russian Azalia Amineva and a day after she won her semifinal bout in the 63-66-kg (139-145.5-pound) category.

M.Bitton (talk) 20:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

There's precisely one original source saying she has XY chromosomes - the IBA. Everyone else is just quoting them. The IBA also, in the same sentence said she is a "man" trying to "fool" people - so clearly we cannot take everything the IBA says at face value. And I think when Khelif said that this whole thing was a "conspiracy" against her, that pretty self-evidently counts as a denial. Unwillingness to go through the difficulty of taking a case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport doesn't weaken that; there are dozens of reasons she could've made that decision.

We have said that the IBA says she has XY chromosomes. We don't need to do anything more. We have to include the IBA's claim, because it is obviously noteworthy, but we also have to not treat that pretty clearly disputed claim as if it is fact or likely fact, especially under WP:BLP. We present what the relevant people say, and if/when we know anything for certain, we can update the article with that certainty. AntiDionysius (talk) 19:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Original IBA quote comes from this TASS report.

The quote translates more or less to "According to the results of DNA tests, we identified a number of athletes who tried to deceive their colleagues and pretended to be women. According to the results of the tests it was proved that they have XY-chromosomes. Such athletes were excluded from the competition". AntiDionysius (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

Someone altered the person's pronouns in an attempt to mock her for not being feminine. She is a woman and the pronouns in the article should be she/her. 47.50.121.222 (talk) 12:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done I caught this already, but thanks for flagging it nonetheless. --AntiDionysius (talk) 13:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

That problem is still there. Consumeraction (talk) 13:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't see it - where is it? And are you sure you're looking at the most recent version of the article? AntiDionysius (talk) 13:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

(not OP) It keeps being changed back and forth. Could this page be fully protected for a couple of days at least? Fenneke (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

Add her recent match against italian Angela Carini and the corresponding political fallout. Carini gave up due to feeling this was not a fair fight for all the reasons already discussed. l

Also, Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said Carini's bout against Khelif was not a fight among equals. "I think that athletes who have male genetic characteristics should not be admitted to women's competitions," Meloni said.

Reuters also reported that "The IOC decision caused a stir before the Games with some warning of safety concerns for the boxers' opponents." NBC reported that Carini refused to shake Imane Khelif's hand after the decision was announced, and she cried in the ring before leaving. USA Today termed it "Olympic boxer at center of gender eligibility controversy wins bizarre first bout". BBC stated "Just before Khelif's arm was raised by the referee, Carini could be heard on camera saying "it's not right"". They also reported that "...it has hurt Olympic boxing at a crucial time where its future is still being discussed. It's an absolute disaster."

Some RS talking about it are:

-Reuters https://www.reuters.com/sports/olympics/boxing-algerian-khelif-advances-after-italys-carini-abandons-fight-after-46-2024-08-01/

-NBC https://www.nbcnewyork.com/paris-2024-summer-olympics/boxing-olympics-gender-test-imane-khelif-angela-carini-match/5656773/

-USA Today https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2024/08/01/olympic-boxer-imane-khelif-gender-eligibility-issue/74628914007/

-BBC https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/cw0yvln9z00o

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 13:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

"Carini gave up due to feeling this was not a fair fight " is there a source for this claim? 31.124.184.56 (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The Sydney Morning Herald had a journalist, Michael Chammas, in the press box at the North Paris Arena to report on the bout. Chammas reports that a few seconds after raising her glove to pause the fight, the Italian competitor Angela Carina returned to her coach and "repeatedly yelled to her corner, “Non e giusto, non e giusto” (“It’s not fair, it’s not fair”)." Chammas goes on to report "Her Olympics was over. “I’ve never felt a punch like this,” she would later say." See the SMH article here, though it may be paywalled. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 02:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

Add UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, statements.

A possible addition could be: Reem Alsalem, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, tweeted about the match, writing, “Angela Carini rightly followed her instincts and prioritized her physical safety, but she and other female athletes should not have been exposed to this physical and psychological violence based on their sex."

Some RS confirming the above:

-The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/aug/01/angela-carini-abandons-fight-after-46-seconds-against-imane-khelif

-Evening Standard https://ca.news.yahoo.com/italian-boxer-quits-olympic-bout-113506942.html

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 14:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I would oppose this addition, personally. It's a comment by one person and it does not to me seem relevant. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Your personal opinion does not matter. You have been edit warring here making one-sided edits in what seems like direct editorializing from you, which goes against WP rules. When enough RS have reported on this, the article must reflect this in a NPOV.

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia operates by consensus. I am expressing a view on whether or not this should be included. Other editors are also welcome to express their views. Then we can go with the consensus.

I also categorically haven't been edit warring, but alright. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

If you were trying to enhance the article by consensus instead of destabilizing the article via editorializing, you could easily add, using the very relevant RS, and responde to the open edit-request. Something tells me you won't, the same way you deleted edit-warring notices on your personal Talk Page.

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 14:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Users have the right to remove notices from their talk pages, per Wikipedia policy. If you believe me to be edit warring, you are welcome to make a report at the edit warring noticeboard.

I am trying to work with consensus by not immediately making your suggested edit or immediately rejecting it. There is no obligation to positively respond to all edit requests just because they reference some reliable sources. It is common practice to respond that something should be discussed and consensus established before an edit request is approved or rejected. It's such common practice that we have a whole template: {{esp|c}} AntiDionysius (talk) 14:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

SUPPORT INCLUSION: I cannot agree with your observation that it is a comment "by one person". Does a UN special rapporteur represent the UN or not? This is an important addition to this person's article Billsmith60 (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Moreover, Reem Alsalem has a very well sourced WP article conveying her bonafides that warrant inclusion. This is not a random tweet or an opinion piece, she represents, since August 2021, all women and has a global UN mandate to "...seek and receive information on violence against women, recommend ways to eliminate violence against women at national, regional and intersectionality levels, and work collaboratively with the other United Nations human rights mechanisms."

All of this showcases this is important, relevant, non-contested, and verifiable. We need to include this to maintain NPOV. 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:147A:F431:89E6:80C2 (talk) 16:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Support Removal: It is not clear what is Reem Alsalem's connection to amateur boxing, or the athlete in question to comment on this issue. This is as non-sequitur and factually inaccurate as a statement as the athlete in question is not trans. 2600:6C44:767F:8E58:554E:854A:6C56:56C0 (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Billsmith60 UN Special Rapporteurs do not speak for the UN as a whole, no. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, from Wikipedia (is it a reliable source): "Special rapporteur (or independent expert) is the title given to independent human rights experts whose expertise is called upon by the United Nations (UN) to report or advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective"? Are you saying this is incorrect? Please can you support your terse assertion that special rapporteurs do not speak for the UN? Billsmith60 (talk) 17:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures-human-rights-council/special-procedures-human-rights-council

Section "Special Procedures are individual experts". Flounder fillet (talk) 20:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

It's...in the text that you posted right there. They advise the UN. They are not spokespeople for the UN. AntiDionysius (talk) 20:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

should not have been exposed to this physical and psychological violence based on their sex what does that even mean? Does it mean that women shouldn't be involved in violent sports? Whatever it means, it certainly doesn't belong in this article as it is about Angela Carini. M.Bitton (talk) 20:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Remove the irrelevant opinion. 16:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Reuters

https://www.reuters.com/sports/olympics/olympics-dsd-rules-focus-womens-boxing-2024-07-31/ "Boxers Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting at last year's world championships in New Delhi fell foul of International Boxing Association (IBA) eligibility rules that prevent athletes with XY chromosomes from competing in women's events." Direct from Reuters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbbowlingmd (talk • contribs) 14:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Plenty of RS are covering this. Even the most respected ones like AP, BBC, and Reuters yet there is strong editorializing here by two users who are trying to prevent a NPOV from acurately what RS are reporting.

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

This is covered in the current text; it notes that the IBA say it was a chromosome issue and the IOC say it was a testosterone issue. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024 (2)

Source these 2 sentences or remove the sentneces: “From this, false rumors have emerged that Khelif is transgender or transsexual. Khelif is a biological woman.” 47.134.145.54 (talk) 14:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done --AntiDionysius (talk) 14:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

DSD

@NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM - regarding your recent edit, I can't immediately see anything in either of the two sources that say Khelif has disorder of sex development. Am I missing something? AntiDionysius (talk) 15:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

"who is also DSD ... Khelif is therefore within her legal right to compete today." From the second reference. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I was missing something. I was Ctrl+F ing "Khelif" but not looking hard enough. Thanks for clarifying! AntiDionysius (talk) 15:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

No problem, I was trying to find out myself the details of this case. I'm sure there will be a lot of coverage of the subject and we'll get a clearer picture still. I see that I've used 'disorder' and the source states 'differences', I went by the Wikipedia article title which is synonymous. Should we change the link to 'differences' which would then redirect to disorder? NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 15:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

There are no primary sources to validate this claim

The only "evidence" of Khelif having a DSD is an unofficial statement by Umar Kremlev that the hormone tests in 2023 proved Khelif & Yu-Ting have XY chromosomes. This statement has never been corroborated. (In fact it's very dubious that this statement can even possibly be correct as the IOC have officially stated that the test in 2023 only checked testosterone levels)

As it stands, this article asserts something as true that has no rigourous evidence to support it. I strongly believe that it is in the best interests of upholding the credibility & integrity of Wikipedia to remove the statement of Khelif having a DSD Sumandark8600 (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

KEEP

I disagree with Sumandark8600 assessment. Plenty of RS cover the current controvery and Khelif and DSD. See Reuters here, for example. Not including this relevant information extensively covered by RS would be a disservice to WP.

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:147A:F431:89E6:80C2 (talk) 15:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Your linked article makes no assertion that either Khalifa or Yu-Ting have DSDs, nor does it include any primary sources.

It is a gross misinterpretation of available facts to state that this is evidence that either athlete have DSDs.

Reuters is also nothing more than a news agency. It is both fallacious & a logical fallacy to claim that not including coverage of their unverified articles would "be a disservice to WP" regardless of how well regarded or trustworthy they are seen to be as an organisation in general. Sumandark8600 (talk) 16:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

You are engaging in WP:OR and editorializing. If many RS report on something, willfully ignoring it due to your personal opinion IS a disservice to WP and violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 17:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I want to echo the concern here, Reuters reports this as factual but provides no basis to support this claim. I think he should be careful to assert information about a medical condition without proof. I agree with Sumandark8600 that this is WP:OR as it is "analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources". It should be added only if additional proof is provided from RS or other sources. Eyeanow (talk) 17:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I did do another search, and there is really no firm evidence that the subject has Differences of Sexual Development (DSD) or that the subject was raised as female but has XY sex chromosomes. I think it's commonly thought, and commonly suggested, but we have no evidence of it. Mind you, it's the sort of thing that the subject would need to disclose I think. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Add more RS covering Khelif controversy

For example, Barron's is a RS and not included on this article even though they have a pretty extensive and NPOV report on this controversy.

From the above source: "one-sided bout", "A distraught and hurt Angela Carini shrugged off attempts by Khelif to shake her hand afterwards and the Italian collapsed to her knees and sobbed uncontrollably in the middle of the ring.", "controversy threatened to overshadow the sixth day of the Games.", "Lin was stripped of her bronze medal after undergoing "biochemical" tests mandated by the IBA.", and "At least one woman boxer at the Games has spoken out about her concerns. Australia's Caitlin Parker is in the 75kg weight class so will not face Khelif or Lin, but she made her stance on the controversy clear. "I don't agree with that being allowed, especially in combat sports as it can be incredibly dangerous," she said."

All of the above further proves this was a controversial match, overshadowing the Olympic games, and the has been public athlete outcry. None of which is referred to in the article as of now, ostensibly due to editorializing by two current WP editors. 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:147A:F431:89E6:80C2 (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the news is too fresh here. Wikipedia rules dictates we should be waiting for a secondary source of any importance to decide whether or not the quotations from the other contestants is of any ENCYCLOPEDIC relevance. It's unclear if any of this will belong to this article in 2030. Iluvalar (talk) 21:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024 (3)

As per many RS have reported on this issue, include Italian Prime Minister's public statements regarding the Khelif controversy. For example:

"Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, who was visiting Italy athletes in the Olympic Village on Thursday, voiced criticism that Carini had to box Khelif, saying she had since 2021 opposed allowing athletes with “genetically male” characteristics to compete against women. “We have to pay attention, in an attempt to not discriminate, that we’re actually discriminating” against women’s rights, Meloni said." 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:147A:F431:89E6:80C2 (talk) 16:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

That's an irrelevant opinion of a politician. M.Bitton (talk) 16:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: I don't think they're irrelevant opinions of a politician; Giorgia Meloni is a very important politician in Italy and her opinions, consequently, are important. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Since when do politicians have a say about the gender of a person (from another country to boot)? Her opinions (about politics) may or may not be important in Italy, but they are certainly not about other subjects, least of all the gender of a living person. M.Bitton (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

If it's irrelevant why ALL RS used in this article and cited in the TP. If you disagree as a matter of opinion, then it violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. It is not a random tweet but ALL the RS used here cover this. 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 17:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper. M.Bitton (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

It is Wikipedia:Notability by being reported by practically all RS and she is Italy's Prime Minister. Lest you forget Caroni is italian herself and is representing Italy in the current Olympics. It makes absolute sense to include her countries statements.

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 19:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: It is WP:NOTABLE. Just because it hurts your feelings and doesn't conform to your ideology doesn't mean it should be excluded. See WP:NOTCENSORED. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 17:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:NOTABLE only deals with if topic that "editors to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article". Not if someone opinion on a situation should be included in a article on the athlete. Eyeanow (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Eyeanow thank you for reminding us. Honestly the point often gets lost. The question of notability is about whether there should be an article about a subject at all. I believe that question is settled. So now it's about the level of balance that is given to different aspects of the person's life. The whole article, certainly, can't be about controversies of gender. The person's life is much bigger than that. But that material is certainly well reported and a significant part of the story. In my view it can't be good article without it being covered. Again, thanks for raising the relevant point here. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 02:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024 (4)

Neither of these sources (10,11) support the claim that Khelif has DSD and is not transgender.

“Khelif is not transgender, but has a disorder of sex development (DSD), which causes some females to have XY chromosomes and blood testosterone levels typical of a male.[10][11]”

This should be changed to say “there is speculation that Khelif may not be transgender but has a disorder of…” and then if you can find a credible source. Khelif has never said they have DSD so the above quoted sentence may be removed entirely. I can’t find sources confirming what Khelif was at birth/biologically. It is only speculation Khelif has DSD. 47.134.145.54 (talk) 16:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Note: You're right that the claim is not supported by the sourcing, but this is a WP:BLP and we cannot include such weaselly language as "there is speculation" without unassailable WP:RS. I have removed the whole line. Melmann 18:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

This page has reverted back to the original line which is AGAIN not supported by sources.

“Khelif is not transgender,(12) but she has a disorder of sex development (DSD) which causes some females to have XY chromosomes and blood testosterone levels typical of a male.(13)”

Neither source has credibility in saying she is not transgender, nor that she has DSD, it is the author’s assumption. If the first part wants to stay it could be said “Khelif does not identify as transgender.” You can identify as whatever you want. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. 47.134.145.54 (talk) 19:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

As per the DSD topic above, it is entirely right for editors like @Melmann to say that the DSD idea is unsupported by reliable sources, at this time. Even if a news article says that the person "might", that really is scuttlebutt and nothing more. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

See also Caster Semenya

Imane is dealing with many of the same issues and criticisms as Caster Semenya. I am not sure if it is the exact same condition, but those interested would benefit from a link to Caster and other DSD athletes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster_Semenya 2001:19E8:F0:7601:8DF8:484D:137:78B3 (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Totally agreed. What an appropriate time to raise the issue. On the eve of a medal. Why wasn´t this an issue when she was defeated three years ago? Lf8u2 (talk) 02:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

We have no reliable sources that establish DSD here, not yet anyway. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024 (5)

She is a woman, the page is using the wrong pronouns to describe her 106.51.160.132 (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 16:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024 (6)

The opening sentence of Early life reads "Khelif grew up in Tiaret, a rural village in northwestern Algeria." I think this is a transcription error on the part of an editor. The original article this is sourced to states "Imane recalls how at 16 she managed to excel in football in her rural village in Tiaret in western Algeria despite football not being seen as a game fit for girls."

Given the context I think it is reasonable to say that this is not referring to Tiaret, a large city, as a rural village, but is rather referring to her coming from a rural village in Tiaret Province. Suggested change to:

"Khelif grew up in a rural village in Tiaret Province in Northwestern Algeria." Relm (talk) 17:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Relmcheatham:  Done JacktheBrown (talk) 17:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

At the last sentence in the 2022–2023 section the 2024 IBA statement lacks the full quote. Change 'In 2024, the IBA said that Khelif and others "did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognized test, whereby the specifics remain confidential"' to 'In 2024, the IBA said that Khelif and others "did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognized test, whereby the specifics remain confidential. This test conclusively indicated that both athletes did not meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors."' Dvtkrlbs (talk) 18:06, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done: I fleshed the paragraph out without using so much of a direct quotation. – macaddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Testosterone

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Intersexe persons have higher levels of testosterone but not in the male range as this lemma suggests 143.179.155.39 (talk) 18:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a source for this? I would be unable to support this until we have a source. I do approve of removing the word "typical" from the article as the Reuters article states that "blood testosterone levels in the male range". "Typical" would imply an average while the article only suggest that the testosterone could fall in the range which could mean just hitting the low end. So, the article should state individuals with DSD "may" fall within "male testosterone ranges". Which is closer to what the Reuters article asserts. The Telegraph article only says its "akin to that of a man" which seems a bit unclear to be cited specifically. Eyeanow (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Looks like a moot point now, since the section was removed. Eyeanow (talk) 18:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Intersex

I am not an expert but i think we should give her the "Category:Intersex women" and "Category:Intersex sportspeople" categories Braganza (talk) 18:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Disagree. Until the athlete claims that they are intersex or first-hand testing results are produced , the article should stay the same. Eyeanow (talk) 18:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Eyeanow: exactly! JacktheBrown (talk) 03:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

No. Categorising living people should be done with utmost care, especially as being intersex may be perceived by some as a negative label, especially in the culture she comes from. Let's keep in mind WP:PEOPLECAT. Melmann 18:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

No, we still know little about her (or them, in the case of transgender). JacktheBrown (talk) 02:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

We know for a fact that she's a cis woman til proven otherwise Trade (talk) 10:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Trans/DSD section needs credible sources before assumptions

This page has reverted back to the original line which is AGAIN not supported by sources.

“Khelif is not transgender,(12) but she has a disorder of sex development (DSD) which causes some females to have XY chromosomes and blood testosterone levels typical of a male.(13)”

Neither source has credibility in saying she is not transgender, nor that she has DSD, it is the author’s assumption. One source says “Khelif does not identify as transgender.” But even that article has no source on the claim of how she identifies. When did she say she was not TG? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Agree with above thread that until the athlete makes a claim themselves as to gender/intersex/DSD/Trans, the two quoted sentences above should be removed and not added back again.

This was fixed in a thread above and reverted to the original language. 47.134.145.54 (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this statement. The edit should be reverted back to original language.Under WP:BL that states "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion". There is no RS that provides proof that the athlete in question has any DSD. Eyeanow (talk) 19:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

IOC Statement

Regarding today's events, the IOC issued this statement, so should the sentence about the IOC not detailing their eligibility rules be modified? Also, should it be noted that there was a bunch of controversy around her participation in the Games, causing the IOC to issue the statement?

The statement also includes comments about the IBA's previous decision. Should these be noted in the section detailing her disqualification from the IBA Championships? Mellamelina (talk) 19:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mellamelina: I believe that is all  Done

MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Request for someone with 30/500 access to update. This phrase should be removed from the article as it is both untrue and not detailed in the linked source: "without detailing what these eligibility rules were" The issued statement does clearly link to a detail of the eligibility rules, and to state otherwise is false. Khaveman (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

More RS reporting on Italian PM comments

See here.

"Thursday’s forfeit sparked strong reactions in Italy, where the prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, called the fight “a match that did not seem on equal footing.”“Athletes who have male genetic characteristics should not be admitted to female competitions,” she told reporters." 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Disagree. The statement is irrelevant to the athlete at hand, because the athlete is not the Olympics nor does the athlete control Olympic policy. In addition, there is already a subsection covering "Bans on transgender women and DSD restrictions" in the Concerns and controversies at the 2024 Summer Olympics page. If this is important, it should go into that subsection or on Giorgia Meloni own page. Eyeanow (talk) 20:06, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

This whole controversy erupted when an Italian athlete quit the match over the perceived sex differences in the match. When said athlete's Prime Minister made public statements about it and they were covered by ALL, let me restate it, ALL RS used in this article and talk page you still say its "irrelevant"? 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 20:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Support. These statements are, certainly, relevant. JacktheBrown (talk) 20:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I oppose inclusion. Very unclear to me why we're meant to care what Meloni thinks; her connection to this (that she is the PM of the country from which the boxer Khelif was fighting comes from) is, in my view, tenuous. AntiDionysius (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose per AntiDionysius. The opinion of a politician is irrelevant to sports in general and has no place in the biography of an athlete (from another country to boot). M.Bitton (talk) 20:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose I agree with both @AntiDionysius & @M.Bitton that the opinion of a politician has no place in the biography of an athlete Sumandark8600 (talk) 21:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose While this is not an identical situation, as this deals with a high-testosterone cisgender female athlete as opposed to a transgender female athlete, I will share what we did when there was a similar dispute on another page. When Lia Thomas (a trans woman) swam against Emma Weyant (a cisgender woman) and Lia got first and Emma Weyant got second, Florida politician/Governor Ron DeSantis made a statement “declaring” Weyant the winner when he had no authority to do so. We had debates on the Emma Weyant page whether DeSantis’s statement should be included or not. We ended up not mentioning his opinion on the subject. Politicians have opinions all the time and sometimes there is prejudice in them as well. It doesn’t necessarily imply notability when a politician says something, even if they are a head of state (though there are likely exceptions). So I don’t think it’s necessary to quote PM Meloni on this. -TenorTwelve (talk) 06:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Support Highly notable person--Trade (talk) 08:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Notable is not synonymous with reliable. We don't just collect irrelevant opinions of those of those who know absolutely nothing about the subject. M.Bitton (talk) 23:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

Article should include a mention of the IOC statement on the controversy. The statment describes in more detail the IBA decision, including the fact that the decision was made "initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO". ChumpusChongas (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

FYI, the IOC took down the response on your link. They have a new one. Additionally, the Board "ratified it afterwards" as per the IOC statement.2601:19E:427E:5BB0:9F16:23A8:BD16:E25 (talk) 20:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

it didn't. M.Bitton (talk) 20:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

See here. Mellamelina (talk) 20:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Quite right @Mellamelina, and worth noting @M.Bitton, the official IOC statement reads, "...decision was initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO. The IBA Board only ratified it afterwards and only subsequently requested that a procedure to follow in similar cases in the future be established..." MatthewDalhousie (talk) 02:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Would you include it in the 2023 section or the 2024 section? Or a section on its own? Mellamelina (talk) 20:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Probably 2024, as it directly pertains to the 2024 Paris controversy. ChumpusChongas (talk) 20:13, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done – macaddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

This is how all matters of controversy should be resolved. Thank you @Macaddct1984. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 02:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Clarify that she is not transgender

There is massive misinformation on internet about that Khelif is transgender. This is more than enough reason to clarify in the article that she is not transgender. There are several reliable sources who have said that Imane Khelif is not a transgender person.[8][9][10] Please also note that there is a paragraph in this article that may lead many people to wrongly think or conclude that Khelif is a transgender person: «According to International Boxing Association (IBA) president Umar Kremlev, DNA testing of Khelif and other athletes "proved they had XY chromosomes and were thus excluded from the sports events».

There are medical conditions that can cause a woman to had XY chromosomes.

Esterau16 (talk) 21:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

It should also be noted that the IBA (who is currently banned) has never provided evidence of the claim that Khelif has XY chromosomes, and the IOC states the IBA decision was arbitrary. DMBradbury 23:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Esterau16: Someone has added that the transgender claims are false, I've appended it with some of your citations

@DMBradbury: That is already present in the article – macaddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Esterau16, multiple people have reverted your addition of the sentence "There are medical conditions that can cause a woman to also have XY chromosomes." to the article. This is editorializing and violates WP:NPOV by inserting speculation about what medical conditions Khelif may or may not have. There is not currently strong sourcing for any such statement, and we already have sources clarifying that she is not transgender. Astaire (talk) 03:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The reversions that you mention were not due to disagreements with the sentence, but with the type of source. At first I put a MedinePlus source, other users said that that source was WP:OR, so I changed it to a secondary source that talks about Khelif. This important to mention, as many may mistakenly think or conclude that Khefli is a male based on Kremlev's claims that Khefli has XY chromosomes. In fact, not making this important clarification violates WP:NPOV. Esterau16 (talk) 04:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done – I have mirrored some key points from the body in the lead. Zenomonoz (talk) 07:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

High androgen levels vs hyperandrogenism

Having high androgen level is not possible for XY women, according to XY gonadal dysgenesis, is it? Or are there other conditions to make women XY? It's not clear if these reports are true. Did she have a karyotype test? Web-julio (talk) 02:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

There is currently no good information about the specifics of the test results or any DSD she may have. However, to answer your direct question, individuals with 5-ARD have XY chromosomes and testosterone levels in the male range, but are often (not always) raised as women due to their appearance at birth. See the case of Caster Semenya and other DSD athletes. Astaire (talk) 03:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Mentioned rare case: Woman may also have XY chromosomes

The mention "There are medical conditions that can cause a woman to also have XY chromosomes" seems to be a misreprestation of the cited article which quotes "Given that obviously we are not aware of her clinical documentation, she could have been born with a congenital disease that caused a disorder of sexual differentiation . At the basis of this there are very rare, but pathological, pathological conditions"

Since the cited expert here, has clearly mentioned that "we are not aware of her clinical documentation", and no other WP:RS source supports such claim regarding Imane Khelif, it may be WP:UNDUE to include a very rare condition here. Untill, consensus is reached, its best to include the quote for context and WP:NPOV language. RogerYg (talk) 06:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I have accordingly added the quote with context, as below:

An endocrinologist, Gianluca Aimaretti, who acknowledged not being aware of Khelif's clinical documentation, claimed that there are some rare pathological cases where XY chromosome may appear in a woman and hypothesized that Khelif "could have been born with a congenital disease that caused a disorder of sexual differentiation".

https://www.gazzetta.it/olimpiadi/discipline/pugilato/01-08-2024/imane-khelif-perche-ha-il-cromosoma-xy-e-quale-e-la-differenza-tra-intersex-e-transgender.shtml

RogerYg (talk) 06:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I think we also need to include

XY is the male chromosome, while XX is the female one.

for WP:Readability

https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/sport-others/paris-olympics-boxing-controversey-imane-khelif-win-9489120/

RogerYg (talk) 06:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I do think we need to be careful about not giving this undue weight here per WP:UNDUE .

Without any evidence outside of a claim to TASS by Kremlev, including extra information may provide a misleading bias toward making the claim appear more credible than current details indicate. DMBradbury 06:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

This is reported in multiple reliable WP:RS sources including The Guardian, and hence should not be deleted without consensus

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/jul/29/boxers-who-failed-gender-tests-at-world-championships-cleared-to-compete-at-olympics

WP:INDIANEXP is also a WP:RS source. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources RogerYg (talk) 07:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Also reported in Reuters

Khelif and Taiwan's double world champion Lin Yu-ting were cleared to fight in Paris after the IOC last year stripped the IBA of its status as boxing's governing body over governance issues, and took charge of the Paris 2024 boxing competition.

Both had been disqualified at the 2023 World Championships after failing International Boxing Association (IBA) eligibility rules that prevent athletes with male XY chromosomes competing in women's events.

https://www.reuters.com/sports/olympics/boxing-algerian-khelif-advances-after-italys-carini-abandons-fight-after-46-2024-08-01/

There are enough WP:RS sources to report this. RogerYg (talk) 07:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Reporting XY chromosome

This is reported in multiple reliable WP:RS sources including The Guardian and Reuters and hence should be reported as per WP:RS

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/jul/29/boxers-who-failed-gender-tests-at-world-championships-cleared-to-compete-at-olympics

WP:INDIANEXP is also a WP:RS source. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources RogerYg (talk) 07:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also reported in Reuters

Khelif and Taiwan's double world champion Lin Yu-ting were cleared to fight in Paris after the IOC last year stripped the IBA of its status as boxing's governing body over governance issues, and took charge of the Paris 2024 boxing competition.

Both had been disqualified at the 2023 World Championships after failing International Boxing Association (IBA) eligibility rules that prevent athletes with male XY chromosomes competing in women's events.

https://www.reuters.com/sports/olympics/boxing-algerian-khelif-advances-after-italys-carini-abandons-fight-after-46-2024-08-01/

Hi User:DMBradbury, Previous topic was about reporting about endocrinologist claim. I think XY chromosome has been reported in multiple reliable WP:RS sources and hence should not be deleted without consensus

There are enough WP:RS sources to report this. RogerYg (talk) 07:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: none of the sources provide proof she has a Y chromosome. The Guardian specifically clarifies that this traces back to a Russian source. That Russian source cites the IBA, who are banned from running the olympic boxing tournament and did not ever state they tested chromosomes. Refer to the IOC statement on this matter. According to the IOC, her disqualification was done at the discretion of two individuals, without any clarity on their reasoning and a lack of due process. We are not going to state that she has a Y chromosome, when it remains unproven. Zenomonoz (talk) 07:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

We have to report in Wikipedia as per WP:RS sources such as Guardian and Reuters.

See Reuters : "had been disqualified at the 2023 World Championships after failing International Boxing Association (IBA) eligibility rules that prevent athletes with male XY chromosomes competing in women's events."

https://www.reuters.com/sports/olympics/boxing-algerian-khelif-advances-after-italys-carini-abandons-fight-after-46-2024-08-01/

We can clarify from Washington Post that "It remains unclear what standards Khelif and Lin Yu Ting of Taiwan failed last year to lead to the disqualifications.". 08:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

RogerYg (talk) 08:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

We need to quote the source Washington Post per WP:NPOV

IBA President Umar Kremlev told the Russian news agency Tass last year the disqualifications were because “it was proven they have XY chromosomes.” "It remains unclear what standards Khelif and Lin Yu Ting of Taiwan failed last year to lead to the disqualifications." RogerYg (talk) 08:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

That is discussed in the body already, actually. The IOC has made it quite clear that the IBA did not use due process or provide evidence. The Russia-led IBA is the subject of corruption scandals, and one of its representatives was calling the IOC "sodomites". Very serious stuff. The IBA won't even clarify what these alleged tests were. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, its not in the body. This was deleted by someone from the body:

IBA President Umar Kremlev told the Russian news agency Tass last year the disqualifications were because “it was proven they have XY chromosomes.” "It remains unclear what standards Khelif and Lin Yu Ting of Taiwan failed last year to lead to the disqualifications. RogerYg (talk) 08:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

List of intersex Olympians

If we are not allowed to call her intersex in the article then why is she listed in this Wiki article? Something doesnt add up Trade (talk) 08:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

She should not be included on the list. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

We might wanna include it now and then have a discussion if she should be included later. This looks like a pretty blatant BLP issue Trade (talk) 08:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I was just coming to add a "please see" to this talkpage linking back to the list. Based on historic precedent of athletes who have effectively been victims of poor gender tests being disqualified, these athletes are included. The prose discussed this all, but given the current controversy, many people are discovering the concept of intersex and potentially also hearing a lot of untruths about intersex and Khelif. There is a discussion at the talkpage of the List of intersex Olympians on improving the list, with increased attention in mind. As much participation as possible is encouraged. Kingsif (talk) 10:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The unsourced label violates WP:BLP and should be removed. M.Bitton (talk) 10:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I direct you to the first paragraph of that list regarding inclusion criteria, and invite you to the talkpage where discussion on the use of "intersex" and other ways to prevent public misconceptions is current. Kingsif (talk) 10:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies

Would this banner be appropriate to add given the whole controversy? Trade (talk) 08:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

No, it is not. We have no confirmation that she is transgender, nor intersex. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I meant because of the controversy. I wasnt trying to imply that the controversy had any truth to it. The controversy takes up 1/3 of the article so we cant really claim it's insignificant Trade (talk) 08:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from involving Imane in LGBT-related discussions, as she is from a country where being LGBT is criminalized. She has faced criticism in the past for dressing in a way deemed too masculine for a woman and has never officially stated that she is a lesbian or intersex; all she has confirmed is that she was born female. We cannot categorize her based on assumptions. sloth (talk) 09:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Did i claimed her to be lesbian or intersex? No Trade (talk) 10:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

There have been discussions before about the inclusion of wikiproject categories. AFAIR the general consensus has been if Wikiproject members feel that the article is within the scope of their wikiproject, it's not for outsiders to worry about. It's accepted that Wikiprojects tags which are simply internal management stuff, don't convey anything about the article subject so it's not a BLP or other violation. As I'm not a member of any wikiproject, I don't worry much about whether any wikiproject tag is added but if members of a wikiproject like the LGBT studies one want to add this article, I see no reason to oppose it. I can see obvious reasons why this article may be of interest to the LGBT studies Wikiproject. While our article doesn't currently mention this (although has in the past), people have been attacking her based on the false claims she is a trans woman, people well known for their opposition to trans rights. Such attacks may or may not have any long term significance, I'm not convinced they belong at this time; but in any case it's still part of the background as demonstrated by the fact currently we use a source which mentions such attacks in the title. Likewise if the inclusion criteria for women's boxing is affecting even cis women athletes, it's quite likely it will affect trans athletes. Still as I said, it's ultimately up to members of that wikiproject to decide if this article is sufficiently in scope. There are plenty of examples where someone is within scope of the LGBT studes wikiproject despite the subject not themselves being part of the umbrella. Gay icons are obvious examples, e.g. Judy Garland. Nil Einne (talk) 14:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Where and when did she confirmed that she was born female? May i see the source please? Kalaboomsky (talk) 11:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

While I'm extremely sympathetic to considering any risk a subject may face from what we do, let's be realistic here. There's a very low chance that someone in Algeria who is stupid enough to think the inclusion of the LGBT studies wikiproject means she is LGBT, will notice the wikiproject and harm her as a result. Especially considering we already have the J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk falsely claiming she is trans and the Prime Minister of Italy also saying something similar. Along with what the IBA did. Nil Einne (talk) 14:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

IBA's Olympic status

The article makes multiple mentions about the IBA's Olympic status being revoked. This is repetition and WP:UNDUE weight, it should be mentioned just once in the body. We also could expand that the IBA didn't organise the 2020 games; the issues with the IOC and IBA are not about the Khelif case, but the article currently may mislead some readers into thinking so. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 09:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The controversy largely comes from the IBA's comments about Khelif's biology. It's important to mention that the IBA has previously been banned for issues that could affect the credibility of their statement. The removal of this context could imply a potential bias or a lack of concern for presenting all the facts from your end. Also, you're currently engaging in an edit war; it's not allowed to remove relevant sentences that are supported by reliable sources. sloth (talk) 11:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth Please read WP:SYNTH. The IBA's Olympic status was not revoked due to the Khelif case, so you are attempting to imply a connection between the two. This will mislead some readers as I explained above.

You've given no reason why you restored the repetition of the same content in the body either. It's mentioned three times, it should be mentioned once to avoid repetition. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 11:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Nowhere does it state that it was revoked due to khelif's case, the article mentions exactly why it is revoked, which was due to several reasons, all independent from one another, and cites sources for the reader to read more.

The reason it's mentioned multiple times is that the IBA's decision comes up in almost every paragraph of the article. sloth (talk) 11:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth Again, please read WP:SYNTH. You are combining separate pieces of information to reach a new conclusion, this will mislead the reader into thinking the revocation of Olympic status was connected to the Khelif case. This could be explained in a non-SYNTH manner in the body of the article, but doing so would be UNDUE weight for the lead.

That's a reason to consolidate/remove content from the article, not a reason to repeat the same content over and over. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 11:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth I already brought it to the talk page, and referenced that in my edit summaries. Please don't tell other editors to bring something to a talk page if you're not going to read the talk page, this is not constructive behaviour.

As it stands, you reverted the edits without explaining why there should be repetition and UNDUE weight given. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 11:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I've read the talk page, that's why I responded to you, and it's clear that the controversy primarily arises from the IBA's statements about Khelif's biology. Given that the IBA has been banned in the past for issues that could call their credibility into question, this context is relevant and should be included whenever the IBA's claims are mentioned. The fact that the repetition of the IBA's claims wasn't an issue for you, but mentioning the organization's potential unreliability is, suggests a double standard. This page is about Khelif, not the IBA, and it's important to provide a full picture, unless there's a specific reference that contradicts this information. Engaging in an edit war and selectively removing sentences backed by reliable sources is not the right approach and it will get you flagged. Add whatever information you need. Do not remove information. sloth (talk) 11:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth You evidently hadn't read the talk page, because I had brought it to talk page *before* you made your edits telling me to take it to the talk page. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 11:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth Please read WP:ONUS. The onus is on you to attain consensus for the inclusion of this content, not for other editors to remove it. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 11:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

You said that this particular point should be mentioned just once within the body of the text. However, you have removed this reference from all three sections where it was originally included, and now you are attempting to eliminate the remaining two instances of it despite them being relevant. This is your final warning before I consider escalating the matter due to bias and starting an edit war. sloth (talk) 11:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no reason to repeat material about the IBA. Once is plenty @Slothtysloth. Also, please see the section below about citations. They sure ain't saying what you think they say. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 11:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Already responded. They do.

It's only mentioned once by the way. @NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM is trying to remove all of them. Which is biased. sloth (talk) 11:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth That is simply false. I kept the information about the IBA's Olympic status being revoked. You can see it in the edit history, it's mentioned right after the UNICEF line. I also added additional information and reference about it in the same section. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 11:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The information about their status being revoked should not be in that paragraph. It needs to be moved to follow the section about her 2023 disqualification, as it originally was, because it adds important context and nuance. The full backstory is contained in the 2023 IBA Championships disqualification section. We should remove it from the opening paragraph of the 2024 Olympics section and place it into the 2023 disqualification paragraph. sloth (talk) 11:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth No, the material about the IBA belongs in the sentence about that topic. As @NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM has patiently discussed, to shove in the material about the entity being discredited, and somehow link it to the boxer having their status revised is WP:SYNTH when the two matters are in no way related.MatthewDalhousie (talk) 12:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The IOC suspended the IBA in 2019, years before this controversy with Khelif began. The IOC revoked the IBA's Olympic status in 2023 for not implementing reforms that were requested in 2019. None of these reforms were related to Khelif because they precede that case, so attempting to connect the two would be synthesis. The content is most appropriate to the 2024 Summer Olympics section as MatthewDalhousie said, because the content refers to the IBA's revoked status at the 2024 Olympics, not the 2023 World Championships. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 12:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Do not start an edit war, please. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

"Victims of cyberbullying"

Would be nice to see a RS for this claim. Simply being controversial isn't the same thing Trade (talk) 10:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I've looked. There's no news article about this subject experiencing cyberbullying. Will remove, thanks for alerting @Trade MatthewDalhousie (talk) 11:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Removed already. As you were. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 11:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

This seems to be a recurring issue with this particular category. Might need a broader discussion elsewhere Trade (talk) 11:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Your source materials need to support the points you've made

@Slothtysloth, would you mind taking a look at the paragraph you've contributed that begins "During her performance..." First of all, boxers don't perform, they fight. But much more importantly, your sources don't back up much of what you've claimed. To begin, JK Rowling has criticised the IOC, according to the citation you've offered at least. Also, I don't think they've said anything about cisgender. Nor do they say jot about financial transparency. Please give it a good look or I think we remove the paragraph and start again. Hope that's okay with you. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 11:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I did not personally write the section referring to 'performance,' but the term is used correctly in this context, as it denotes the action or process of executing a task or function, it happened after she had won. If you have strong objections to the use of 'performance" please suggest an alternative term; however, I want to clarify that I did not author that particular section myself.

The text does indeed highlight criticism directed at the IOC for allowing Imane to compete, and the references clearly support this.

If you had thoroughly reviewed the references, you would have seen that it also addresses financial transparency issues. For instance, the article from NBC Chicago states: "The IOC is in charge of boxing in Paris because the IBA has been banned from the past two Olympics due to years of governance problems, a lack of financial transparency, and numerous perceived instances of corruption in judging and refereeing." a few other articles were removed for excessive sourcing.

Hope that answers your questions. sloth (talk) 11:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slothtysloth thanks for replying.

Some thoughts and observations.

1. Apologies for assuming you wrote "perform." As mentioned, the right verb for this sport is, unsurprisingly, "fight."

2. There seem to be two main articles this paragraph depends on beginning with this one in Variety which

2.1 Makes no mention of "trans"

2.2 Make it clear that J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk are criticising the IOC

2.3 Does not suggest that these figures have strong views against transgender rights (and even if it did that would be relevant to articles about those figures, this is a BLP about a boxer, not various billionaires).

2.4 Say nothing about anything being "overlooked", if they have overlooked something, that would be from your original research, which isn't what we're doing here.

2.5 Says nothing about the IBA or bans

3. The second article the paragraph leans on is (and I wish I was joking here) The Hollywood Reporter

3.1 Says nothing about any individual's view of trans people, except to say "with many seeming to believe she is a man" which, seriously, ain't the same thing.

3.2 Make it clear that J.K. Rowling is criticising the IOC

3.3 Does suggest that J.K. Rowling is critical of the trans movement, but nothing about rights, and even if she was, again, that would belong in an article about JK Rowling

3.4 Say nothing about anything being "overlooked", if they have overlooked something, that would be from your original research, which isn't what we're doing here.

3.5 Says nothing about the IBA or bans

In short, unless you, or some other editor, can fix this paragraph up, I'm inclined to remove it. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 12:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to include this para as it shows the viewpoints of another competitor in the Olympic comp

"While not labelling Khelif as transgender, competing Australian boxer Marissa Williamson-Pohlman noted that Khelif may be XY-chromosome, and said that it was fair that she should declare that she was XY-chromosome if that was the case. [36] [37]"

I think the idea that Williamson didn't accuse her of being trans or a man... BUT has asked for transparency is noteworthy. While Marissa Williamson says she MAY be XY chromosome, the IBA and RS have indicated that she was, which would seem to make the claim in this case, more supported. Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

You may include the information, but rewrite it with proper grammar and remove any redundancy about the IBA president, as it has already been mentioned excessively. Also remove any biased tone; a competitor cannot merely 'note' someone’s XY chromosomes. They can express complaints or speculate, but not make such factual observations. That's a molecular level observation. sloth (talk) 11:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, good points - how is this?

"While not labelling Khelif as transgender, competing Australian boxer Marissa Williamson-Pohlman stated that Khelif may be XY-chromosome. Williamson-Pohlman said that Khelif should be transparent that she was XY-chromosome if that was the case." Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:54, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Please see this edit for why this was removed. M.Bitton (talk) 11:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thanks - I saw that edit, that's why I am discussing it here. I think its a valid inclusion, and the fact is, the article supports the fact Khelif may be XY chromosome by the reference to what the IBA have stated. Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

We don't really have any idea what Khelif's chromosomes look like. The IBA statement on what they believe is relevant because they might have done tests, and therefore may have some authority.

But another boxer speculating about Khelif's chromosomes, or making a hypothetical comment about what it would imply if she had certain chromosomes, feels less obviously relevant to me - the former because it's speculation and the latter because it's a hypothetical hinging on a significant unknown. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Hang on, as another female boxer potentially competing in an olympic match with her, in her sport, her viewpoint is IMHO *completely relevant* and worthy of inclusion, and it also mirrors others in the sport who have similiar concerns. And has already been mentioned by other editors, the IBA determination has been reported by noted RS and is mentioned in the article already, so its not merely "speculation".Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I know the IBA statement is mentioned. It should be, of course. But we don't know that the IBA statement is necessarily true. The dispute over that is a large portion of the news cycle around this whole thing.

If we knew beyond doubt that Khelif had XY chromosomes, then there might be cause for inclusion of the other athlete's comment about competing against women with XY chromosomes. But that statement, for now, is not of certain relevance to Khelif specifically. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Deathlibrarian, there is so much in this article that needs fixing. It's a long way from being anything like encyclopaedic. It certainly doesn't need any theories picked up that have been overheard from other competitors. I'm afraid that would be, to my mind, a clear case of WP:SPECULATION. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 12:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, seconding this sentiment. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Remove parroted language that the IBA decision is legally binding

The article notes that the withdrawal of Khelif’s appeal made “the IBA decision legally binding.” First, the linked source doesn’t support this. Second, this claim is solely provided by the IBA statement and is not supported by a reputable party. It may be binding per IBA rules, but it is not necessary “legally binding.” This is an important clarification and the language should be removed from the article. Khaveman (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done

AntiDionysius (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion of controversy in lede

This situation is turning fairly rapidly into a media circus and culture war battleground, with US political candidates and UK government ministers feeling the need to comment—with some of them outright spreading misinformation. Given the prominence of this gender controversy, should it be given coverage in the article's lede section? I'd like to hear others' thoughts on the idea. Ithinkiplaygames (talk) 16:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

They can feel the need to comment on what's well beyond their "expertise" all they want, we don't have to give "whatever they're selling to their readers" any coverage. M.Bitton (talk) 17:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I have to agree that the situation is notable enough that it should be included in the lead. It can just be a single sentence saying something like "she was the center of controversy after people started to falsely claim that she's a transgender woman." JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 19:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Quote sources

Right now, the article says "Carini cited an 'unfairness' of competing against Khelif" which is a strange way to describe what an athlete said during a sporting event. The MSN source listed thereafter does not support this claim. Carini's apology should also be mentioned in the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LivLovisa (talk • contribs) 17:50, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 2 August 2024

State that

1. Angela Carini later apologized for her reaction, stating she was angry because of her loss
2. IBA only disqualified Imane after she beat a Russian athlete Azalia Amineva

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2024/08/01/imane-khelif-algerian-boxer-gender-paris-olympics/ Caralice (talk) 17:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC) copied from WP:RFPP/E by Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The IBA disqualified Imane Khelif after her victory over Uzbekistani boxer Navbakhor Khamidova. -- Tobby72 (talk) 22:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

More Details from Carpenter's Washington Post story needed

Key details from Les Carpenter's Washington Post story were left out of the "2023: IBA Championships disqualification" section.

To wit... Motive for the IBA chief (a Putin ally) to disqualify Khelif: "Three people familiar with the details of the women’s case pointed out that the disqualifications came three days after Khelif defeated Russian Azalia Amineva and a day after she won her semifinal bout in the 63-66-kg (139-145.5-pound) category."

A source (admittedly unnamed) commenting thusly: "A person with knowledge of last year’s disqualifications from worlds but not authorized to speak publicly called Khelif and Lin’s banishments 'classic IBA disinformation.'"

Without this, Khelif's "big conspiracy" comment sounds overblown and hyperbolic. Given the context above, one could argue she has a point. Djmcguire1972 (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Why was I reverted?

In this edit. Courtesy ping to Abds97 who did not offer any explanation whatsoever. I get that their situations are different but see also links don't have to be directly comparable. I thought it was useful further context because it provides background about notable athletes who have been subjected to sex testing (which Khelif was even if there is no evidence that she has any specific intersex condition). Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not the one who reverted your edit, but I have to agree with Abds97 because what you added is not in the same defining category as this topic. M.Bitton (talk) 23:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:SEE ALSO states that One purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics; however, articles linked should be related to the topic of the article or be in the same defining category.

I'd argue notable Olympic athletes that have been subjected to sex testing is related enough, even if their unique situations are very different. This article also says The minutes also say that the IBA should "establish a clear procedure on gender testing" so to me, I think it's incredibly relevant to provide background on the history of the IBA's procedures on gender testing (which this article provides extensive detail about the recent history of all that). It's not the end of the world if it's not included but I do think there's a decent reason to consider it. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Why not add all women boxers? The relation between the them is notable and undisputed. M.Bitton (talk) 23:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Because if you added all women boxers then that see also section would be crazy long and unreadable. A link to List of women boxers seems relevant enough to me. But I also think that Semenya should be included given that her case is directly relevant to the current procedures the IBA has for sex testing and when women are considered to have an "unfair advantage" (which to me is unfair because plenty of men have advantages over other men. I bring this up as an example because if there is a comparable situation where a man had higher testosterone levels or something and that got extensive coverage, we should include that guy as a link as well). Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

If anything, I could see Semenya's case being included as an example in the Sex verification in sports article, but I agree that it shouldn't be included here. Mellamelina (talk) 23:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

My point is that it's not just a random example of an athlete whose been subject to sex testing. Her case has direct implications to which athletes are allowed to compete in the Olympics. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I see what you're getting at, but ultimately this is an article about Imane Khelif, not about the implications of sex testing in sports. It might also lead some people to presume that Khelif is intersex like Semenya. Mellamelina (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

An annotated link like what I suggested below might be the solution to that. I didn't think of the implications that it'd leave readers to assume Khelif was intersex, honestly I was thinking about it from the opposite angle, that all this random controversy has to be about something else given the current rules. As I stated earlier, this article literally states The minutes also say that the IBA should "establish a clear procedure on gender testing" (even if that's a quote) and I think it's useful to provide background to readers that you know there is actually a procedure for all that. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

For examples of what I mean, read Caster Semenya#2015 testosterone rule change and Caster Semenya#2018 testosterone rule change. I genuinely believe this is useful background for readers. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Again, I think background information like this would be more appropriate in the Sex verification in sports article. Mellamelina (talk) 00:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

+1 M.Bitton (talk) 00:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

That was a rhetorical question. Anyway, I added Lin Yu-ting, who happens to be mentioned in RS alongside Khelif. Please remember that this is a WP:BLP (i.e., it must be written conservatively). M.Bitton (talk) 00:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I know that this is a BLP. I have no issues with your link to Yu-ting and I took your question as literal, which is why I added a wikilink to List of women boxers. We obviously disagree on the merits of Semenya and I won't reinstate that link without a consensus, but I do genuinely believe it's a useful link that provides context to readers. It might be useful as a bulleted link under sex verification in sports with an annotated link that says something about the current practice of sex testing in the Olympics. As to inclusion in the sex verification article, it already is, although I think the information there could be more detailed. I don't think that means it can't be included as a see also link here as well. I look forward to what editors have to say on the matter because I don't think we're accomplishing much in this back and forth. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:13, 3 August 2024 (UTC)