This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Same-sex marriage in the United States.svg file. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about same-sex unions. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this file. You may wish to ask factual questions about same-sex unions at the Reference desk. |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, Template talk:Map of same-sex marriage in the United States redirects here. |
![]() | LGBT studies File‑class | ||||||
|
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
People have often asked how to edit this map, so I am making this guide. Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 23:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Any XML editor will work. I use EditiX-Free-XML Editor2009. Opening the file with Notepad or WordPad works as well.
Generally, most of the changes you will need to make involve changing striping (or lack of striping). Most logical striping combinations already exist; creating new two- and three-stripe combinations is easy, though creating a new four-stripe pattern would require some familarity with SVG creation.
The legal status of same-sex marriages and unions in each state is indicated by a fill pattern selected by one of the following codes.
marriage
: Same-sex marriagesforeign
: Foreign same-sex marriages recognizedtransition
: State in process of legalizing same-sex marriagesforeignstay
: Ruling ordering recognition of foreign same-sex marriages stayedmarriagestay
: Judicial ruling against a same-sex marriage ban stayed pending appealmarriageban
: Constitution or statute bans same-sex marriagenolaw
: No specific law regarding same-sex marriagePatterns for compound legal statuses exist: foreign-marriageban
and foreignstay-marriageban
are included.
New multi-color combinations for compound statuses to put in the SVG defs section are easy to construct:
<g id="foreign-marriageban">
<use xlink:href="#part1of2" class="foreign"/>
<use xlink:href="#part2of2" class="marriageban"/>
</g>
The pattern may be invoked and its center positioned so that it fully overlaps the clipping path used to define the shape of a state or territory.
<!-- Missouri -->
<g clip-path="url(#clipPathMO)">
<use xlink:href="#foreign-marriageban" transform="translate(538,297)"/>
</g>
The transformation may include scaling or rotation to enhance the appearance of small, striped regions without fear of disturbing the region's outline:
<use xlink:href="#foreign-marriageban" transform="translate(97.5,120) scale(0.8) rotate(-65)"/>
In regard to the translations: Except for Alaska and Hawaii, all the US states use the top-left of the image as the origin. Alaska, Hawaii and the insular territories have their origins located at the top-left of their insets. This makes them easy to move.
The color palette for the states and territories is defined entirely within the CSS near the top. Only the inset lines and the white circle outline for the enlarged, circular representation of Washington D.C. have hard-coded colors.
When editing the SVG file with Notepad, say, it is helpful to have the SVG file loaded into your web browser. You can usually load the image simply by dragging the SVG file's icon into the browser window. Whenever you save the changes you've made, press F5 in the browser to refresh the image.
When you are satisfied with the changes, check it carefully, use the W3 Validator and if all is well, upload the new version.
So that the SVG file can easily be edited even with crude text editors like Notepad, it is helpful to use CRLF for the line endings.
Feel free to amend or add information as needed. Rreagan007 ( talk) 17:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
New information from American Samoa: AG of American Samoa reviewing decision, Territorial Government to provide comment soon: http://www.samoanews.com/content/en/ag-reviews-supreme-court%E2%80%99s-same-sex-marriage-ruling It appears that we might be able to change the color of American Samoa on the map in the very near future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
UPDATE: Superior Court Judge orders marriage in the U.S. Virgin Islands within 8 days. See link: http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/iphone/homepage.aspx#_articleb6e76b7d-c692-4c94-ae4e-4df830d22451/waarticleb6e76b7d-c692-4c94-ae4e-4df830d22451/b6e76b7d-c692-4c94-ae4e-4df830d22451/true Awyow ( talk) 12:44, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Mapp's order isn't in legal effect due to the Lt. Gov's absence. He has to sign it as well and the next in the line of succession refused to sign on. However, the court order applies to the entirety of the territory. The article makes no reference to it only applying to one jurisdiction. On a separate note: I'm monitoring news stories heavily about Marriage in the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa. Awyow ( talk) 17:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Also, Marriage is set to begin in Puerto Rico on Wednesday, July 15th. http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2015/07/08/marriage-equality-victory-puerto-rico Awyow ( talk) 17:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Please join discussion pertaining to whether or not this map should be removed from the Same-sex marriage in the United States article [6]. Prcc27 ( talk) 07:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
According to Equality Kansas, the state is now recognizing same-sex couples' marriages, meaning only the territories are holding out. But the source does note that Governor Brownback is refusing to confirm the change in policy. D ralwi k| Have a Chat 21:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Kansas is medium complying but until I see Kansas being force by judge Crabtree or Sam Brownback saying he is going to comply I say to left Kansas purple as is not complying fully.-- Allan120102 ( talk) 00:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Purple is okay for now, but I support Kansas going to dark blue as soon as Brownback concedes. The standard of all benefits going into effect has never been the standard on this map. The standard has been marriage and recognition, period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 04:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
BREAKING: Kansas recognition http://eqks.org/breaking-news-state-of-kansas-recognizes-same-sex-marriages/ I agree with Kudzu, Kansas should be blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 16:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Consensus is that Kansas should be blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
It's not complicated. You have zero evidence anyone is being denied any benefits, and no one agrees with you that as of today Kansas shouldn't be blue. Give it up, honey. 68.199.96.18 ( talk) 23:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Prcc27, most state agencies in Kansas are complying as of today and Gov. Brownback conceded and issued an executive order protecting clergymen and religious organizations in the State of Kansas. Brownback stated that Kansas must abide by the U.S. Constitution and the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. https://governor.ks.gov/media-room/executive-orders Your standard of 100% = recognition has never been the standard for this map. From the article you just cited, it said that the department is implementing changes. If you are so concerned over tax filing, then create a map for "Joint Tax Filing for Same Sex Couples in the United States." This map is for marriage and recognition, not implementation of departmental changes for certain benefits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 00:17, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
My mistake, I linked the executive order and not the press release and statements by Brownback. http://governor.ks.gov/media-room/media-releases/2015/07/07/governor-sam-brownback-issues-executive-order-protecting-the-religious-freedom-of-kansas-clergy-and-religious-organizations Awyow ( talk) 00:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
From the other Talk page, posted by Htonl: Kansas has now conceded, apparently:
The order comes a day after Brownback quietly allowed state agencies to comply with the high court's ruling, so couples can now do things like place state workers’ spouses on health care plans.
[...]
Eileen Hawley, Brownback’s spokeswoman, on Tuesday downplayed the move to finally implement the high court's decision, saying it wasn’t a “directive” from the governor’s office. They had been undergoing “a thoughtful process” to comply with the June 26 high court ruling, she said.
“We are a nation of laws and we will comply with the laws of the nation,” Hawley said.
Awyow ( talk) 13:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
The Governor has signed the executive order, but the Lt. Governor is out of the territory, and the President of the Senate (his designated replacement) won't sign off of the order becoming effective. Mw843 ( talk) 19:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
According to this article, recognition is occurring with benefits. The executive order will likely be signed on Wednesday, July 15th. http://stcroixsource.com/content/news/local-news/2015/07/13/superior-court-move-forward-same-sex-marriage-licenses Awyow ( talk) 03:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The access to benefits was your standard of recognition over the Kansas dispute. "The ruling also gives lawfully married same sex couples the equal rights to put their spouses on their health insurance, designate beneficiaries, designate individuals to make decisions on their behalf in their time of illness, and file join tax returns at Bureau of Internal Revenue." -From the article. Awyow ( talk) 05:16, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I support USVI going to light blue, if not dark blue. Plus the Executive Order will likely be signed tomorrow. I'm fine with the Northern Mariana Islands remaining pink for now. American Samoa is still ambiguous. It has not been determined whether the ruling applies, still waiting on their AG to make a statement on the matter. Plus the precedent would apply if American Samoans are deemed as citizens in a ruling from a current lawsuit in the DC Circuit. Awyow ( talk) 19:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
→:::You're not addressing what I'm saying, at all. You have this idea in your head that certain colors represent certain notions. They represent what we want them to represent. Right now you and others are just having a juvenile edit war for a graphic which should have long since been retired. There are three American territories that don't have full, total, complete marriage equality in practice. All that requires is three footnotes, not a symposium over what to color each of the three. I would change the map myself but don't have the ability to do so. There should be two colors, dark blue and gray, and there should be three footnotes for the three gray territories. But since I have no ability to change the map I'll just enjoy watching people having conniptions over the colors of the three itty bitty territories.
Per the "standard" y'all were allegedly going by, i.e. whether the governor had "conceded", Virgin Islands should be dark blue. The Governor has more than conceded... he signed an executive order. It's a done deal. Yes, the Lt. gov needs to sign that he witnessed the gov's signature, but that is pretty much the definition of a "mere formality." Marriage licenses have already been issued to same sex couples for goodness sake. Please follow "your own" rules, and someone please make VI dark blue so we can tidy up the map and its notes for now. The last two territories will probably not be resolved for some time. Njsustain ( talk) 23:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
You are redundant, annoying, and childish. Stop reverting. Everyone is against you. You've lost. If you keep reverting I'll ask administration to intervene as clearly you are the only person who thinks VI is not fullys legal and cannot produce a source to prove anyone is being denied rights despite the fact (that you conceded to) that licenses are being given. You can't expect anyone to believe recognition isn't taking place for licenses the government itself is giving out unless you have a source saying so. THE CONSENSUS IS AGAINST YOU, PERIOD. STOP!!!
Everyone isn't against me, at least one other user agrees with me that performance is legal but recognition is not. Either way, this isn't a democracy. All sources on the current status of same-sex marriage only mention performance so you are the one that needs to provide a source that they recognize. It is WP:OR to make those assumptions without a reliable source. Also, I will report you to an admin if you keep shouting at me.... Prcc27 ( talk) 23:46, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
IMO, the Virgin Islands footnote completely mis-characterises the situation in USVI, and needs to be removed. Mw843 ( talk) 23:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
You're the least collegial editor I've ever seen on wp. You are always violating Wp: own, cuvil, OR, concensus, etc. You don't get that this isn't a wp:bureaucracy or courtroom. Everything you do us contrary to improving wp. I have no interest nor need in complying with your version of being civil, in which everyone must do what you want but you need not consider anyone else's opinions. Njsustain ( talk) 07:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
The caption for a graphic is meant to explain what is shown in the graphic, in order to enhance an article, in this case states in which SSM is performed or recognized. This graphic is therefore meant to show which states (and by extension territories and DC) SSM is performed or recognized in. Statements about federal government recognition are appropriate for an article on SSM in the US, not for a graphic about SSM in the US by state. Therefore it is appropriate to remove such a statement.
Please note that consensus is not required in order to edit articles, nor is an RfC required to do so. There is no consensus to have the statement remain in. I addressed the statement, and have a rational reason why it should not be in this graphic. Repeating that the fact is "important" does not change the fact that such a statement belongs not in this graphic, but in an appropriate article.
Similarly, neither this graphic nor its associated article are meant to show which native tribes perform same sex marriages, exactly like it is not meant to show which churches perform same sex marriages, which catering halls welcome same sex marriage, nor what the price of tea in China is. It's been removed from the graphic because it is not relevant to the graphic. Yes, it's "important", but that doesn't mean that it belongs in the caption of this graphic.
As per the guidelines (not rules... they are NOT rules) of WP, if anyone has a logical reason to disagree with what I've said here, please discuss them here in a rational conversation, rather than simply revert, complain that anyone who has a different opinion is "shouting", post a litany of WP guidelines, and calling them "rules" as if you are going to tattle on me to the teacher. Njsustain ( talk) 14:00, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Currently the map has different colours for the CNMI and American Samoa. One is captioned, "Northern Mariana Islands is determining how to apply Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges. Same sex marriages are currently neither recognized nor licensed," while the other is captioned, "Local authorities are discussing the applicability of U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges to American Samoa." To me those sound like they're basically the same thing, and might as well be the same colour. If there is some relevant difference that can be articulated, it's certainly not clear from the captions. - htonl ( talk) 03:00, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
That's understandable, though I still think needlessly complicated when there is only one non-complying entity for each color. But in any case VI should be dark blue now, and the map should be changed anyway as it's just so hard to see. With AS being small and separate from the other states, the purple is indistinguishable from the dark blue. And NMI are just too small to see regardless of how they're colored. Can the map be edited so the inside of the polygons they're held in are colored in rather than just the tiny shapes? Then NMI could be a pink area of the map, and AS yellow or orange perhaps. Njsustain ( talk) 16:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Based on recent discussions, I felt this was much clearer. Obviously having dark blue in the key was superfluous: It's clear in the graphic that virtually the whole country has the same status, and it is well known to even someone living under a rock that the status is full and utter legality. So I simply stated that same sex marriage is legal *except* for those three territories listed in the legend. Since each color has only one territory, there is no point having a "generic" description of what each color means. And since the excepted territories are so tiny and not generally identifiable, it's simply stated in the key which territory each of the three colors is referring to and what the current situation is there. So in practice this is more of a table with a graphic attached to it, rather than vice versa. But that is the reality now.
When the eight day period is up in VI (should be very soon) that whole line including the color block can just be deleted. If someone could change the light blue to dark blue in the graphic, great. If not, so be it, it can stay light blue for all time, but the legality is still the same there as in the rest of the country. Njsustain ( talk) 19:42, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
@Prcc27: Again, if you don't want to change VI to dark blue, it's your choice to refrain from doing so, but you can't claim the VI governor's order is "pending" without any evidence, as that is OR. However, a footnote in the legend that you feel the order's implementation is "unconfirmed" would be a reasonable compromise. I don't believe that is true so will not make such an edit myself. Njsustain ( talk) 05:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm proposing a radically new legend which I hope can be all things to all people and avoid any future edit wars. It's also in my sandbox. I'm asking for input before making edits to the files.
[deleted... obsolete]
Njsustain ( talk) 15:30, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
So.... I realize not many people care anymore, but the remaining colors really should be updated.
Now, I can create the file with whatever colors, but can only update it to another filename, not this one. If anyone can offer me any advice on how to make this happen I will do it. Njsustain ( talk) 18:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
...and removed the map from the two en.wp articles where it was still present, for the reasons discussed in several of the sections above. Let's see if it sticks. - htonl ( talk) 16:57, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
First same-sex marriage took place in Northern Mariana Islands on July 22. See [14], [15]. Ron 1987 ( talk) 06:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
OK. It has been basically a month since the Supreme Court Decision. As far as I know, the following statements are true
If these four points are true, then as was noted elsewhere in the thread... Make everything that isn't American Samoa Blue, pick a color that isn't Blue (Pink???) for American Samoa and basically leave it alone.... Naraht ( talk) 18:31, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore issued an order today (Wednesday 06 January 2016) stating the a March 2015 order by the Supreme Court was still in effect and that Probate Judges cannot issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples. http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/01/roy_moore_says_probate_judges.html Baltimatt ( talk) 19:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
http://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-virgin-islands-daily-news/20150727/281517929821418/TextView I think this should clear up any remaining conflict, if such still exists. 107.199.150.70 ( talk) 19:49, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Should Alabama be colored purple again due to the State Supreme Court going rogue again? It was purple back in 2015 when the State Supreme Court went against a Federal Court ruling (U.S. District Court) and it is once again going against a Federal Court ruling (SCOTUS). [16] Prcc27 ( talk) 08:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
We weren't even bothering to use this map in the SSM in the US article any more, so I changed the scope to cover tribal govts, Alabaman counties, etc. and put it back in the article. My coding isn't as elegant as what it has for the states, but it's functional. The tribal govts are all the main ones (all the ones with populations > 5,000, plus some smaller), but even then some might should be changed from grey to purple or vice versa, due to poor coverage in RS's and uncertainty in some of the local laws (some of which have probably not yet been tried in court). Hopefully having them on the map will encourage ppl to find out more than what I was able to on my own, or even motivate the res to make statements. I also changed American Samoa to grey. There's nothing complicated about it -- there is no SSM there, Oberfell has never been applied. Unless things change ... — kwami ( talk) 23:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Since the landmark case of Obergefell v. Hodges, Two states - Mississippi and North Carolina - have made it legal for State officials to decline to marry couples of whose marriage they disapprove of, if it conflicted with there religious beliefs. Although most of these laws do not explicitly state who they are targeting, it is obvious they were created to target the LGBT community. As a result of these laws being passed, I would like to recommend a change to the key of the map, and the map itself. Add a new designation of marriage legality reflecting the laws in these states in the key. The color for these states could be a lighter shade of blue, and maybe state as a description in the key; "State has a targeted religious exemption law that permits state and local officials to decline to marry couples of whose marriage they disapprove." Kansas does have a similar law in place, although this law only allows faith-based agencies to deny wedding services. Sources are linked right here: [17] [18] Religious Liberty Accommodations Act Senate Bill 2 (North Carolina General Assembly, 2015 Session) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AStupidZoomer,NowLeaveMeAlongStinkyBoomer ( talk • contribs) 08:22, 13 September 2020 (UTC) <
If the Respect for Marriage Act passes, American Samoa should be purple. Prcc27 ( talk) 22:18, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Same-sex marriage in the United States.svg file. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about same-sex unions. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this file. You may wish to ask factual questions about same-sex unions at the Reference desk. |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, Template talk:Map of same-sex marriage in the United States redirects here. |
![]() | LGBT studies File‑class | ||||||
|
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
People have often asked how to edit this map, so I am making this guide. Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 23:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Any XML editor will work. I use EditiX-Free-XML Editor2009. Opening the file with Notepad or WordPad works as well.
Generally, most of the changes you will need to make involve changing striping (or lack of striping). Most logical striping combinations already exist; creating new two- and three-stripe combinations is easy, though creating a new four-stripe pattern would require some familarity with SVG creation.
The legal status of same-sex marriages and unions in each state is indicated by a fill pattern selected by one of the following codes.
marriage
: Same-sex marriagesforeign
: Foreign same-sex marriages recognizedtransition
: State in process of legalizing same-sex marriagesforeignstay
: Ruling ordering recognition of foreign same-sex marriages stayedmarriagestay
: Judicial ruling against a same-sex marriage ban stayed pending appealmarriageban
: Constitution or statute bans same-sex marriagenolaw
: No specific law regarding same-sex marriagePatterns for compound legal statuses exist: foreign-marriageban
and foreignstay-marriageban
are included.
New multi-color combinations for compound statuses to put in the SVG defs section are easy to construct:
<g id="foreign-marriageban">
<use xlink:href="#part1of2" class="foreign"/>
<use xlink:href="#part2of2" class="marriageban"/>
</g>
The pattern may be invoked and its center positioned so that it fully overlaps the clipping path used to define the shape of a state or territory.
<!-- Missouri -->
<g clip-path="url(#clipPathMO)">
<use xlink:href="#foreign-marriageban" transform="translate(538,297)"/>
</g>
The transformation may include scaling or rotation to enhance the appearance of small, striped regions without fear of disturbing the region's outline:
<use xlink:href="#foreign-marriageban" transform="translate(97.5,120) scale(0.8) rotate(-65)"/>
In regard to the translations: Except for Alaska and Hawaii, all the US states use the top-left of the image as the origin. Alaska, Hawaii and the insular territories have their origins located at the top-left of their insets. This makes them easy to move.
The color palette for the states and territories is defined entirely within the CSS near the top. Only the inset lines and the white circle outline for the enlarged, circular representation of Washington D.C. have hard-coded colors.
When editing the SVG file with Notepad, say, it is helpful to have the SVG file loaded into your web browser. You can usually load the image simply by dragging the SVG file's icon into the browser window. Whenever you save the changes you've made, press F5 in the browser to refresh the image.
When you are satisfied with the changes, check it carefully, use the W3 Validator and if all is well, upload the new version.
So that the SVG file can easily be edited even with crude text editors like Notepad, it is helpful to use CRLF for the line endings.
Feel free to amend or add information as needed. Rreagan007 ( talk) 17:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
New information from American Samoa: AG of American Samoa reviewing decision, Territorial Government to provide comment soon: http://www.samoanews.com/content/en/ag-reviews-supreme-court%E2%80%99s-same-sex-marriage-ruling It appears that we might be able to change the color of American Samoa on the map in the very near future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
UPDATE: Superior Court Judge orders marriage in the U.S. Virgin Islands within 8 days. See link: http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/iphone/homepage.aspx#_articleb6e76b7d-c692-4c94-ae4e-4df830d22451/waarticleb6e76b7d-c692-4c94-ae4e-4df830d22451/b6e76b7d-c692-4c94-ae4e-4df830d22451/true Awyow ( talk) 12:44, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Mapp's order isn't in legal effect due to the Lt. Gov's absence. He has to sign it as well and the next in the line of succession refused to sign on. However, the court order applies to the entirety of the territory. The article makes no reference to it only applying to one jurisdiction. On a separate note: I'm monitoring news stories heavily about Marriage in the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa. Awyow ( talk) 17:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Also, Marriage is set to begin in Puerto Rico on Wednesday, July 15th. http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2015/07/08/marriage-equality-victory-puerto-rico Awyow ( talk) 17:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Please join discussion pertaining to whether or not this map should be removed from the Same-sex marriage in the United States article [6]. Prcc27 ( talk) 07:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
According to Equality Kansas, the state is now recognizing same-sex couples' marriages, meaning only the territories are holding out. But the source does note that Governor Brownback is refusing to confirm the change in policy. D ralwi k| Have a Chat 21:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Kansas is medium complying but until I see Kansas being force by judge Crabtree or Sam Brownback saying he is going to comply I say to left Kansas purple as is not complying fully.-- Allan120102 ( talk) 00:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Purple is okay for now, but I support Kansas going to dark blue as soon as Brownback concedes. The standard of all benefits going into effect has never been the standard on this map. The standard has been marriage and recognition, period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 04:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
BREAKING: Kansas recognition http://eqks.org/breaking-news-state-of-kansas-recognizes-same-sex-marriages/ I agree with Kudzu, Kansas should be blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 16:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Consensus is that Kansas should be blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
It's not complicated. You have zero evidence anyone is being denied any benefits, and no one agrees with you that as of today Kansas shouldn't be blue. Give it up, honey. 68.199.96.18 ( talk) 23:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Prcc27, most state agencies in Kansas are complying as of today and Gov. Brownback conceded and issued an executive order protecting clergymen and religious organizations in the State of Kansas. Brownback stated that Kansas must abide by the U.S. Constitution and the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. https://governor.ks.gov/media-room/executive-orders Your standard of 100% = recognition has never been the standard for this map. From the article you just cited, it said that the department is implementing changes. If you are so concerned over tax filing, then create a map for "Joint Tax Filing for Same Sex Couples in the United States." This map is for marriage and recognition, not implementation of departmental changes for certain benefits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awyow ( talk • contribs) 00:17, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
My mistake, I linked the executive order and not the press release and statements by Brownback. http://governor.ks.gov/media-room/media-releases/2015/07/07/governor-sam-brownback-issues-executive-order-protecting-the-religious-freedom-of-kansas-clergy-and-religious-organizations Awyow ( talk) 00:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
From the other Talk page, posted by Htonl: Kansas has now conceded, apparently:
The order comes a day after Brownback quietly allowed state agencies to comply with the high court's ruling, so couples can now do things like place state workers’ spouses on health care plans.
[...]
Eileen Hawley, Brownback’s spokeswoman, on Tuesday downplayed the move to finally implement the high court's decision, saying it wasn’t a “directive” from the governor’s office. They had been undergoing “a thoughtful process” to comply with the June 26 high court ruling, she said.
“We are a nation of laws and we will comply with the laws of the nation,” Hawley said.
Awyow ( talk) 13:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
The Governor has signed the executive order, but the Lt. Governor is out of the territory, and the President of the Senate (his designated replacement) won't sign off of the order becoming effective. Mw843 ( talk) 19:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
According to this article, recognition is occurring with benefits. The executive order will likely be signed on Wednesday, July 15th. http://stcroixsource.com/content/news/local-news/2015/07/13/superior-court-move-forward-same-sex-marriage-licenses Awyow ( talk) 03:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The access to benefits was your standard of recognition over the Kansas dispute. "The ruling also gives lawfully married same sex couples the equal rights to put their spouses on their health insurance, designate beneficiaries, designate individuals to make decisions on their behalf in their time of illness, and file join tax returns at Bureau of Internal Revenue." -From the article. Awyow ( talk) 05:16, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I support USVI going to light blue, if not dark blue. Plus the Executive Order will likely be signed tomorrow. I'm fine with the Northern Mariana Islands remaining pink for now. American Samoa is still ambiguous. It has not been determined whether the ruling applies, still waiting on their AG to make a statement on the matter. Plus the precedent would apply if American Samoans are deemed as citizens in a ruling from a current lawsuit in the DC Circuit. Awyow ( talk) 19:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
→:::You're not addressing what I'm saying, at all. You have this idea in your head that certain colors represent certain notions. They represent what we want them to represent. Right now you and others are just having a juvenile edit war for a graphic which should have long since been retired. There are three American territories that don't have full, total, complete marriage equality in practice. All that requires is three footnotes, not a symposium over what to color each of the three. I would change the map myself but don't have the ability to do so. There should be two colors, dark blue and gray, and there should be three footnotes for the three gray territories. But since I have no ability to change the map I'll just enjoy watching people having conniptions over the colors of the three itty bitty territories.
Per the "standard" y'all were allegedly going by, i.e. whether the governor had "conceded", Virgin Islands should be dark blue. The Governor has more than conceded... he signed an executive order. It's a done deal. Yes, the Lt. gov needs to sign that he witnessed the gov's signature, but that is pretty much the definition of a "mere formality." Marriage licenses have already been issued to same sex couples for goodness sake. Please follow "your own" rules, and someone please make VI dark blue so we can tidy up the map and its notes for now. The last two territories will probably not be resolved for some time. Njsustain ( talk) 23:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
You are redundant, annoying, and childish. Stop reverting. Everyone is against you. You've lost. If you keep reverting I'll ask administration to intervene as clearly you are the only person who thinks VI is not fullys legal and cannot produce a source to prove anyone is being denied rights despite the fact (that you conceded to) that licenses are being given. You can't expect anyone to believe recognition isn't taking place for licenses the government itself is giving out unless you have a source saying so. THE CONSENSUS IS AGAINST YOU, PERIOD. STOP!!!
Everyone isn't against me, at least one other user agrees with me that performance is legal but recognition is not. Either way, this isn't a democracy. All sources on the current status of same-sex marriage only mention performance so you are the one that needs to provide a source that they recognize. It is WP:OR to make those assumptions without a reliable source. Also, I will report you to an admin if you keep shouting at me.... Prcc27 ( talk) 23:46, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
IMO, the Virgin Islands footnote completely mis-characterises the situation in USVI, and needs to be removed. Mw843 ( talk) 23:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
You're the least collegial editor I've ever seen on wp. You are always violating Wp: own, cuvil, OR, concensus, etc. You don't get that this isn't a wp:bureaucracy or courtroom. Everything you do us contrary to improving wp. I have no interest nor need in complying with your version of being civil, in which everyone must do what you want but you need not consider anyone else's opinions. Njsustain ( talk) 07:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
The caption for a graphic is meant to explain what is shown in the graphic, in order to enhance an article, in this case states in which SSM is performed or recognized. This graphic is therefore meant to show which states (and by extension territories and DC) SSM is performed or recognized in. Statements about federal government recognition are appropriate for an article on SSM in the US, not for a graphic about SSM in the US by state. Therefore it is appropriate to remove such a statement.
Please note that consensus is not required in order to edit articles, nor is an RfC required to do so. There is no consensus to have the statement remain in. I addressed the statement, and have a rational reason why it should not be in this graphic. Repeating that the fact is "important" does not change the fact that such a statement belongs not in this graphic, but in an appropriate article.
Similarly, neither this graphic nor its associated article are meant to show which native tribes perform same sex marriages, exactly like it is not meant to show which churches perform same sex marriages, which catering halls welcome same sex marriage, nor what the price of tea in China is. It's been removed from the graphic because it is not relevant to the graphic. Yes, it's "important", but that doesn't mean that it belongs in the caption of this graphic.
As per the guidelines (not rules... they are NOT rules) of WP, if anyone has a logical reason to disagree with what I've said here, please discuss them here in a rational conversation, rather than simply revert, complain that anyone who has a different opinion is "shouting", post a litany of WP guidelines, and calling them "rules" as if you are going to tattle on me to the teacher. Njsustain ( talk) 14:00, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Currently the map has different colours for the CNMI and American Samoa. One is captioned, "Northern Mariana Islands is determining how to apply Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges. Same sex marriages are currently neither recognized nor licensed," while the other is captioned, "Local authorities are discussing the applicability of U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges to American Samoa." To me those sound like they're basically the same thing, and might as well be the same colour. If there is some relevant difference that can be articulated, it's certainly not clear from the captions. - htonl ( talk) 03:00, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
That's understandable, though I still think needlessly complicated when there is only one non-complying entity for each color. But in any case VI should be dark blue now, and the map should be changed anyway as it's just so hard to see. With AS being small and separate from the other states, the purple is indistinguishable from the dark blue. And NMI are just too small to see regardless of how they're colored. Can the map be edited so the inside of the polygons they're held in are colored in rather than just the tiny shapes? Then NMI could be a pink area of the map, and AS yellow or orange perhaps. Njsustain ( talk) 16:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Based on recent discussions, I felt this was much clearer. Obviously having dark blue in the key was superfluous: It's clear in the graphic that virtually the whole country has the same status, and it is well known to even someone living under a rock that the status is full and utter legality. So I simply stated that same sex marriage is legal *except* for those three territories listed in the legend. Since each color has only one territory, there is no point having a "generic" description of what each color means. And since the excepted territories are so tiny and not generally identifiable, it's simply stated in the key which territory each of the three colors is referring to and what the current situation is there. So in practice this is more of a table with a graphic attached to it, rather than vice versa. But that is the reality now.
When the eight day period is up in VI (should be very soon) that whole line including the color block can just be deleted. If someone could change the light blue to dark blue in the graphic, great. If not, so be it, it can stay light blue for all time, but the legality is still the same there as in the rest of the country. Njsustain ( talk) 19:42, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
@Prcc27: Again, if you don't want to change VI to dark blue, it's your choice to refrain from doing so, but you can't claim the VI governor's order is "pending" without any evidence, as that is OR. However, a footnote in the legend that you feel the order's implementation is "unconfirmed" would be a reasonable compromise. I don't believe that is true so will not make such an edit myself. Njsustain ( talk) 05:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm proposing a radically new legend which I hope can be all things to all people and avoid any future edit wars. It's also in my sandbox. I'm asking for input before making edits to the files.
[deleted... obsolete]
Njsustain ( talk) 15:30, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
So.... I realize not many people care anymore, but the remaining colors really should be updated.
Now, I can create the file with whatever colors, but can only update it to another filename, not this one. If anyone can offer me any advice on how to make this happen I will do it. Njsustain ( talk) 18:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
...and removed the map from the two en.wp articles where it was still present, for the reasons discussed in several of the sections above. Let's see if it sticks. - htonl ( talk) 16:57, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
First same-sex marriage took place in Northern Mariana Islands on July 22. See [14], [15]. Ron 1987 ( talk) 06:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
OK. It has been basically a month since the Supreme Court Decision. As far as I know, the following statements are true
If these four points are true, then as was noted elsewhere in the thread... Make everything that isn't American Samoa Blue, pick a color that isn't Blue (Pink???) for American Samoa and basically leave it alone.... Naraht ( talk) 18:31, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore issued an order today (Wednesday 06 January 2016) stating the a March 2015 order by the Supreme Court was still in effect and that Probate Judges cannot issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples. http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/01/roy_moore_says_probate_judges.html Baltimatt ( talk) 19:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
http://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-virgin-islands-daily-news/20150727/281517929821418/TextView I think this should clear up any remaining conflict, if such still exists. 107.199.150.70 ( talk) 19:49, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Should Alabama be colored purple again due to the State Supreme Court going rogue again? It was purple back in 2015 when the State Supreme Court went against a Federal Court ruling (U.S. District Court) and it is once again going against a Federal Court ruling (SCOTUS). [16] Prcc27 ( talk) 08:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
We weren't even bothering to use this map in the SSM in the US article any more, so I changed the scope to cover tribal govts, Alabaman counties, etc. and put it back in the article. My coding isn't as elegant as what it has for the states, but it's functional. The tribal govts are all the main ones (all the ones with populations > 5,000, plus some smaller), but even then some might should be changed from grey to purple or vice versa, due to poor coverage in RS's and uncertainty in some of the local laws (some of which have probably not yet been tried in court). Hopefully having them on the map will encourage ppl to find out more than what I was able to on my own, or even motivate the res to make statements. I also changed American Samoa to grey. There's nothing complicated about it -- there is no SSM there, Oberfell has never been applied. Unless things change ... — kwami ( talk) 23:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Since the landmark case of Obergefell v. Hodges, Two states - Mississippi and North Carolina - have made it legal for State officials to decline to marry couples of whose marriage they disapprove of, if it conflicted with there religious beliefs. Although most of these laws do not explicitly state who they are targeting, it is obvious they were created to target the LGBT community. As a result of these laws being passed, I would like to recommend a change to the key of the map, and the map itself. Add a new designation of marriage legality reflecting the laws in these states in the key. The color for these states could be a lighter shade of blue, and maybe state as a description in the key; "State has a targeted religious exemption law that permits state and local officials to decline to marry couples of whose marriage they disapprove." Kansas does have a similar law in place, although this law only allows faith-based agencies to deny wedding services. Sources are linked right here: [17] [18] Religious Liberty Accommodations Act Senate Bill 2 (North Carolina General Assembly, 2015 Session) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AStupidZoomer,NowLeaveMeAlongStinkyBoomer ( talk • contribs) 08:22, 13 September 2020 (UTC) <
If the Respect for Marriage Act passes, American Samoa should be purple. Prcc27 ( talk) 22:18, 16 November 2022 (UTC)