This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Universal Basic Income (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universal Basic Income, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Universal Basic IncomeWikipedia:WikiProject Universal Basic IncomeTemplate:WikiProject Universal Basic IncomeUniversal Basic Income Economics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Organized Labour Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Sociology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Philosophy: Philosophers / Social and political / Contemporary Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Social and political philosophy Contemporary philosophy International development Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International development, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of international development, including such areas as appropriate technology, microfinance and social issues, 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.International developmentWikipedia:WikiProject International developmentTemplate:WikiProject International developmentInternational development Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance). This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Can we change the caption to that?, It will be very beneficial for everyone. IanisMD (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about "Standing sitting Guy sitting Guy Standing sitting at the BIEN Congress in 2012"? Lallint 18:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. We aren't going to make any memes about his name. This has been discussed to death in the archives. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know we already had an edit war about this, but "Standing at the BIEN Congress in 2012" kind of makes it sound like it means "[Here he is] standing at the BIEN Congress in 2012", rather than the intended "[Guy] Standing at the BIEN Congress in 2012". I think we should change the caption to "Guy Standing at the BIEN Congress in 2012", to clarify. --ISometimesEatBananas (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was discussed in 2023. While I apparently supported it then I'm leaning against it now. We normally refer to people only by surname. We should hold fast against the tide of memes (so to speak) and follow exactly the same rules here as we would for someone with a different name. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just “Standing, at the BIEN Congress in 2012” 2600:1004:B052:27BF:6820:D19B:6C6C:F931 (talk) 01:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the best solution ~2026-14614-42 (talk) 08:48, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be good to change the photo of Guy Standing to one where he is actually standing up. Primarily to erase any possible confusion (which ISometimesEatBananas originally discussed), and also to dissuade possible memers as well.

Also a more recent photo would be preferable too. Darius Leong (talk) 03:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guy standing sitting discourse in the big 2024 💔 207.174.167.81 (talk) 07:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing the photo has been discussed before, but the problem is finding a better photo. Having a newer photo, if one is found that is suitable for use, is a good idea. Wilh3lm^Talk 13:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or it could say “him (Guy standing is implied but not written) sitting at…” in the caption, it removes the issue of confusion which is present with “Standing at…” which could be easily confused for “(person)Standing(possibly capitalised only because it’s the first word) at…” and wouldn’t have the issues of “Guy Standing sitting at…” or “Standing sitting at…”

would you say this works? Legendarycool (talk) 00:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found a picture of him on his site (https://www.guystanding.com/) where he is standing, would that work? --ISometimesEatBananas (talk) 22:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would need to be released under a free license. And anyway I oppose making any changes to the photo. The right thing to do is to not care at all about this memery and use exactly the same image, with exactly the same caption, as we would for any other person. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like the caption “Standing at the BIEN Congress in 2012” should be replaced with “him sitting at the BIEN Congress in 2012” as it mitigates may of the issues, if there are any reliable source of the previous hilarity the article could have a section on the name’s comedy. Legendarycool (talk) 23:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It took years of arguing on this talk page just to get the uncropped photo back. I am opposed to anything that might jeopardize the consensus finally established. We have a good photo with a neutral and informative caption, which also shows Standing's continual involvement with the BIEN Conference more than two decades after its founding. If it isn't broken, don't fix it! Editorial time would be better spent expanding and improving the article rather than just trying to force the meme. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are say, but confusion is created with the use of Standing as a name while he is sitting wouldn’t “him sitting at the BIEN Congress in 2012” avoid the issue of both the meme and the unclear description in the caption? Wouldn’t the continued use of his name in the caption be considered an attempt at comedy too?

I am just trying to get a completely neutral caption that would remove the need for any conflict. Legendarycool (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "him standing" is grammatical in that use. And on the topic of images, there's a second image in the article that depicts him standing, why can't we make that the thumbnail and remove the current thumbnail image all together? ...in fact, there's one more image of him standing in Wikimedia Commons, we could use that as well. But it doesn't look very good as a thumbnail. Meanwhile, to Trainsandotherthings as well as Pppery, if we don't address this this is going to pop up again. Additionally, the article is protected because of this argument, which stops people from making good image-unrelated edits like I was going to do. --ISometimesEatBananas (talk) 22:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussions: Talk:Guy Standing (economist)/Archive 1#Why can’t we make the joke, Talk:Guy Standing (economist)/Archive 1#Extended confirm protection too much?, Talk:Guy Standing (economist)/Archive 2#Picture. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:00, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Making jokes about a subject's name violates WP:BLP – same goes for people like Kevin Lasagna. If the subject was deceased you might have a better chance but as it stands, it probably won't happen DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 21:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say changing the caption to ‘him’ instead of ‘Standing’ as it could considered an attempt at a joke so using him or them instead would work better.

Legendarycool (talk) 22:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, referring to Standing by a pronoun in a caption feels very awkward, and contradicts the usual style for naming people in the captions, which is by surname. I haven't been able to find any info in MOS about this but the surname would easily be the preferred style if his surname was anything else. Wilh3lm^Talk 19:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an actual consensus against this? The linked discussions (which constitute nearly the entirety of the talk page's archives) mostly seem to be a combination of the following:

• Discussions where some random noob requests the edit, and they are told "no", and someone links to previous discussions.
• The previous discussions themselves, which for the most part are closed as "no consensus".

I get that there is a bias against this, because we are a very serious website and the Internet is serious business and it is maximally important to never write anything that is incidentally funny to anybody ever, but I really don't see a basis for awkwardly contorting our standard practices to avoid humor. Typically, photos are described by captions. The only reason we don't do that here is because... there's some meme on the Internet where people think this caption is amusing? We've been reverting it for five years for the sole purpose of annoying them?

Some people will say it is immature to have a funny thing in an encyclopedia; I say it is immature to go out of our way to imperiously remove encyclopedic content because people think it is funny. We have articles on flatulence, exploding whales, killing baby Hitler, Festivus and inherently funny word; it is not unencyclopedic for us to do so. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a role-playing website where we compete to see who can act the most serious.

Unless there is strenuous objection to the contrary, I propose that the caption be restored and we get on with our lives. jp×g🗯️ 07:16, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or how about we don't make fun of somebody's name just because people on the internet find it amusing? A person claiming to be his wife (I find the claim credible, given that the account & their interest in Standing is much older than the meme and the article) has stated that they find it somewhat annoying[1] & specifically requested that we use a different photo. I don't mind writing articles that are more than a little tongue in cheek; I also think saying that the only reason we're not making a elementary school-esque joke is to annoy people is not an accurate read of history.

Also, we do not always describe a person's pose in captions. We normally say their name, the date, and optionally the location/event. This article's captions are relatively normal; we have not contorted ourselves. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 09:40, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]