Template:Did you know nominations/Tilly Norwood: Difference between revisions

Tilly Norwood

Tilly Norwood

• … that Tilly Norwood‘s (pictured) existence has been criticised by multiple Hollywood actresses?

Launchballer 18:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC).

• I’m not comfortable with asserting that Tilly Norwood exists, actually. I’m also not comfortable with the article using gendered pronouns for the Tilly construct. DS (talk) 19:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Your discomfort comes without justification and is inconsistent with you using the term “Tilly construct” for a subject you claim doesn’t exist. If you’re right then what are you talking about? This sentence exists, pictures exist, stories exist, your prejudice exists and line blurring metafictions like Tilly exist. 2A02:C7E:205B:3D00:ADF7:E53:C019:2ACB (talk) 09:30, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

• SAG-AFTRA‘s criticism of the character seems more significant than unnamed “multiple Hollywood actresses”. Listing the names of notable actresses could also make it a better hook. ^Falling_Gravity 01:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

SAG-AFTRA isn’t likely to mean anything to anyone unfamiliar with the industry. Naming the actresses might add interest, but I’m disinclined to go there given what happened at Michelle Pfeiffer (Ethel Cain song). As for the gendered pronouns, I’ve said my piece at the talk page, in as much that (in my opinion) avoiding their use would be silly.–Launchballer 04:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

I think SAG-AFTRA has higher prominence after the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, which was also about studio’s using AI avatars (among other issues), so it’s increasingly relevant here. ^Falling_Gravity 04:21, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Comment: @FallingGravity: maybe “creation” as a synonym for existence? Roast (talk) 01:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

ALT0a: … that the creation of Tilly Norwood (pictured) has been criticised by multiple Hollywood actresses?–Launchballer 13:23, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

ALT1: … that a Hollywood actress recently described Tilly Norwood (pictured) as “really, really scary”?–Launchballer 15:00, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

We could run ALT2: … that the talk page for Wikipedia’s article about Tilly Norwood (pictured) has been described as “a fascinating window into the semantic debates that our society is facing more broadly” as a result of AI? on 15 January, Wikipedia’s 25th. (I’m guessing I can’t nominate a talk page and run it as a double nom?)–Launchballer 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

(seeing this DYK on the article TP). I do think that ALT1 is very good – this whole area is scary, but that is the point and that hook captures it perfectly. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:23, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

For the record, I strongly object to this item appearing on DYK at all. Documenting the existence of “TillyNorwood.exe”, sure. Taking any further steps to promote it in the public consciousness and thereby boost its commercial viability — and don’t bullshit yourself, that’s exactly what this would be doing — no. Same reason we don’t have DYKs on political candidates when they’re running for office. DS (talk) 15:12, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

My sphincter, we run real-life actresses all the time and this is no more promotional.–Launchballer 15:52, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Do you understand why we don’t run DYKs on political candidates when they’re actually running for office? DS (talk) 04:21, 7 October 2025 (UTC)