This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act 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 rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
I knew this would come up. This is an issue where opponents are vocal in their opposition, but proponents, however many there may be, are mostly silent. Believe me, I've been trying to maintain neutrality. I haven't been able to find a single company in support of HB 2 publicly. That's not to say they're not out there, only that they lack notoriety, aren't published in the media, or both.
If anyone has sources that should be included, whether they are critical of HB 2 or otherwise, please add them yourself or provide them to me and I will add them. Dmarquard ( talk) 02:43, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
The roll-call vote for the state House of Reps is here: http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/voteHistory/RollCallVoteTranscript.pl?sSession=2015E2&sChamber=H&RCS=9
It shows that 10 of the 35 Democrats who voted on the bill voted in favor of it.
These sentences, or something close to them, keep getting deleted:
A contentious element of the bill is the part that eliminates anti-discrimination protections for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, and legislates that individuals only use bathrooms that correspond to their biological gender. This has been criticized because it prevents transgender people from using the bathroom of their new gender. [1] [2] [3]
If anyone has a proposal for how to improve this, please explain. As far as I can see, this is a straightforward summary of what is contentious about the bill, and it uses plain language to express the key elements, and contentious elements, of it. User:AHC300 keeps deleting it and has not explained why. The lead is supposed to sum up the most important parts of the topic and outline the controversies without engaging in them. Thanks. Cleopatran Apocalypse ( talk) 02:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
With the impact of HB2 just starting to come to fruition, I've added an "Impact" section to the article. I encourage everyone reading this to expand upon it. Dmarquard ( talk)
Rather than continuing to quote updated estimates of economic impact, I think it might be more useful to start an inventory. I've seen several summary amounts but haven't yet seen anyone actually post a breakdown of their numbers.
So far, some of what we know:
who | what | how much |
---|---|---|
Braeburn Pharmaceuticals | reconsidering their plans to build a US$20 million manufacturing and research facility in Durham County | $20 million |
High Point Market | customers are boycotting their bi-annual event | unknown |
Southern Sociological Society | considering canceling their event | unknown |
who | what | where | estimated loss |
---|---|---|---|
PayPal | canceled a planned expansion | Charlotte | $$? |
Deutsche Bank | halted a planned expansion | Cary | $$?? |
Community Transportation Association of America | re-located weeklong event for 1000 people | Wake County | $1.7 million |
Record Store Day” | canceled three-day event | Raleigh | $191,000 |
(four unknown events | events canceled according to Raleigh Visitor's Bureau | Raleigh | $700,000 |
WDYT? Mamburn ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
There should be a separate article, or at least a substantial section within this article, on Charlotte Ordinance 7056. There is a great deal of misinformation about HB 2, and explaining 7056 would go a long way to clarifying the reason that the portion of HB 2 (that part that most people approve of; see article) was adopted. 174.25.31.20 ( talk) 21:39, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Referring to the sections that exist in the article at present:
-sche ( talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if this merits mention in the article or not, but several media, including The News & Observer and WNCT, have noted that calls to a hotline for transgender people who are considering suicide increased after HB2 passed (they also note the statistic that 41% of trans people attempt suicide). -sche ( talk) 21:07, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The long paragraph beginning "In response to Target's new policy..." details an attempted non-governmental, nationwide boycott of the Target corporation, which is off-topic in an article about a law passed by the government of North Carolina, AFAICT. I propose that it be moved to Target Corporation#.22Bathroom_policy.22_and_boycott, where it is relevant (and where much of it is already present). -sche ( talk) 21:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
While this seems to have been a big bugbear for some people in 2016 it needs radical pruning now, I think. The article is ludicrous long and full of trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.189.105 ( talk) 00:43, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act 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 rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
I knew this would come up. This is an issue where opponents are vocal in their opposition, but proponents, however many there may be, are mostly silent. Believe me, I've been trying to maintain neutrality. I haven't been able to find a single company in support of HB 2 publicly. That's not to say they're not out there, only that they lack notoriety, aren't published in the media, or both.
If anyone has sources that should be included, whether they are critical of HB 2 or otherwise, please add them yourself or provide them to me and I will add them. Dmarquard ( talk) 02:43, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
The roll-call vote for the state House of Reps is here: http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/voteHistory/RollCallVoteTranscript.pl?sSession=2015E2&sChamber=H&RCS=9
It shows that 10 of the 35 Democrats who voted on the bill voted in favor of it.
These sentences, or something close to them, keep getting deleted:
A contentious element of the bill is the part that eliminates anti-discrimination protections for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, and legislates that individuals only use bathrooms that correspond to their biological gender. This has been criticized because it prevents transgender people from using the bathroom of their new gender. [1] [2] [3]
If anyone has a proposal for how to improve this, please explain. As far as I can see, this is a straightforward summary of what is contentious about the bill, and it uses plain language to express the key elements, and contentious elements, of it. User:AHC300 keeps deleting it and has not explained why. The lead is supposed to sum up the most important parts of the topic and outline the controversies without engaging in them. Thanks. Cleopatran Apocalypse ( talk) 02:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
With the impact of HB2 just starting to come to fruition, I've added an "Impact" section to the article. I encourage everyone reading this to expand upon it. Dmarquard ( talk)
Rather than continuing to quote updated estimates of economic impact, I think it might be more useful to start an inventory. I've seen several summary amounts but haven't yet seen anyone actually post a breakdown of their numbers.
So far, some of what we know:
who | what | how much |
---|---|---|
Braeburn Pharmaceuticals | reconsidering their plans to build a US$20 million manufacturing and research facility in Durham County | $20 million |
High Point Market | customers are boycotting their bi-annual event | unknown |
Southern Sociological Society | considering canceling their event | unknown |
who | what | where | estimated loss |
---|---|---|---|
PayPal | canceled a planned expansion | Charlotte | $$? |
Deutsche Bank | halted a planned expansion | Cary | $$?? |
Community Transportation Association of America | re-located weeklong event for 1000 people | Wake County | $1.7 million |
Record Store Day” | canceled three-day event | Raleigh | $191,000 |
(four unknown events | events canceled according to Raleigh Visitor's Bureau | Raleigh | $700,000 |
WDYT? Mamburn ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
There should be a separate article, or at least a substantial section within this article, on Charlotte Ordinance 7056. There is a great deal of misinformation about HB 2, and explaining 7056 would go a long way to clarifying the reason that the portion of HB 2 (that part that most people approve of; see article) was adopted. 174.25.31.20 ( talk) 21:39, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Referring to the sections that exist in the article at present:
-sche ( talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if this merits mention in the article or not, but several media, including The News & Observer and WNCT, have noted that calls to a hotline for transgender people who are considering suicide increased after HB2 passed (they also note the statistic that 41% of trans people attempt suicide). -sche ( talk) 21:07, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The long paragraph beginning "In response to Target's new policy..." details an attempted non-governmental, nationwide boycott of the Target corporation, which is off-topic in an article about a law passed by the government of North Carolina, AFAICT. I propose that it be moved to Target Corporation#.22Bathroom_policy.22_and_boycott, where it is relevant (and where much of it is already present). -sche ( talk) 21:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
While this seems to have been a big bugbear for some people in 2016 it needs radical pruning now, I think. The article is ludicrous long and full of trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.189.105 ( talk) 00:43, 25 March 2019 (UTC)