This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I corrected an error: in this page we arw speaking of Charles II of Mantua, not the third. His father never became duke, so he never received a number of succession. As source, we can see a coin minted in 1649 [1]: we can read CAROLUS II DEO GRATIA DUX MANTUAE ET MONTIS FERRATI ET CASALIS. -- Cusio ( talk) 14:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
We need reliable sources for category claims. It may well be that such sources are indeed available and you can list them in the article - but if not, then who is saying that these people fit the bill? Just deciding that you think they fit the description is Original Research - and that's not allowed here. I need to see a few reliable little blue number in each categorisation that links to a reference document that can be examined to confirm Basic Academic Rigour.
Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, will be immediately deleted.
We need reliable sources for category claims. It may well be that such sources are indeed available and you can list them in the article - but if not, then who is saying that these people fit the bill? Just deciding that you think they fit the description is Original Research - and that's not allowed here. I need to see a few reliable little blue number in each categorisation that links to a reference document that can be examined to confirm Basic Academic rigour
WP:CAT/R#Sexuality For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate. For example, while some sources have claimed that William Shakespeare was homosexual or bisexual, there is not a sufficient consensus among scholars to support categorising him as such. Similarly, a living person who is caught in a gay prostitution scandal, but continues to assert their heterosexuality, can not be categorised as gay. Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, it should be immediately depopulated and deleted. Note that as similar categories of this type have actually been attempted in the past, they may be speedily deleted (as a G4) and do not require another debate at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
Sexual categorisation in lack of clear irrefutable evidence, confession is dishonest and from a historical point of view abhorrently misleading. Pgarret ( talk) 13:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
References
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I corrected an error: in this page we arw speaking of Charles II of Mantua, not the third. His father never became duke, so he never received a number of succession. As source, we can see a coin minted in 1649 [1]: we can read CAROLUS II DEO GRATIA DUX MANTUAE ET MONTIS FERRATI ET CASALIS. -- Cusio ( talk) 14:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
We need reliable sources for category claims. It may well be that such sources are indeed available and you can list them in the article - but if not, then who is saying that these people fit the bill? Just deciding that you think they fit the description is Original Research - and that's not allowed here. I need to see a few reliable little blue number in each categorisation that links to a reference document that can be examined to confirm Basic Academic Rigour.
Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, will be immediately deleted.
We need reliable sources for category claims. It may well be that such sources are indeed available and you can list them in the article - but if not, then who is saying that these people fit the bill? Just deciding that you think they fit the description is Original Research - and that's not allowed here. I need to see a few reliable little blue number in each categorisation that links to a reference document that can be examined to confirm Basic Academic rigour
WP:CAT/R#Sexuality For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate. For example, while some sources have claimed that William Shakespeare was homosexual or bisexual, there is not a sufficient consensus among scholars to support categorising him as such. Similarly, a living person who is caught in a gay prostitution scandal, but continues to assert their heterosexuality, can not be categorised as gay. Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, it should be immediately depopulated and deleted. Note that as similar categories of this type have actually been attempted in the past, they may be speedily deleted (as a G4) and do not require another debate at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
Sexual categorisation in lack of clear irrefutable evidence, confession is dishonest and from a historical point of view abhorrently misleading. Pgarret ( talk) 13:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
References