This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
LGBT rights in Taiwan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) 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 is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2021 and 8 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
JTorre23.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 02:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move per request.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 07:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
LGBT rights in the Republic of China → LGBT rights in Taiwan - This article only deals with information post 1949 and it is not an official government title so therefore it should fit in with other articles and use Taiwan not Republic of China. C. 22468 Talk to me 22:28, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
http://focustaiwan.tw/news/asoc/201501040018.aspx 217.247.109.63 ( talk) 21:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: To be moved. Note: Move requires admin assistance, which I will request at WP:RMT. ( non-admin closure) — Amakuru ( talk) 11:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
LGBT rights in Taiwan (ROC) →
LGBT rights in Taiwan – Per
common name of the state and that the current title is unusual and unworkable
Tærkast (
Discuss)
17:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
This page should be moved to reflect the article's move. -- Tærkast ( Discuss) 16:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Someone needs to edit this page to reflect 24 May 2017's court ruling in favour of same-sex marriage. (I'm new to Wikipedia and don't want to mess anything up by trying to do it myself.) LivaG ( talk) 16:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)LivaG
As far as I know, Israel’s civil union protection for same-sex couples is better than that of Taiwan. They can Joint adoption, IVF, and even donate blood. Israel recognizes same-sex marriage abroad. Taiwan’s protection for transgender is not even as good as Israel and Pakistan.-- S59112024 ( talk) 10:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
"Though Taiwan is widely regarded as the most progressive place in Asia for gay rights". [1]This source does not mention transgender people. It only said Taiwan is widely regarded as the most progressive place in Asia for gay rights.-- S59112024 ( talk) 17:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
I think not only trans rights needs reliable secondary sources, but also gay rights. Does taiwan can change legal gender without surgery like Israel? Does taiwan can Joint adoption like Israel? Does taiwan can use IVF service like Israel? Does taiwan can donate blood like Israel without following five years of abstinence from sex? Does taiwan recognize same-sex marriage abroad like Israel?-- S59112024 ( talk) 18:05, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Although taiwan have a civil-like marriage, but lack of marriage rights compare of Israel.-- S59112024 ( talk) 18:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
References
Though Taiwan is widely regarded as the most progressive place in Asia for gay rights—the closest country in the region that has legalized gay marriage is Australia—conservative groups have long tried to pressure legislators to pass a law that does not grant same-sex unions equal rights to heterosexual ones.
@
Kwamikagami: Take a look at the manual of style before continuing to make reversions. For example, in
MOS:FIRST: When the page title is used as the subject of the first sentence, it may appear in a slightly different form, and it may include variations...
Removing it altogether doesn't make sense here. The piped link comes from "in Asia", not simply "Asia", and is relevant to the sentence since readers might be interested in the comparison being made, but you're right there's some ambiguity. I'm open to other ways of wording or organizing the lead if you have other ideas but I think the title and link should stay at least.
Soapwort (
talk)
03:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Apologies if I am missing an obvious reference guide or similar, but I have searched for one before posting this. I am unsure of how to reffer to the sources and citations used, for ease of understanding I have decided to refer to the citation number as of the 25th of May 2023 at 9 am Greenwich time, clarification and direct links to these sources will be provided if asked.
As of posting this the article clearly states that married LGBTQ couples now have the right to jointly adopt children since 2023 in the first paragraph with clarification that they have full adoption rights/ the child does not need to be related to either parent much later on. Yet in some places it states that a same-sex partner can only adopt their partners biological child. As the more recent sources clearly specify that the bill has already been passed with the implication that it is effective immediately, why is the article still maintaining that stepchild adoptions are the only available form of adoption for married same-sex couples?
It would be prudent to not use citation [53], [54], [55], [60], and [63] as the sources for adoption rights in 2023. Instead, they are now relevant in regards to adoption when same-sex marriage was first legalised and leading up to and part of May 2023. Citations [1], [66], [67], and [119] seem more useful for the situation during and after May 2023.
Similarly, the use of citation [63] to state that no legalisation to codify the court ruling seems outdated, as citations [66] and [67] are used in the next paragraph to support the statement that legalisation in support of said ruling has been passed, with the implication that it became effective immediately. Unless there is a difference larger than minor semantics between passing and codifying a legalisation these two statements seem to contradict each other.
As such I propose a larger overhaul of the [Adoption and family planning] subcategory to update it in regards to what is the status of adoption rights in 2023 and what it was before that using more precise language. Similar edits seem to be needed in other places too. Furthermore, a complete rewrite of everything adoption-related in the [Adoption and family planning] subcategory that increases the coherency without losing any information anlog the way would be personally appreciated. Citations [1], [66], [67], and [119] seem to be the most suited for the current status while citations [53], [54], [55], [60], and [63] seem to be better suited for the historical background. Some of the more recent citations refer to the same source without any jumps and just linking to it without retrieval date, that should also be undertaken.
I am willing to do all of this myself, but as these would be major edits I want at the minimum some feedback beforehand in this plan so that I don't do a mistake or preferably someone more experienced in editing takes on some of the more tricky parts. 176.10.220.162 ( talk) 09:16, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Can someone add information to the "Legality of same-sex sexual activity" section about the history of the current legal status? I gather from a novel I'm reading that it was illegal at least as recently as the late 1970s. Largoplazo ( talk) 13:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
therefore [ exporting] anti-homosexuality laws throughout the British Empire....just saying --- Cat12zu3 ( talk) 11:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
The majority of Taiwanese people reject the gay agenda in favor of promoting traditional ancient Chinese family values based on the ancient Chinese culture of Confucius. And because of this Confucian culture of politeness, the Taiwanese people are, in general, polite to everyone including the fringe minority of gays living in Taiwan. But this culture of politeness should not be seen as “gay friendly” since the majority of Taiwanese voters have repeatedly voted against any gay marriage and any gay agenda.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46329877
https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2018/11/25/taiwan-gay-marriage-orig-acl.cnn
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:B0C5:E456:D8E6:CD5A:4793:668A ( talk) 21:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
What does "LGBT people in Taiwan are regarded as the most comprehensive" mean? Comprehensive people? That's ridiculous. I'd say you guys overdid it. Again. Cyanmax ( talk) 06:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Cyanmax: I don't understand why you had revert so many since today. Since you came to this page early this year, you had some wrong info from ILGA, in particular the year of criminalization, which is 1912. ILGA had rely mostly on english source for early historical history, which ILGA could erred on this. I'm find it puzzling that you claimed Academica Sinica from ROC Taiwan itself is not reliable. Do you know Chinese language? Any source to back up "1907" against reputable source, albeit Chinese language however still allowed per WP:NOENG about decriminzation in Greater China in 1912? I'm actually took the WP:RS source from zh:台灣LGBT歷史#中華民國政府統治(解嚴以前) which are still there now. I'm actually a chinese speaker too. (I don't like to say it out language/ethnic/race, ashamed and not proud, for some reasons, such as myself hospitalized for Wuhan pneumonia in bad shape, I ashamed to name myself actual ethnic/racial group, and would rather called myself Asian (just like some other Asians post-2020 & Europeans post-2022) --- Cat12zu3 ( talk) 11:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Chinese speaker or not, that's not relevant. Could you provide English sources so we can all understand them? xiexie.certainly show you don't know about WP:NOENG, you had not been fully aware of it...
My pronouns are he/himnecessary Special:Diff/1232212508?...
I saw User:Rolando 1208 revert, Rolando 1208 has only 612 edits, and apparently not seen WP:NOENG.
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
LGBT rights in Taiwan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) 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 is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2021 and 8 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
JTorre23.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 02:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move per request.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 07:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
LGBT rights in the Republic of China → LGBT rights in Taiwan - This article only deals with information post 1949 and it is not an official government title so therefore it should fit in with other articles and use Taiwan not Republic of China. C. 22468 Talk to me 22:28, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
http://focustaiwan.tw/news/asoc/201501040018.aspx 217.247.109.63 ( talk) 21:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: To be moved. Note: Move requires admin assistance, which I will request at WP:RMT. ( non-admin closure) — Amakuru ( talk) 11:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
LGBT rights in Taiwan (ROC) →
LGBT rights in Taiwan – Per
common name of the state and that the current title is unusual and unworkable
Tærkast (
Discuss)
17:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
This page should be moved to reflect the article's move. -- Tærkast ( Discuss) 16:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Someone needs to edit this page to reflect 24 May 2017's court ruling in favour of same-sex marriage. (I'm new to Wikipedia and don't want to mess anything up by trying to do it myself.) LivaG ( talk) 16:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)LivaG
As far as I know, Israel’s civil union protection for same-sex couples is better than that of Taiwan. They can Joint adoption, IVF, and even donate blood. Israel recognizes same-sex marriage abroad. Taiwan’s protection for transgender is not even as good as Israel and Pakistan.-- S59112024 ( talk) 10:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
"Though Taiwan is widely regarded as the most progressive place in Asia for gay rights". [1]This source does not mention transgender people. It only said Taiwan is widely regarded as the most progressive place in Asia for gay rights.-- S59112024 ( talk) 17:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
I think not only trans rights needs reliable secondary sources, but also gay rights. Does taiwan can change legal gender without surgery like Israel? Does taiwan can Joint adoption like Israel? Does taiwan can use IVF service like Israel? Does taiwan can donate blood like Israel without following five years of abstinence from sex? Does taiwan recognize same-sex marriage abroad like Israel?-- S59112024 ( talk) 18:05, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Although taiwan have a civil-like marriage, but lack of marriage rights compare of Israel.-- S59112024 ( talk) 18:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
References
Though Taiwan is widely regarded as the most progressive place in Asia for gay rights—the closest country in the region that has legalized gay marriage is Australia—conservative groups have long tried to pressure legislators to pass a law that does not grant same-sex unions equal rights to heterosexual ones.
@
Kwamikagami: Take a look at the manual of style before continuing to make reversions. For example, in
MOS:FIRST: When the page title is used as the subject of the first sentence, it may appear in a slightly different form, and it may include variations...
Removing it altogether doesn't make sense here. The piped link comes from "in Asia", not simply "Asia", and is relevant to the sentence since readers might be interested in the comparison being made, but you're right there's some ambiguity. I'm open to other ways of wording or organizing the lead if you have other ideas but I think the title and link should stay at least.
Soapwort (
talk)
03:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Apologies if I am missing an obvious reference guide or similar, but I have searched for one before posting this. I am unsure of how to reffer to the sources and citations used, for ease of understanding I have decided to refer to the citation number as of the 25th of May 2023 at 9 am Greenwich time, clarification and direct links to these sources will be provided if asked.
As of posting this the article clearly states that married LGBTQ couples now have the right to jointly adopt children since 2023 in the first paragraph with clarification that they have full adoption rights/ the child does not need to be related to either parent much later on. Yet in some places it states that a same-sex partner can only adopt their partners biological child. As the more recent sources clearly specify that the bill has already been passed with the implication that it is effective immediately, why is the article still maintaining that stepchild adoptions are the only available form of adoption for married same-sex couples?
It would be prudent to not use citation [53], [54], [55], [60], and [63] as the sources for adoption rights in 2023. Instead, they are now relevant in regards to adoption when same-sex marriage was first legalised and leading up to and part of May 2023. Citations [1], [66], [67], and [119] seem more useful for the situation during and after May 2023.
Similarly, the use of citation [63] to state that no legalisation to codify the court ruling seems outdated, as citations [66] and [67] are used in the next paragraph to support the statement that legalisation in support of said ruling has been passed, with the implication that it became effective immediately. Unless there is a difference larger than minor semantics between passing and codifying a legalisation these two statements seem to contradict each other.
As such I propose a larger overhaul of the [Adoption and family planning] subcategory to update it in regards to what is the status of adoption rights in 2023 and what it was before that using more precise language. Similar edits seem to be needed in other places too. Furthermore, a complete rewrite of everything adoption-related in the [Adoption and family planning] subcategory that increases the coherency without losing any information anlog the way would be personally appreciated. Citations [1], [66], [67], and [119] seem to be the most suited for the current status while citations [53], [54], [55], [60], and [63] seem to be better suited for the historical background. Some of the more recent citations refer to the same source without any jumps and just linking to it without retrieval date, that should also be undertaken.
I am willing to do all of this myself, but as these would be major edits I want at the minimum some feedback beforehand in this plan so that I don't do a mistake or preferably someone more experienced in editing takes on some of the more tricky parts. 176.10.220.162 ( talk) 09:16, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Can someone add information to the "Legality of same-sex sexual activity" section about the history of the current legal status? I gather from a novel I'm reading that it was illegal at least as recently as the late 1970s. Largoplazo ( talk) 13:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
therefore [ exporting] anti-homosexuality laws throughout the British Empire....just saying --- Cat12zu3 ( talk) 11:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
The majority of Taiwanese people reject the gay agenda in favor of promoting traditional ancient Chinese family values based on the ancient Chinese culture of Confucius. And because of this Confucian culture of politeness, the Taiwanese people are, in general, polite to everyone including the fringe minority of gays living in Taiwan. But this culture of politeness should not be seen as “gay friendly” since the majority of Taiwanese voters have repeatedly voted against any gay marriage and any gay agenda.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46329877
https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2018/11/25/taiwan-gay-marriage-orig-acl.cnn
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:B0C5:E456:D8E6:CD5A:4793:668A ( talk) 21:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
What does "LGBT people in Taiwan are regarded as the most comprehensive" mean? Comprehensive people? That's ridiculous. I'd say you guys overdid it. Again. Cyanmax ( talk) 06:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Cyanmax: I don't understand why you had revert so many since today. Since you came to this page early this year, you had some wrong info from ILGA, in particular the year of criminalization, which is 1912. ILGA had rely mostly on english source for early historical history, which ILGA could erred on this. I'm find it puzzling that you claimed Academica Sinica from ROC Taiwan itself is not reliable. Do you know Chinese language? Any source to back up "1907" against reputable source, albeit Chinese language however still allowed per WP:NOENG about decriminzation in Greater China in 1912? I'm actually took the WP:RS source from zh:台灣LGBT歷史#中華民國政府統治(解嚴以前) which are still there now. I'm actually a chinese speaker too. (I don't like to say it out language/ethnic/race, ashamed and not proud, for some reasons, such as myself hospitalized for Wuhan pneumonia in bad shape, I ashamed to name myself actual ethnic/racial group, and would rather called myself Asian (just like some other Asians post-2020 & Europeans post-2022) --- Cat12zu3 ( talk) 11:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Chinese speaker or not, that's not relevant. Could you provide English sources so we can all understand them? xiexie.certainly show you don't know about WP:NOENG, you had not been fully aware of it...
My pronouns are he/himnecessary Special:Diff/1232212508?...
I saw User:Rolando 1208 revert, Rolando 1208 has only 612 edits, and apparently not seen WP:NOENG.