![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Uruguay and Victoria, Australia will have registered partnerships or civil unions by the commencement of Nov for Urugray and Dec 2007 for Australia, Victoria!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.40.222 ( talk) 13:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Added Austria to the list because sometime in 2008 registered partnerships will be avaliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.8.158 ( talk) 07:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Has Ireland passed the civil partnership/union legislation come into force as yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.59.50 ( talk) 07:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The Irish Civil Partnership Bill 2008 will be indroduced to the House on the 29th March 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.136.173 ( talk) 06:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Have these two countries passed any sort of civil union, partnership, domestic or registered partnership as yet?
(Please note that this thread has been altered by an IP user from its original version.) In 2008, progress has been made in Victoria with the Relationships Bill 2008 and the Australian Capital Territory has a very lengthy debate to provided either a registered partnership or a civil partnership (the Civil Partnership Bill 2008 is yet to be passed, at the moment at the 2nd reading - We will keep you updated).
State and/or Territory law:
Commonwealth law
Local Government or Council law
Can we write a page on Same-sex relationships in the European Union. I'd like to outline similarities, differences, and international relationship issues (i.e. same-sex couple married in Netherlands only being recognized as having a union while in Germany), as well as the status of an EU-wide push for official recognition of same-sex relationships. samwaltz ( talk) 00:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Relationships Bill 2008 in Victoria (Australia) will become affective from 1 July 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.136.173 ( talk) 06:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The ACT Civil Partnership Bill 2008 is still stalling at the 2nd reading, it might pass the legislative desk, its hard to know if the Government will intervine on it when it passes or not. The Kevin Rudd Government sayed it will allow the Bill - If no "public ceremony" is conducted, what ever that means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.136.173 ( talk) 06:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Victoria's Relationships Act 2008 will come into force from 1 December 2008. (see Victorian Legislation) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.137.77.73 ( talk) 10:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
The Australian Capital Territory provides a Civil Partnership under the Civil Partnership Act 2008 (commences on the 15 November 2008). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.85.37 ( talk) 08:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The ACT Government has just approved the Civil Partnership Act 2008 - However "ceremonies" are not allowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.255.55 ( talk) 12:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Why is Greece in the list "same-sex marriage"? I think it is a mistake...
Greece obviously belongs in the template, so would Rrius be so kind as to cease needlessly removing it? Thanks. — Nightstallion 09:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Rrius, there are two married gay couples in Greece and what you do is an insult to them. I personally know one of them. The marriage is valid, registered in the town hall and nothing was done against ANY law. What do you need more?! - Georgios.delft ( talk) 14:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC);
Queensland (Australia) is "considering" relationship registories or a domestic partnership. South Australia already has a domestic partnership since 1/6/2007. SSO QUEENSLAND CONSIDERS RELATIONSHIP REGISTER —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.111.130 ( talk) 11:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
According to the wikipedia article and this link, among others, the effective date of the law is 1 January 2009. I will try to get a better reference from someone who understands Norwegian and can therefore use the bill or Norwegian news reports for reference. - Rrius ( talk) 22:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Has Ireland provided and/or legalized Civil Partnerships yet?
And has Austria provided and/or legalized Registered Partnerships yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenlanes ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Okey doke, so I changed the header style by adding a solid background and I did it with some shade of gray (Platinum, I think) to avoid implications produced by using color and to more adequately distinguish the headers from the text. Apparently, the gray I chose was difficult for some to see. I would invite folks to make suggestions on how to distinguish the section headers. If you think I was on the right track, maybe check out a couple possible versions of the solid-background headers and suggest a good gray shade (see
User:Zuejay/sandbox3), or a different single solid color background for the section headers (see
List of colors - let me know if you'd like to see your suggestion on the template, I'll add it to the sandbox!). Or, if you think its perfect the way it is, you can certainly say so. Thanks!
Zue
Jay (
talk)
22:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
PS - If anyone knows how to left align the text for the US under "Recognition granted,
same-sex marriage debated", I think that'd make the template look better.
Zue
Jay (
talk)
What is the wikipedia policy as concerns "issue under consideration" or "recognition debated"? I think we should limit ourselves to parliamentary debates only, or bills introduced into parliamentary committees. Wikipedia should be precise and as most objective as possible. The definition of debate is way too vague. Who is debating? Politicians? Parties? the Press? the LGBT groups? Probably even some people in Russia and Iran, Saudi Arabia and Congo are debating some form of union for homosexuals, but this does not mean this debate is leading to anywhere anytime soon.
Less provocatively, in the template we have Hungary, which recently introduced partnerships and is likely not to have mariage for the next 10 years, especially if Fidesz wins next elections. In Italy Berlusconi's government is not passing any law for de facto couples, either gay or straight. Same in France, is Sarkozy in favour of gay marriage? And in Taiwan or China, is there any law pending in parliament?
My opinion is that these countries (and many others) should be removed by the sections "recognition debated" and "samesex marriage debated". There is already another page for this kind of information and it is "LGBT rights by country".
I'm waiting for your opinion. Finedelledanze ( talk) 10:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Has Denmark legalized GNMs (gender-neutral marriages) yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.229.140.62 ( talk) 10:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
An icon has been added to the top of the template. I kinda like it, but I wonder if the very long template should take up any more space where transcluded than it already does. I'm going to leave it unless others object. - Rrius ( talk) 21:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I just removed the icon, and unfortunately did not see this discussion until afterwards. I removed the icon on the following basis:
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This template is already quite large, but wouldn't it make sense to list countries that specifically outlaw gay unions in various ways? It seems like this is the next logical category after 'recognition debated'. ike9898 ( talk) 02:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
What is the current situation in Sweden - Has gender-neutral marriages been legalized there yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.64.209 ( talk) 09:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Since November SSM is being put to a vote, and will possibly be legal from 1 july 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenlanes ( talk • contribs) 06:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Given the fact that California has an initiative on the ballot that would get rid of SSM, should California be listed in the "Recognition granted, same-sex marriage debated" section? Or would that be too confusing since it is the opposite of the others on the list? - Rrius ( talk) 02:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Given the fact that California has approved Proposition 8, should California be removed off the Recognized in Some Regions on the [1] template? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spambait ( talk • contribs) 19:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Even though the election results aren't certified and there's a court challenge, the fact remains that California is not granting licenses, so why not have it reflect reality? Theknightswhosay ( talk) 06:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Uruguay and Victoria, Australia will have registered partnerships or civil unions by the commencement of Nov for Urugray and Dec 2007 for Australia, Victoria!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.40.222 ( talk) 13:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Added Austria to the list because sometime in 2008 registered partnerships will be avaliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.8.158 ( talk) 07:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Has Ireland passed the civil partnership/union legislation come into force as yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.59.50 ( talk) 07:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The Irish Civil Partnership Bill 2008 will be indroduced to the House on the 29th March 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.136.173 ( talk) 06:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Have these two countries passed any sort of civil union, partnership, domestic or registered partnership as yet?
(Please note that this thread has been altered by an IP user from its original version.) In 2008, progress has been made in Victoria with the Relationships Bill 2008 and the Australian Capital Territory has a very lengthy debate to provided either a registered partnership or a civil partnership (the Civil Partnership Bill 2008 is yet to be passed, at the moment at the 2nd reading - We will keep you updated).
State and/or Territory law:
Commonwealth law
Local Government or Council law
Can we write a page on Same-sex relationships in the European Union. I'd like to outline similarities, differences, and international relationship issues (i.e. same-sex couple married in Netherlands only being recognized as having a union while in Germany), as well as the status of an EU-wide push for official recognition of same-sex relationships. samwaltz ( talk) 00:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Relationships Bill 2008 in Victoria (Australia) will become affective from 1 July 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.136.173 ( talk) 06:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The ACT Civil Partnership Bill 2008 is still stalling at the 2nd reading, it might pass the legislative desk, its hard to know if the Government will intervine on it when it passes or not. The Kevin Rudd Government sayed it will allow the Bill - If no "public ceremony" is conducted, what ever that means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.136.173 ( talk) 06:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Victoria's Relationships Act 2008 will come into force from 1 December 2008. (see Victorian Legislation) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.137.77.73 ( talk) 10:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
The Australian Capital Territory provides a Civil Partnership under the Civil Partnership Act 2008 (commences on the 15 November 2008). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.85.37 ( talk) 08:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The ACT Government has just approved the Civil Partnership Act 2008 - However "ceremonies" are not allowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.255.55 ( talk) 12:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Why is Greece in the list "same-sex marriage"? I think it is a mistake...
Greece obviously belongs in the template, so would Rrius be so kind as to cease needlessly removing it? Thanks. — Nightstallion 09:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Rrius, there are two married gay couples in Greece and what you do is an insult to them. I personally know one of them. The marriage is valid, registered in the town hall and nothing was done against ANY law. What do you need more?! - Georgios.delft ( talk) 14:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC);
Queensland (Australia) is "considering" relationship registories or a domestic partnership. South Australia already has a domestic partnership since 1/6/2007. SSO QUEENSLAND CONSIDERS RELATIONSHIP REGISTER —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.111.130 ( talk) 11:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
According to the wikipedia article and this link, among others, the effective date of the law is 1 January 2009. I will try to get a better reference from someone who understands Norwegian and can therefore use the bill or Norwegian news reports for reference. - Rrius ( talk) 22:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Has Ireland provided and/or legalized Civil Partnerships yet?
And has Austria provided and/or legalized Registered Partnerships yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenlanes ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Okey doke, so I changed the header style by adding a solid background and I did it with some shade of gray (Platinum, I think) to avoid implications produced by using color and to more adequately distinguish the headers from the text. Apparently, the gray I chose was difficult for some to see. I would invite folks to make suggestions on how to distinguish the section headers. If you think I was on the right track, maybe check out a couple possible versions of the solid-background headers and suggest a good gray shade (see
User:Zuejay/sandbox3), or a different single solid color background for the section headers (see
List of colors - let me know if you'd like to see your suggestion on the template, I'll add it to the sandbox!). Or, if you think its perfect the way it is, you can certainly say so. Thanks!
Zue
Jay (
talk)
22:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
PS - If anyone knows how to left align the text for the US under "Recognition granted,
same-sex marriage debated", I think that'd make the template look better.
Zue
Jay (
talk)
What is the wikipedia policy as concerns "issue under consideration" or "recognition debated"? I think we should limit ourselves to parliamentary debates only, or bills introduced into parliamentary committees. Wikipedia should be precise and as most objective as possible. The definition of debate is way too vague. Who is debating? Politicians? Parties? the Press? the LGBT groups? Probably even some people in Russia and Iran, Saudi Arabia and Congo are debating some form of union for homosexuals, but this does not mean this debate is leading to anywhere anytime soon.
Less provocatively, in the template we have Hungary, which recently introduced partnerships and is likely not to have mariage for the next 10 years, especially if Fidesz wins next elections. In Italy Berlusconi's government is not passing any law for de facto couples, either gay or straight. Same in France, is Sarkozy in favour of gay marriage? And in Taiwan or China, is there any law pending in parliament?
My opinion is that these countries (and many others) should be removed by the sections "recognition debated" and "samesex marriage debated". There is already another page for this kind of information and it is "LGBT rights by country".
I'm waiting for your opinion. Finedelledanze ( talk) 10:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Has Denmark legalized GNMs (gender-neutral marriages) yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.229.140.62 ( talk) 10:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
An icon has been added to the top of the template. I kinda like it, but I wonder if the very long template should take up any more space where transcluded than it already does. I'm going to leave it unless others object. - Rrius ( talk) 21:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I just removed the icon, and unfortunately did not see this discussion until afterwards. I removed the icon on the following basis:
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This template is already quite large, but wouldn't it make sense to list countries that specifically outlaw gay unions in various ways? It seems like this is the next logical category after 'recognition debated'. ike9898 ( talk) 02:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
What is the current situation in Sweden - Has gender-neutral marriages been legalized there yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.64.209 ( talk) 09:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Since November SSM is being put to a vote, and will possibly be legal from 1 july 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenlanes ( talk • contribs) 06:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Given the fact that California has an initiative on the ballot that would get rid of SSM, should California be listed in the "Recognition granted, same-sex marriage debated" section? Or would that be too confusing since it is the opposite of the others on the list? - Rrius ( talk) 02:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Given the fact that California has approved Proposition 8, should California be removed off the Recognized in Some Regions on the [1] template? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spambait ( talk • contribs) 19:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Even though the election results aren't certified and there's a court challenge, the fact remains that California is not granting licenses, so why not have it reflect reality? Theknightswhosay ( talk) 06:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)