This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Margot Robbie article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2023, when it received 11,041,143 views.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 8 times. The weeks in which this happened: January 12 to 18, 2014 July 12 to 18, 2015 July 31 to August 6, 2016 August 7 to 13, 2016 July 16 to 22, 2023 July 23 to 29, 2023 July 30 to August 5, 2023 August 6 to 12, 2023

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Australia: Queensland / Cinema / Television Mid‑importance Margot Robbie is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Australian cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance. Biography: Actors and Filmmakers 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 articles This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Low-importance). Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Hello. News about Margot Robbie being pregnant was released in early July (via People Magazine). However, Wikipedia editors have reverted any edits adding info about this in the article since Robbie hasn't seemingly confirmed her pregnancy herself. This is understandable. However, in an interview, Robbie's Barbie costar Ariana Greenblatt confirmed that Robbie is pregnant. (See the article here: https://people.com/barbie-s-ariana-greenblatt-says-her-mom-guessed-margot-robbie-s-pregnancy-before-the-news-broke-8693523.) I believe this is verification enough for Robbie's pregnancy news to be included in the article. Let me know what you think so we can reach a consensus. Thanks, CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 01:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources says "the magazine should not be used for contentious claims unless supplemented with a stronger source.". That article is written in a particularly tabloid style that instantly triggered my scepticism. Content such as "her mom, Soli, had a dream about Robbie's pregnancy" is a serious trigger. There MUST be a better source somewhere. HiLo48 (talk) 01:54, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per this, "Multiple sources confirm to PEOPLE that the Barbie star, 34, and husband Tom Ackerley are expecting their first baby". Alexandra Daddario backed this claim. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:48, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That second, probably independent source is good, but the word "adorably" doesn't belong in quality journalism either. I recommend citing both sources. HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At this time, sources' framing of the supposed pregnancy does not merit a neutral claim here about Robbie being pregnant. Yes, Robbie is probably pregnant. So what? Every source has attributed their reporting to anonymous sources, published that it has been reported elsewhere that Robbie is pregnant, or included a quote from somebody famous suggesting Robbie is pregnant. None has neutrally said so. The only appropriate way to write about any pregnancy is "Robbie is reportedly pregnant" or "actors Ariana Greenblatt and Alexandra Daddario have suggested that Robbie is pregnant". Which of these meets WP:BLPGOSSIP and WP:NOTNEWS? KyleJoan^talk 04:21, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Worst kept secret. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tell that to her and the sources that have only suggested she is pregnant (and would not neutrally state as much). As an observer, I'm convinced she's pregnant. As a user, "I'm convinced she's pregnant" fails BLPGOSSIP and NOTNEWS. KyleJoan^talk 04:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's obviously clear that she's pregnant, and it's ridiculous to fight over sourcing when WP:COMMONSENSE should triumph. Having said that, simply being pregnant does not warrant a mention in her bio. Let her deliver her child, which should then be mentioned. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion isn't about whether she's pregnant, though. It's about whether we should include a neutral claim stating it. It sounds like you're saying pregnancies aren't appropriate to include regardless of sourcing. This point contradicts the COMMONSENSE reference because that essay suggests that we could ignore the policies referenced and include a claim, so which is it–should a claim be included as per COMMONSENSE or excluded based on something else? KyleJoan^talk 09:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a binary argument. Pregnancies by themselves aren't notable for inclusion. Also, the COMMONSENSE argument doesn't ask us to disregard policies. What I'm trying to say is that, if the pregnancy claim needs to be included then the current sourcing is fine, because it's obvious that she's pregnant, per COMMONSENSE. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 09:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So why reference COMMONSENSE at all if it's irrelevant to whether this material should be included? KyleJoan^talk 10:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because COMMONSENSE is literally the argument! Krimuk2.0 (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's proving, and then there's knowing. But if the rule is not to add info on her pregnancy simply because it is unnotable/she didn't confirm it herself, I'll leave it at that. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COMMONSENSE is about making helpful edits despite what the "rules" are. Unless the essay is used to support how it's helpful to include or exclude a claim about Robbie being pregnant, it sounds more like COMMONSENSE would be the argument in some other dispute to include some other claim. KyleJoan^talk 10:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]