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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Much of what I've been working on in this project has to do with pre-Stonewall lesbians, and I'm finding much of the resources for the articles I'm working on are related to men's issues. Barbara Gittings (I'm working on) and Frank Kameny (I haven't) worked together, but their articles are quite different, despite the fact that Kameny is alive and well and has his own website (hint, fellows - write to him). The Daughters of Bilitis (working on) and the Mattachine Society (haven't worked on), and The Ladder (working on) and ONE, Inc. (not working on) are also quite different also despite the fact that there seems to be a lot more information on the Mattachine Society than the DOB. Articles are only as good as people who care about them, so if any guys out there who are history buffs want to take me on in a specialized jumpaclass article competition to improve these articles, let me know. I'm working on GA or FA class for mine. I'll point you toward the references I used, assist and whatnot. It's not that I'm a sexist pig or anything - I seriously don't have the time for all the information available on the early homophile movement. My stupid job gets in the way.
So - any takers? Must I resort to insulting your mothers, dance skills, or taste in disco? Must I??? -- Moni3 ( talk) 17:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Chris Crocker (Internet celebrity) Content dispute if source of content is considered reliable to subject, need outside opinions. Posting to both wikiprojects associated with article. Benjiboi 20:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Following Wikipedia's policy for
biographies of living people, an article may categorize and/or describe a person as lesbian, gay, and/or bisexual and/or transgender if reliably sourced material indicates one of the following criteria is met:
An article may categorize and/or describe a person as transgender if reliably sourced material indicates either a self-identification as transgender/transsexual or that the person meets the description of transgender.
Comment - It looks good now, but when applied practically, as in the case of Foster, who is in a relationship of 15 years with a woman, who she's raising children with, who she addressed publicly, we're still confused as to what to do. Is this relationship notable? Is it not romantic or sexual enough? -- Moni3 ( talk) 15:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
This standard would require us to remove the numerous cross-dressers, drag queens, and other gender noncomformists who are currently listed in "transgender and transsexual" categories and on the List of transgender people. Then there are the more difficult issues: what about people who qualify as transgender or transsexual by Wikipedia's definition, but who adamantly deny this label? I was able to find two clear examples of this in List of transgender people without scrolling past the C's"
This issue is going to come up time and time again, since many "FTMs" and "MTFs" self-identify as "male" and "female" respectively, and not as trans. - AdelaMae ( t - c - wpn) 17:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Related to the question of these guidelines is how we label people in our LGB lists. I think an anonymous IP user recently labeled everyone in the A list, which was then reverted. I confess to sympathising with said IP. It strikes me as non-NPOV to label specifically only known bisexuals, and not known gays and lesbians. Aleta ( talk) 23:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
This Gay Lib v. University of Missouri should be added to that section [4]. In 1977 William Rehnquist condoned the University of Missouri's refusal to recognise a gay students' organisation. See the Harvard Law Review, volume 98. I don't have time to expand - maybe someone else does? It seems like an interesting case. Zigzig20s ( talk) 09:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Has this group considered going with gender-neutral language for actors on the lists of LGBT people? You don't say poetess, sculptress, etc., and actor is just as correct for women as it is for men. Most occupations on your list don't indicate gender -- why not do the same for actors? -- Melty girl ( talk) 22:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
See Actor#Terminology for a discussion of the terms. It gives some history of the usages. Aleta ( talk) 23:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I was trying to work out why I was happy to use doctor instead of doctress but not actor instead of actress, and I think I've got it - the acting profession, by it's nature, makes big distinctions between men and women. Whether a doctor is a man or a woman doesn't matter, you're going to see them because you're ill, but you go to the theatre to see people performing for you and in that case gender does makes a difference. You can't ignore that an actress is a woman, or an actor a man. I suspect that's also why doctress have fallen into disuse and we're still using actress. My thoughts have run out now, and I think I'm going to go back to bed... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I propose that we bring asexuality under our umbrella. Unlike intersexuality, which we recently decided not to add, asexuality is a sexual orientation. What do you all think? Aleta ( talk) 01:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
(reset indent) Dev, I've noticed that you are staunchly opposed to the suggestion that intersex should be a part of this project. I'm really surprised by that, and I want respectfully ask you: Have you taken the time to sit down and read about intersex issues? Have you talked to any intersex people? The reason intersex people aren't included in the acronym is probably due to the fact that intersex carries an even larger stigma than any of the others. At least most LGBT people are physically "normal" people, whereas intersex people are seen as ghouls, walking birth defects, freaks. It's not surprising that the LGBT movement (going for normalcy and acceptance) would want to shrug off the "freaks of nature" contingent and suppose that they are "properly covered" elsewhere. But is that really the best choice? We are talking about people whose genitals are cut off in infancy, not for medical reasons, but to make their parents and doctors and society at large more comfortable. Most LGBT people don't have to endure anything close to that. The vast majority of LGBT people will, at the most, be directed to a therapist by any anti-queer people in their family. They aren't sent for shock treatment, institutionalization, or surgery. Society is still far behind when it comes to basic human rights for intersex people. As people who transgress often not just gender boundaries but the boundaries of those holy, "immutable" boundaries of biological sex, itself, they are intimately, intimately entwined with the plight of people who seek acceptance for their sexual orientation. I am surprised and dismayed that you would put your foot down to keep intersex out of this project. If you haven't read the Chrysalis magazine special issue on intersex issues, please consider reading it. If you don't understand how a person who is neither male nor female might very often become part of the queer community, I challenge you to figure out why that might be. Photouploaded ( talk) 12:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
While I'm not so sure about asexuality, I was also surprise to see that intersex issues didn't fall under the project's scope. I would also respectfully ask the project members to reconsider the issue. Members of the intersex community certainly fall under the "Q" in the often/cited LGBTQ acronym and they also play a sizable role in the "T" transgender community. Often intersex individuals are seemingly forced into a "gay category" by family and society who have deemed them of one gender and in a relationship with some of the same gender. Other times they may identify as gay but others, who again have their own perception of gender, have categorized them as straight. While I'm not as up to date on the "politics of the movement", I really can't see how the LGBT community can not find common ground with the intersex community? It really is the essence of being queer in every sense of the word. Agne Cheese/ Wine 13:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
This is what i get for missing an evening here in WP:LGBT talk. I'm not even sure where to post this, but I don't think asexuality is a topic that should be under the scope of this project. The first thing that comes to my mind when asexual and LGBT are related is the self-imposed punishment LGBT people endure because they can't accept their desires - like the helpful suggestions by the Christian organizations to people struggling with sexuality and faith. Otherwise, I'm not sure how it can be related to LGBT issues at all. -- Moni3 ( talk) 15:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Outdent. I would also respectfully ask everyone o remember that it took many battles to get the current acronym to be LGBT and include bisexual and trans people, Before that lesbians were invisible. We all were just the "gays" the "homosexuals" the "freaks", the "fruits", the "queers", etc. The same battles that have been and are currently waged by the AIDS community will, in part, greatly help all the rest of us. Did you know that before AIDS activists demanded and fought for reform at the FDA (United States Food and Drug Administration) that medicines weren't tested on women before approvals because their bodies were different and too variable. Did anyone expect that as an outcome, probably not but it's an example of how our umbrella communities are continually battling for human rights that not only benefit them but so many others as well. The issues that transgender people face have enormous implications for the L, the G and the B and yet no one here is required to do a thing on those articles although when asked for support or advice it would be nice. And I'll also apologize as I'm really not trying to guilt-trip as I think that backfires so I'm sorry if I did do that and will try to stop it. What I meant to do is share a bit of my perspective in hopes that others could also get more of a historical perspective because our two-dimensional world on wikipedia impacts many many real-world lives. We are Oprah, saving lives with good information, IMHO. Benjiboi 04:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I Oppose this. The project should stay focused. Asexuality is not an LGBT issue as defined by our purpose. It belongs in the Sexuality project, not here. -
Davodd (
talk)
18:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
This article was created today. She wrote the first book to be considered a lesbian pulp fiction novel. She was not gay, and even though her book sold an astounding 4.5 million copies between 1950 and 1952 and launched the genre of fiction that is so near and dear to my heart, she was quite astonished that her book got so much attention. She thought the salacious attention it got was unwarranted, and I read an interview with her a while back that implied she wasn't too happy to be the ringer-in of the new genre either. The book is not a first person account of a lesbian experience, but the narrator's description of all of the women who were in her barracks in WWII. Two just happened to be lesbian. Should it be tagged? -- Moni3 ( talk) 18:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Are all editors allowed to add items to the "Open Tasks" list? Or is it decided by the community which are considered "tasks"? Hormone replacement therapy (female-to-male) and Hormone replacement therapy (male-to-female) are in serious need of verification. The former only has ONE reference! Photouploaded ( talk) 23:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, the New York Native was 'a paper produced by and for the gay community' (Lee Edelman, Homographesis, Preface page xvii) in the 1990...or maybe it's still around? Anyway I cannot find much about it on google, can anyone remember it at all, and where can some basic info about it be found? Zigzig20s ( talk) 20:52, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it was a gay newspaper in New York City from December 1980 to January 1997 (16 years), especially during the beginning of the AIDS crisis, when it was the only gay paper in town. No, it's not around anymore. See here. Part of the problem was that the paper was later going against the tide on the cause of AIDS by claiming that HIV was not the cause of AIDS. Conspiracy theory, anyone? Part seems to be that gay newspapers don't tend to survive in NYC. Here's a minor reference. Another interesting take on NYC gay newspapers is here. See also Larry Kramer, who wrote a notable 1983 front page piece in the New York Native that focused attention on AIDS. And here is a interesting NY Times piece on gay papers in NYC. There should be an article on the New York Native. In fact this got me to start a draft version here. I want to get enough together before creating the article to avoid a speedy for non-notability. It would seem to have enough reliable sources and it's notable enough. — Becksguy ( talk) 04:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Why is Whoopi under this project's scope? there's no explanation for it in the article. - Yamanbaiia( free hugs!) 16:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Sometime ago we contextualised the sentence that equals homosexuality to an ailment, and that was recently removed. I have put it back. Just thought I'd bring this to everyone's attention. Zigzig20s ( talk) 11:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
So I've run in to our categorization scheme again...
I have a suggestion for at least part of the cat hierarchy. When it comes to "LGBT people", our nationality section is pretty well set up and clean. The occupation section, though, is a little messy.
My suggestion is to try to clean these up to have:
I think having that setup will limit the number of articles that are in cats and subcats and will make things pretty clean. Most people articles will then (most likely) have two categories - "LGBT widget makers" and "LGBT people from Peru". Often the second category will be more specific with regard to sexual orientation.
Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 16:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Is there no page with a list of gay radio stations as there is for Radio stations in Omaha, Nebraska for instance? Zigzig20s ( talk) 12:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I know it seems repetitive, but James I of England could use some input from others - I'm getting frustrated. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 05:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Five sections were just moved from Homosexuality to Gay. Please look at the changes and at the start of a discussion here and comment as appropriate. — Becksguy ( talk) 03:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
UPDATE: The moves were reverted by Fireplace. Lets see what happens now. — Becksguy ( talk) 08:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year to you all. I recently went through all our Jumpaclasses and tallied them up, and 2007's winner is Fluffball70 ( talk · contribs) with 12 points! As her prize, she has chosen LGBT symbols as this month's Collaboration. Can we make an extra special effort on this as a thankyou? ;) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank-you everyone and I am honoured at having the choice! I felt that this article needed help and was something that all LGBT people across the world and from all walks of life could work on. Fluffball70 ( talk) 22:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
What happened to her was horrible, but does anyone else think this POV article needs to be cleaned up?
The opening paragraph includes "Nicholas Gutierrez had resented her questioning his gay lifestyle choices." Most of the sources are from Conservative Christian websites, with the titles of the articles being stuff like "Man Raped and Murdered Woman because she Vocally Opposed Gay Lifestyle says Defense Lawyer" and "'Gay' Reaction to Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder: Silence to Applause." -- Silvestris ( talk) 20:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I added some sources from the Chicago Sun-Times, at least the factual information about the murder, arrest, and trial. If I need to find anything else to remove the neutrality tag, let me know and I can look for it. -- Moni3 ( talk) 23:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Someone has deleted my bit on his take on homosexuality [7]. It was referenced from the Journal of Homosexuality. The person who deleted it explained why on the talkpage [8]. I think it should be reverted it back again (it had already been deleted and I'd put it back) because it's not like I had written an overkill long passage on it, and it feels like that person is simply deleting valid info. For the record, they also added another bit [9] which is not referenced. Zigzig20s ( talk) 23:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
If all goes well Judy Garland as gay icon should be the lead (with photo) at DYK, which runs on the mainpage. I got the nom in pretty much at the last minute so it's not terribly zingy but congrats to Otto for a stellar article and keep an eye out for those who may want to give ol' Judy some special attention. Benjiboi 00:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI... January is Bisexual Awareness Month in Utah. See Utah Pride Center. Aleta (Sing) 03:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I know nothing about this colonial adventurer, but came across the article at James Brooke and discovered that although he won a kingdom, he had no legitimate issue to pass it on to, his closest relationships being with adolescent boys. Is it worth adding him to a LGBT category? BrainyBabe ( talk) 17:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, here's another query. Richard Halliburton is already tagged. On the talk page I found the following:
So, my question is, does anyone here have access to The Advocate archives to find out more from Blankenship's article? Thanks. BrainyBabe ( talk) 20:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Are former actors who appeared in gay pornography really considered in the scope of the LGBT Wikiproject? Avruch talk 20:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
A bit drained from a few of my special admirers; could someone else check on some of the redlinks on {{ LGBT sidebar}}? 11:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
A lot depends on whether we want to create the new articles to match the links or delete the links. I deleted the LGBT Studies link because it was only a redirect page to Queer Studies. Pi 12:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
He was gay apparently [10]. It would be good to find more references perhaps - this is bound to create some controversy. Zigzig20s ( talk) 05:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
It's red. See Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Is there a similar, more widely-used category? Zigzig20s ( talk) 15:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
There's an important policy discussion relevant to this project at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Religous Beliefs and Sexual Orientation. It has to do with when sexual orientation (and religious beliefs) used for category tags or mentioned at all in articles about living people. Aleta (Sing) 20:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I mean the article on Ken Hutcherson, not the man himself (although you know what they say about vociferous homophobes....)
I rolled back some POV edits made yesterday. While trying to work out how to put his notability as an internationally known bigot back into the lede, I realized that the reference citations are total mess. I won't be able to tackle him until late tonight, so if anyone else wants to take a stab at him -- I mean at fixing the article -- feel free. TechBear ( talk) 17:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm having trouble with an editor on a smear campaign against Alfred Kinsey. Many of his edits and suggestions are not in line with WP:NPOV, WP:UNDUE, WP:OR, WP:BIO and other policies. I've been trying to reign him in, but he is very persistent and confrontational. If other editors could weigh in on the discussions, it would be most appreciated. Kaldari ( talk) 01:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Could anyone else please check up on this bio of gay Brazilian asylum actvist Flavio Alves? The article seems to be under a bit of an unwelcome overhaul and this may have to do with his work for Hillary Clinton. Primary author accused of autobiography, which may be true but they also seem to just be a very new editor. Benjiboi 23:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Emily Dickinson is up for peer review in the big peer review, but you guys are a talented crew. Can some of you take a look at it? The primary author is working on FA, already having passed GA. Here's LGBT peer review. -- Moni3 ( talk) 16:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm fairly new to wikipedia. Can someone refresh my memory as to the tag to place on the pages of supporters of GLBT issues? In particular, I'm speaking of Martie Maguire and Emily Robison, and yes, I have documentation to use to back it up. Anybody? Thanks. -- leahtwosaints ( talk) 11:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
List of animals displaying homosexual behavior is up for AfD. Benjiboi 17:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
See the discussion regarding LGBTQ user categories at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 January 8#Category:Queer Wikipedians. See also: Wikipedia:Categorization. Hyacinth ( talk) 18:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Why was this deleted? Look at Category:Wikipedians; if Wikipedians can be categorized by religion, ethniticy and nationality, cancer survival, even motorcycle ownership, then why can't we be categorized by LGBT affiliation? This is discrimination! Photouploaded ( talk) 19:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Don't you think this should be split into two pages, with another page for the Alice B Toklas Democratic Club? Zigzig20s ( talk) 08:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
SatyrTN has decided she was not a bisexual, and I'm not sure why. I added a reference from an academic history book, and there is no reference to prove that she was not a bisexual. The reference seems serious enough to me - again, it is a published and fairly popular academic history book. What is more, Lillian Faderman says that Luhan acknowledges her bisexuality in her very memoirs - how can this be disproved? Maybe SatyrTN wants the reference from the memoirs - I have not read them, nor do I have the time atm. I am confused with regards to this politics of silence concerning this bisexual. Not to be too queeny about it - and after all why not? - but I am disappointed in SatyrTN. Zigzig20s ( talk) 17:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Brad Renfro was found dead today. One of my homo crushes is now gone. :[ ALLSTAR echo 07:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Need some help researching Norma McCorvey, the original "Roe" in "Roe v. Wade". Evidently she was involved in a lesbian relationship at the time of the lawsuit, but I have no clue what she's doing now. Anyone feel like researching her? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 17:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
List of LGBT couples at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_16#16_January_2008 cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 13:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Unity II. Whenever I see a project tag on the talk of a speedy candidate, I remove the tag to at least give the interested project members a shot at the article before deletion. This article is neglected (no edits since July 07). Happy editing, Keeper | 76 17:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
See [11]. Where in the article should I add a reference as to her bisexuality and her lesbian relationship with Lorena Hickok? I'm tempted to put it in 'marriage and family life', but maybe I'm being too antinormative - then again... Zigzig20s ( talk) 01:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
"I would consider this for deletion
"It's gender-studies cruft. How can an article about this term be much more than a bare-bones stub? Feel free to prove me wrong...--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 14:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)"
I'm copying it here in case anyone wants to expand this stub before HSR nominates it for deletion. Aleta (Sing) 15:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm checking to see if anyone here is interested in bringing a core article to GA status or more. I was thinking the
Stonewall Riots, just to think big. I have access to a lot of information and research. I'm thinking of a 2-month long collaboration. Anyone willing to help out with research, copy editing, MOS crap precision? Or does anyone else have a core article in mind? --
Moni3 (
talk)
20:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI- It has been suggested for several months that Sexual Minorities in Japan be merged into LGBT rights in Japan. Seems like a good idea to me. Other opinions? Queerudite ( talk) 14:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I recently enlisted Bradford LGBT to help out with our LGB people lists - they mean well, bless them , but they're not Wikipedians, so if you see any IP addresses contributing but making a bit of a mess, do clean up after the dears if you spot it. Ta, Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Per several suggestions at the deletion review for Category:Queer Wikipedians, I have now created Category:Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues. Feel free to add yourself to this category by adding this text to your user page: [[Category:Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues]] — Photouploaded ( talk) 21:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
This one? Category:Gayass Wikipedians ALLSTAR echo 02:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Anyone for a userbox?
{{User:Allstarecho/gayass}}
Gay |
This user's flame burns phenomenally bright, as this user is an avowed homosexual and official Gayass Wikipedian! |
Ass |
haha ALLSTAR echo 05:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
And while I'm at my shameless promotion point, here's another people might enjoy..
{{User:Allstarecho/gp}}
This user enjoys
gay porn.. .. a lot! |
Don't be shy. ;] lol ALLSTAR echo 06:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
And just for you Moni...
{{User:Allstarecho/lp}}
This user knows there's no such thing as lesbian porn outside of Sarah Waters and Ann Bannon. |
It was either that image or this one:
lol ALLSTAR echo 16:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Also note, Category:Gayass Wikipedians is now listed at Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:Gayass Wikipedians. ALLSTAR echo 16:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Spoilsports ;-)-- Tyrfing ( talk) 02:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to try on this for size:
Gay |
This user's flame burns phenomenally bright, as this user is decidedly queer and is an official Gayass Wikipedian! |
Ass |
:) Photouploaded ( talk) 02:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
List of LGBT couples is up for deletion and a few of us are trying to reference the outstanding list or removed unverifiable ones to the talk page. We only have 88 couples left to confirm, if each of you would do fifty or so that would be so super! Thanks! Benjiboi 01:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Níð has been on our peer review page since August with no comments. (I'm as guilty as anyone!) The main author very much would like some feedback. I've just made a few comments. If anyone else would care to look at it, and comment, I think TlatoSMD would greatly appreciate it. Aleta (Sing) 03:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
(First, though, my thanks to the LGBT group, especially AllstarEcho, for being the only ones at Wikipedia to make my brief, unhappy stay here brighter, nicer, more literate, and more humane.)
I don't know if you have noticed, but for some time, I have had on my page "Category:People who remain Wikipedians despite frequently getting really annoyed by the whole thing". It's red, but if you click on it you can actually see that the category has been formed with my name in it even if it does not, technically, exist. If Gayass is deleted, all it means if they're going to delete the blurb - they can't do anything about throwing out the people in it. Keep the userbox on your pages and they can't touch you. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Since I left Wikipedia, Avruch talk has made obviously sincere attempts to explain that he did not intend prejudice, and he's made several gestures of reconciliation, of which withdrawing the deletion nomination was only one. There may have been mutual misunderstanding, but it's more important that there clearly was no malice, as there was none on my part either. I accept his explanations, I thank him for his gestures, I bear him no ill will, and I apologize for whatever degree I was the cause of our misunderstanding.
My frustration with Wikipedia has therefore cooled down to just below the boiling point and I am returning.
I would like to very sincerely thank several kind people who spoke decently about gays and/or kindly about me during the discussion. William P. Coleman ( talk) 19:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
/me creates Category:Gayass Wikipedians In North America in America in Alabama who watch NFL and who smoke pipes and who love math and who know Docking Sleeves is what it's all about more so than the Hokey Pokey -- ✰ ALLSTAR✰ echo 05:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Members of this project might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Anglin. PKT ( talk) 15:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
As you know, it is coming up to LGBT History month here in sunny England, and in recognition of that I have been working extra hard on our LGB people list (although admittedly I've mostly been removing straight people - still knocked 50 people off though). Today, my friend Josh and I are even having a special trip to the library to work on it. Come join us! We're down to just 800 people (from 2000) now - we might well get it done in time if we just keep at it. Please... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The scope of List of LGBT couples is not entirely clear to me. I would appreciate your help with this question. Thanks! Photouploaded ( talk) 16:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
English is fun and to hell with the MOS! If you don't like the word, change it! Or is this some kind of joke? -- Moni3 ( talk) 14:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Is this page a bit sleepy lately?
I placed Barbara Gittings up for peer review here at LGBT and at WP:Biography just to see what kind of feedback I can get before putting it up for GA. I recently read a compelling FAC request claiming anyone who didn't read his article and comment was a lazy fart. He even put it in bold, too. I'm not sure how when he did it it was funny, and when I try it just seems annoying. -- Moni3 ( talk) 17:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
In the page of "History of same-sex unions", I've found the name "Diocletianus", but it must be a mistake. Therefore, I've changed his name to "Elagabalus". And also "Poppea" into "Poppaea".
I am Japanese and have many data on historical pederastic couples in Japanese history. And I've found so many famous couples were lacking in the "Historical pederastic couples". (e.g.) Oda Nobunaga and Maeda Toshiie. Maeda Toshiie was one of the most renowned beloved boy of Oda Nobunaga. Of course there were so many other beloved pageboys of Oda Nobunaga. And Tokugawa Ieyasu's most beloved boy Ii Manchiyo was Ii Naomasa(his adult name). (talk:Hadrianvs et antinovs|talk]])a.k.a."sebastianvs").
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Historical_pederastic_couples" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadrianvs et antinovs ( talk • contribs) 01:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
(posted on main page, moved by -- Moni3 ( talk) 02:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC))
There is a deletion review which can be found at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_21#Category:Queer_Wikipedians. DuncanHill ( talk) 01:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Several heavyweight admins have joined the deletion review and spoken in well-reasoned terms. There have also been calls there lately to just go ahead and relist Queer Wikipedians thereby invoking an RfC that could potentially produce genuine consensus. (BTW: My humble opinion is that bisexuals could count as "queers," like the rest of us -- and that we ought to be inclusive and welcoming. Anyway, I think that the RFC has to be cast not as comment on Queers, but comment on self-identification categories as such. So, if the RfC is successful, then bisexuals and others could chose to have their own categories too.)
The deletion discussion has suggested that the relisting should be done by somebody experienced who understands the technicalities. However, no one has stepped up to do it. I think I've reasoned out ways to frame the summary of previous discussion in a perceptibly fair, comprehensive way. But, as a newbie, I still find the technical issues (how to "tag" the catergory, how to get the RfC listed, etc.) daunting. Depending on how much time I have for research tomorrow morning, I may take a crack at it. Good idea? Or no? William P. Coleman ( talk) 00:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello all. After seeing a conversation on the Administrators's Noticeboard, I had replied that whether or not categories for "Wikipedians by sexual preference" were a good idea on Wikipedia, these sorts of categories would be more than appropriate on Wikiversity (both as part of the demographics resource and as a way of organizing "learning groups"). I finally had time today to add a survey about sexual preferences and opinions, if anyone would like to give it a spin.
The survey is very general (and incomplete), but I would be more than happy to help make surveys that are specifically aimed at the GLBT community (I'm honestly not quite sure what should be asked). The basic questions I included are the obvious one (are you hetero-/bi-/homo- sexual), and the others ones stem from topics I hear about on the radio: "is homosexual sex immoral?" and "is sexual preference genetically determined?" I didn't add one on "Gay marriage" yet because I'm not sure how "global" the issue is (is this just an American provincial thing, or is it discussed in other places as well?), and likewise "Gays in the military" (same reason).
As far as Category:Queer Wikipedians is concerned, I wasn't entirely sure whether the controversey was in the term "queer" or about the category in general (apparently Category:Christian Wikipedians is acceptable?), but it did strike me that a question about how one refers to their sexual preference (for example: "straight" vs. "heterosexual" vs. "...", etc.) could certainly have some merit.
I'm guessing this is the first most of you have heard of Wikimedian Demographics, but it's a learning resource aimed at learning how demographics works, but also about the dempgraphics of "we, the Wikimedians". The surveys are in the form of templates you fill out, and instructions are provided at every step (follow the wikilink and hopefully it will all make sense. Templates are editable, but the #if+#switch stuff can be a bit daunting for those without a good bit of experience, so don't be afraid to just point out problems for someone else to do the fixing. -- SB_Johnny | talk 18:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The DRV has now been closed. You can read the result at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_21. DuncanHill ( talk) 16:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see Category:LGBT Wikipedians. Avruch talk 21:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I have awarded the Special Barnstar to Avruch for his actions in creating and defending category:LGBT Wikipedians. Jay*Jay ( talk) 14:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Per the recent drama on the Rosie O'Donnell article, folks deleting first then discussing when compelled, I have rewritten, resourced and refocused Rosie O'Donnell#Accusations of anti-Catholicism and would appreciate others keeping an eye on it since the article just came off protection. Benjiboi 17:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Why on earth is that in this project? I see that Satyr added it, which is only reason I didn't delete our tag immediately. Is there something I'm missing? Aleta (Sing) 22:48, 31 January 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Much of what I've been working on in this project has to do with pre-Stonewall lesbians, and I'm finding much of the resources for the articles I'm working on are related to men's issues. Barbara Gittings (I'm working on) and Frank Kameny (I haven't) worked together, but their articles are quite different, despite the fact that Kameny is alive and well and has his own website (hint, fellows - write to him). The Daughters of Bilitis (working on) and the Mattachine Society (haven't worked on), and The Ladder (working on) and ONE, Inc. (not working on) are also quite different also despite the fact that there seems to be a lot more information on the Mattachine Society than the DOB. Articles are only as good as people who care about them, so if any guys out there who are history buffs want to take me on in a specialized jumpaclass article competition to improve these articles, let me know. I'm working on GA or FA class for mine. I'll point you toward the references I used, assist and whatnot. It's not that I'm a sexist pig or anything - I seriously don't have the time for all the information available on the early homophile movement. My stupid job gets in the way.
So - any takers? Must I resort to insulting your mothers, dance skills, or taste in disco? Must I??? -- Moni3 ( talk) 17:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Chris Crocker (Internet celebrity) Content dispute if source of content is considered reliable to subject, need outside opinions. Posting to both wikiprojects associated with article. Benjiboi 20:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Following Wikipedia's policy for
biographies of living people, an article may categorize and/or describe a person as lesbian, gay, and/or bisexual and/or transgender if reliably sourced material indicates one of the following criteria is met:
An article may categorize and/or describe a person as transgender if reliably sourced material indicates either a self-identification as transgender/transsexual or that the person meets the description of transgender.
Comment - It looks good now, but when applied practically, as in the case of Foster, who is in a relationship of 15 years with a woman, who she's raising children with, who she addressed publicly, we're still confused as to what to do. Is this relationship notable? Is it not romantic or sexual enough? -- Moni3 ( talk) 15:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
This standard would require us to remove the numerous cross-dressers, drag queens, and other gender noncomformists who are currently listed in "transgender and transsexual" categories and on the List of transgender people. Then there are the more difficult issues: what about people who qualify as transgender or transsexual by Wikipedia's definition, but who adamantly deny this label? I was able to find two clear examples of this in List of transgender people without scrolling past the C's"
This issue is going to come up time and time again, since many "FTMs" and "MTFs" self-identify as "male" and "female" respectively, and not as trans. - AdelaMae ( t - c - wpn) 17:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Related to the question of these guidelines is how we label people in our LGB lists. I think an anonymous IP user recently labeled everyone in the A list, which was then reverted. I confess to sympathising with said IP. It strikes me as non-NPOV to label specifically only known bisexuals, and not known gays and lesbians. Aleta ( talk) 23:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
This Gay Lib v. University of Missouri should be added to that section [4]. In 1977 William Rehnquist condoned the University of Missouri's refusal to recognise a gay students' organisation. See the Harvard Law Review, volume 98. I don't have time to expand - maybe someone else does? It seems like an interesting case. Zigzig20s ( talk) 09:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Has this group considered going with gender-neutral language for actors on the lists of LGBT people? You don't say poetess, sculptress, etc., and actor is just as correct for women as it is for men. Most occupations on your list don't indicate gender -- why not do the same for actors? -- Melty girl ( talk) 22:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
See Actor#Terminology for a discussion of the terms. It gives some history of the usages. Aleta ( talk) 23:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I was trying to work out why I was happy to use doctor instead of doctress but not actor instead of actress, and I think I've got it - the acting profession, by it's nature, makes big distinctions between men and women. Whether a doctor is a man or a woman doesn't matter, you're going to see them because you're ill, but you go to the theatre to see people performing for you and in that case gender does makes a difference. You can't ignore that an actress is a woman, or an actor a man. I suspect that's also why doctress have fallen into disuse and we're still using actress. My thoughts have run out now, and I think I'm going to go back to bed... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I propose that we bring asexuality under our umbrella. Unlike intersexuality, which we recently decided not to add, asexuality is a sexual orientation. What do you all think? Aleta ( talk) 01:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
(reset indent) Dev, I've noticed that you are staunchly opposed to the suggestion that intersex should be a part of this project. I'm really surprised by that, and I want respectfully ask you: Have you taken the time to sit down and read about intersex issues? Have you talked to any intersex people? The reason intersex people aren't included in the acronym is probably due to the fact that intersex carries an even larger stigma than any of the others. At least most LGBT people are physically "normal" people, whereas intersex people are seen as ghouls, walking birth defects, freaks. It's not surprising that the LGBT movement (going for normalcy and acceptance) would want to shrug off the "freaks of nature" contingent and suppose that they are "properly covered" elsewhere. But is that really the best choice? We are talking about people whose genitals are cut off in infancy, not for medical reasons, but to make their parents and doctors and society at large more comfortable. Most LGBT people don't have to endure anything close to that. The vast majority of LGBT people will, at the most, be directed to a therapist by any anti-queer people in their family. They aren't sent for shock treatment, institutionalization, or surgery. Society is still far behind when it comes to basic human rights for intersex people. As people who transgress often not just gender boundaries but the boundaries of those holy, "immutable" boundaries of biological sex, itself, they are intimately, intimately entwined with the plight of people who seek acceptance for their sexual orientation. I am surprised and dismayed that you would put your foot down to keep intersex out of this project. If you haven't read the Chrysalis magazine special issue on intersex issues, please consider reading it. If you don't understand how a person who is neither male nor female might very often become part of the queer community, I challenge you to figure out why that might be. Photouploaded ( talk) 12:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
While I'm not so sure about asexuality, I was also surprise to see that intersex issues didn't fall under the project's scope. I would also respectfully ask the project members to reconsider the issue. Members of the intersex community certainly fall under the "Q" in the often/cited LGBTQ acronym and they also play a sizable role in the "T" transgender community. Often intersex individuals are seemingly forced into a "gay category" by family and society who have deemed them of one gender and in a relationship with some of the same gender. Other times they may identify as gay but others, who again have their own perception of gender, have categorized them as straight. While I'm not as up to date on the "politics of the movement", I really can't see how the LGBT community can not find common ground with the intersex community? It really is the essence of being queer in every sense of the word. Agne Cheese/ Wine 13:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
This is what i get for missing an evening here in WP:LGBT talk. I'm not even sure where to post this, but I don't think asexuality is a topic that should be under the scope of this project. The first thing that comes to my mind when asexual and LGBT are related is the self-imposed punishment LGBT people endure because they can't accept their desires - like the helpful suggestions by the Christian organizations to people struggling with sexuality and faith. Otherwise, I'm not sure how it can be related to LGBT issues at all. -- Moni3 ( talk) 15:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Outdent. I would also respectfully ask everyone o remember that it took many battles to get the current acronym to be LGBT and include bisexual and trans people, Before that lesbians were invisible. We all were just the "gays" the "homosexuals" the "freaks", the "fruits", the "queers", etc. The same battles that have been and are currently waged by the AIDS community will, in part, greatly help all the rest of us. Did you know that before AIDS activists demanded and fought for reform at the FDA (United States Food and Drug Administration) that medicines weren't tested on women before approvals because their bodies were different and too variable. Did anyone expect that as an outcome, probably not but it's an example of how our umbrella communities are continually battling for human rights that not only benefit them but so many others as well. The issues that transgender people face have enormous implications for the L, the G and the B and yet no one here is required to do a thing on those articles although when asked for support or advice it would be nice. And I'll also apologize as I'm really not trying to guilt-trip as I think that backfires so I'm sorry if I did do that and will try to stop it. What I meant to do is share a bit of my perspective in hopes that others could also get more of a historical perspective because our two-dimensional world on wikipedia impacts many many real-world lives. We are Oprah, saving lives with good information, IMHO. Benjiboi 04:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I Oppose this. The project should stay focused. Asexuality is not an LGBT issue as defined by our purpose. It belongs in the Sexuality project, not here. -
Davodd (
talk)
18:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
This article was created today. She wrote the first book to be considered a lesbian pulp fiction novel. She was not gay, and even though her book sold an astounding 4.5 million copies between 1950 and 1952 and launched the genre of fiction that is so near and dear to my heart, she was quite astonished that her book got so much attention. She thought the salacious attention it got was unwarranted, and I read an interview with her a while back that implied she wasn't too happy to be the ringer-in of the new genre either. The book is not a first person account of a lesbian experience, but the narrator's description of all of the women who were in her barracks in WWII. Two just happened to be lesbian. Should it be tagged? -- Moni3 ( talk) 18:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Are all editors allowed to add items to the "Open Tasks" list? Or is it decided by the community which are considered "tasks"? Hormone replacement therapy (female-to-male) and Hormone replacement therapy (male-to-female) are in serious need of verification. The former only has ONE reference! Photouploaded ( talk) 23:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, the New York Native was 'a paper produced by and for the gay community' (Lee Edelman, Homographesis, Preface page xvii) in the 1990...or maybe it's still around? Anyway I cannot find much about it on google, can anyone remember it at all, and where can some basic info about it be found? Zigzig20s ( talk) 20:52, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it was a gay newspaper in New York City from December 1980 to January 1997 (16 years), especially during the beginning of the AIDS crisis, when it was the only gay paper in town. No, it's not around anymore. See here. Part of the problem was that the paper was later going against the tide on the cause of AIDS by claiming that HIV was not the cause of AIDS. Conspiracy theory, anyone? Part seems to be that gay newspapers don't tend to survive in NYC. Here's a minor reference. Another interesting take on NYC gay newspapers is here. See also Larry Kramer, who wrote a notable 1983 front page piece in the New York Native that focused attention on AIDS. And here is a interesting NY Times piece on gay papers in NYC. There should be an article on the New York Native. In fact this got me to start a draft version here. I want to get enough together before creating the article to avoid a speedy for non-notability. It would seem to have enough reliable sources and it's notable enough. — Becksguy ( talk) 04:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Why is Whoopi under this project's scope? there's no explanation for it in the article. - Yamanbaiia( free hugs!) 16:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Sometime ago we contextualised the sentence that equals homosexuality to an ailment, and that was recently removed. I have put it back. Just thought I'd bring this to everyone's attention. Zigzig20s ( talk) 11:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
So I've run in to our categorization scheme again...
I have a suggestion for at least part of the cat hierarchy. When it comes to "LGBT people", our nationality section is pretty well set up and clean. The occupation section, though, is a little messy.
My suggestion is to try to clean these up to have:
I think having that setup will limit the number of articles that are in cats and subcats and will make things pretty clean. Most people articles will then (most likely) have two categories - "LGBT widget makers" and "LGBT people from Peru". Often the second category will be more specific with regard to sexual orientation.
Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 16:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Is there no page with a list of gay radio stations as there is for Radio stations in Omaha, Nebraska for instance? Zigzig20s ( talk) 12:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I know it seems repetitive, but James I of England could use some input from others - I'm getting frustrated. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 05:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Five sections were just moved from Homosexuality to Gay. Please look at the changes and at the start of a discussion here and comment as appropriate. — Becksguy ( talk) 03:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
UPDATE: The moves were reverted by Fireplace. Lets see what happens now. — Becksguy ( talk) 08:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year to you all. I recently went through all our Jumpaclasses and tallied them up, and 2007's winner is Fluffball70 ( talk · contribs) with 12 points! As her prize, she has chosen LGBT symbols as this month's Collaboration. Can we make an extra special effort on this as a thankyou? ;) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank-you everyone and I am honoured at having the choice! I felt that this article needed help and was something that all LGBT people across the world and from all walks of life could work on. Fluffball70 ( talk) 22:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
What happened to her was horrible, but does anyone else think this POV article needs to be cleaned up?
The opening paragraph includes "Nicholas Gutierrez had resented her questioning his gay lifestyle choices." Most of the sources are from Conservative Christian websites, with the titles of the articles being stuff like "Man Raped and Murdered Woman because she Vocally Opposed Gay Lifestyle says Defense Lawyer" and "'Gay' Reaction to Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder: Silence to Applause." -- Silvestris ( talk) 20:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I added some sources from the Chicago Sun-Times, at least the factual information about the murder, arrest, and trial. If I need to find anything else to remove the neutrality tag, let me know and I can look for it. -- Moni3 ( talk) 23:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Someone has deleted my bit on his take on homosexuality [7]. It was referenced from the Journal of Homosexuality. The person who deleted it explained why on the talkpage [8]. I think it should be reverted it back again (it had already been deleted and I'd put it back) because it's not like I had written an overkill long passage on it, and it feels like that person is simply deleting valid info. For the record, they also added another bit [9] which is not referenced. Zigzig20s ( talk) 23:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
If all goes well Judy Garland as gay icon should be the lead (with photo) at DYK, which runs on the mainpage. I got the nom in pretty much at the last minute so it's not terribly zingy but congrats to Otto for a stellar article and keep an eye out for those who may want to give ol' Judy some special attention. Benjiboi 00:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI... January is Bisexual Awareness Month in Utah. See Utah Pride Center. Aleta (Sing) 03:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I know nothing about this colonial adventurer, but came across the article at James Brooke and discovered that although he won a kingdom, he had no legitimate issue to pass it on to, his closest relationships being with adolescent boys. Is it worth adding him to a LGBT category? BrainyBabe ( talk) 17:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, here's another query. Richard Halliburton is already tagged. On the talk page I found the following:
So, my question is, does anyone here have access to The Advocate archives to find out more from Blankenship's article? Thanks. BrainyBabe ( talk) 20:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Are former actors who appeared in gay pornography really considered in the scope of the LGBT Wikiproject? Avruch talk 20:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
A bit drained from a few of my special admirers; could someone else check on some of the redlinks on {{ LGBT sidebar}}? 11:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
A lot depends on whether we want to create the new articles to match the links or delete the links. I deleted the LGBT Studies link because it was only a redirect page to Queer Studies. Pi 12:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
He was gay apparently [10]. It would be good to find more references perhaps - this is bound to create some controversy. Zigzig20s ( talk) 05:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
It's red. See Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Is there a similar, more widely-used category? Zigzig20s ( talk) 15:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
There's an important policy discussion relevant to this project at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Religous Beliefs and Sexual Orientation. It has to do with when sexual orientation (and religious beliefs) used for category tags or mentioned at all in articles about living people. Aleta (Sing) 20:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I mean the article on Ken Hutcherson, not the man himself (although you know what they say about vociferous homophobes....)
I rolled back some POV edits made yesterday. While trying to work out how to put his notability as an internationally known bigot back into the lede, I realized that the reference citations are total mess. I won't be able to tackle him until late tonight, so if anyone else wants to take a stab at him -- I mean at fixing the article -- feel free. TechBear ( talk) 17:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm having trouble with an editor on a smear campaign against Alfred Kinsey. Many of his edits and suggestions are not in line with WP:NPOV, WP:UNDUE, WP:OR, WP:BIO and other policies. I've been trying to reign him in, but he is very persistent and confrontational. If other editors could weigh in on the discussions, it would be most appreciated. Kaldari ( talk) 01:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Could anyone else please check up on this bio of gay Brazilian asylum actvist Flavio Alves? The article seems to be under a bit of an unwelcome overhaul and this may have to do with his work for Hillary Clinton. Primary author accused of autobiography, which may be true but they also seem to just be a very new editor. Benjiboi 23:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Emily Dickinson is up for peer review in the big peer review, but you guys are a talented crew. Can some of you take a look at it? The primary author is working on FA, already having passed GA. Here's LGBT peer review. -- Moni3 ( talk) 16:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm fairly new to wikipedia. Can someone refresh my memory as to the tag to place on the pages of supporters of GLBT issues? In particular, I'm speaking of Martie Maguire and Emily Robison, and yes, I have documentation to use to back it up. Anybody? Thanks. -- leahtwosaints ( talk) 11:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
List of animals displaying homosexual behavior is up for AfD. Benjiboi 17:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
See the discussion regarding LGBTQ user categories at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 January 8#Category:Queer Wikipedians. See also: Wikipedia:Categorization. Hyacinth ( talk) 18:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Why was this deleted? Look at Category:Wikipedians; if Wikipedians can be categorized by religion, ethniticy and nationality, cancer survival, even motorcycle ownership, then why can't we be categorized by LGBT affiliation? This is discrimination! Photouploaded ( talk) 19:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Don't you think this should be split into two pages, with another page for the Alice B Toklas Democratic Club? Zigzig20s ( talk) 08:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
SatyrTN has decided she was not a bisexual, and I'm not sure why. I added a reference from an academic history book, and there is no reference to prove that she was not a bisexual. The reference seems serious enough to me - again, it is a published and fairly popular academic history book. What is more, Lillian Faderman says that Luhan acknowledges her bisexuality in her very memoirs - how can this be disproved? Maybe SatyrTN wants the reference from the memoirs - I have not read them, nor do I have the time atm. I am confused with regards to this politics of silence concerning this bisexual. Not to be too queeny about it - and after all why not? - but I am disappointed in SatyrTN. Zigzig20s ( talk) 17:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Brad Renfro was found dead today. One of my homo crushes is now gone. :[ ALLSTAR echo 07:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Need some help researching Norma McCorvey, the original "Roe" in "Roe v. Wade". Evidently she was involved in a lesbian relationship at the time of the lawsuit, but I have no clue what she's doing now. Anyone feel like researching her? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 17:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
List of LGBT couples at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_16#16_January_2008 cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 13:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Unity II. Whenever I see a project tag on the talk of a speedy candidate, I remove the tag to at least give the interested project members a shot at the article before deletion. This article is neglected (no edits since July 07). Happy editing, Keeper | 76 17:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
See [11]. Where in the article should I add a reference as to her bisexuality and her lesbian relationship with Lorena Hickok? I'm tempted to put it in 'marriage and family life', but maybe I'm being too antinormative - then again... Zigzig20s ( talk) 01:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
"I would consider this for deletion
"It's gender-studies cruft. How can an article about this term be much more than a bare-bones stub? Feel free to prove me wrong...--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 14:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)"
I'm copying it here in case anyone wants to expand this stub before HSR nominates it for deletion. Aleta (Sing) 15:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm checking to see if anyone here is interested in bringing a core article to GA status or more. I was thinking the
Stonewall Riots, just to think big. I have access to a lot of information and research. I'm thinking of a 2-month long collaboration. Anyone willing to help out with research, copy editing, MOS crap precision? Or does anyone else have a core article in mind? --
Moni3 (
talk)
20:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI- It has been suggested for several months that Sexual Minorities in Japan be merged into LGBT rights in Japan. Seems like a good idea to me. Other opinions? Queerudite ( talk) 14:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I recently enlisted Bradford LGBT to help out with our LGB people lists - they mean well, bless them , but they're not Wikipedians, so if you see any IP addresses contributing but making a bit of a mess, do clean up after the dears if you spot it. Ta, Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Per several suggestions at the deletion review for Category:Queer Wikipedians, I have now created Category:Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues. Feel free to add yourself to this category by adding this text to your user page: [[Category:Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues]] — Photouploaded ( talk) 21:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
This one? Category:Gayass Wikipedians ALLSTAR echo 02:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Anyone for a userbox?
{{User:Allstarecho/gayass}}
Gay |
This user's flame burns phenomenally bright, as this user is an avowed homosexual and official Gayass Wikipedian! |
Ass |
haha ALLSTAR echo 05:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
And while I'm at my shameless promotion point, here's another people might enjoy..
{{User:Allstarecho/gp}}
This user enjoys
gay porn.. .. a lot! |
Don't be shy. ;] lol ALLSTAR echo 06:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
And just for you Moni...
{{User:Allstarecho/lp}}
This user knows there's no such thing as lesbian porn outside of Sarah Waters and Ann Bannon. |
It was either that image or this one:
lol ALLSTAR echo 16:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Also note, Category:Gayass Wikipedians is now listed at Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:Gayass Wikipedians. ALLSTAR echo 16:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Spoilsports ;-)-- Tyrfing ( talk) 02:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to try on this for size:
Gay |
This user's flame burns phenomenally bright, as this user is decidedly queer and is an official Gayass Wikipedian! |
Ass |
:) Photouploaded ( talk) 02:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
List of LGBT couples is up for deletion and a few of us are trying to reference the outstanding list or removed unverifiable ones to the talk page. We only have 88 couples left to confirm, if each of you would do fifty or so that would be so super! Thanks! Benjiboi 01:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Níð has been on our peer review page since August with no comments. (I'm as guilty as anyone!) The main author very much would like some feedback. I've just made a few comments. If anyone else would care to look at it, and comment, I think TlatoSMD would greatly appreciate it. Aleta (Sing) 03:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
(First, though, my thanks to the LGBT group, especially AllstarEcho, for being the only ones at Wikipedia to make my brief, unhappy stay here brighter, nicer, more literate, and more humane.)
I don't know if you have noticed, but for some time, I have had on my page "Category:People who remain Wikipedians despite frequently getting really annoyed by the whole thing". It's red, but if you click on it you can actually see that the category has been formed with my name in it even if it does not, technically, exist. If Gayass is deleted, all it means if they're going to delete the blurb - they can't do anything about throwing out the people in it. Keep the userbox on your pages and they can't touch you. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Since I left Wikipedia, Avruch talk has made obviously sincere attempts to explain that he did not intend prejudice, and he's made several gestures of reconciliation, of which withdrawing the deletion nomination was only one. There may have been mutual misunderstanding, but it's more important that there clearly was no malice, as there was none on my part either. I accept his explanations, I thank him for his gestures, I bear him no ill will, and I apologize for whatever degree I was the cause of our misunderstanding.
My frustration with Wikipedia has therefore cooled down to just below the boiling point and I am returning.
I would like to very sincerely thank several kind people who spoke decently about gays and/or kindly about me during the discussion. William P. Coleman ( talk) 19:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
/me creates Category:Gayass Wikipedians In North America in America in Alabama who watch NFL and who smoke pipes and who love math and who know Docking Sleeves is what it's all about more so than the Hokey Pokey -- ✰ ALLSTAR✰ echo 05:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Members of this project might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Anglin. PKT ( talk) 15:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
As you know, it is coming up to LGBT History month here in sunny England, and in recognition of that I have been working extra hard on our LGB people list (although admittedly I've mostly been removing straight people - still knocked 50 people off though). Today, my friend Josh and I are even having a special trip to the library to work on it. Come join us! We're down to just 800 people (from 2000) now - we might well get it done in time if we just keep at it. Please... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The scope of List of LGBT couples is not entirely clear to me. I would appreciate your help with this question. Thanks! Photouploaded ( talk) 16:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
English is fun and to hell with the MOS! If you don't like the word, change it! Or is this some kind of joke? -- Moni3 ( talk) 14:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Is this page a bit sleepy lately?
I placed Barbara Gittings up for peer review here at LGBT and at WP:Biography just to see what kind of feedback I can get before putting it up for GA. I recently read a compelling FAC request claiming anyone who didn't read his article and comment was a lazy fart. He even put it in bold, too. I'm not sure how when he did it it was funny, and when I try it just seems annoying. -- Moni3 ( talk) 17:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
In the page of "History of same-sex unions", I've found the name "Diocletianus", but it must be a mistake. Therefore, I've changed his name to "Elagabalus". And also "Poppea" into "Poppaea".
I am Japanese and have many data on historical pederastic couples in Japanese history. And I've found so many famous couples were lacking in the "Historical pederastic couples". (e.g.) Oda Nobunaga and Maeda Toshiie. Maeda Toshiie was one of the most renowned beloved boy of Oda Nobunaga. Of course there were so many other beloved pageboys of Oda Nobunaga. And Tokugawa Ieyasu's most beloved boy Ii Manchiyo was Ii Naomasa(his adult name). (talk:Hadrianvs et antinovs|talk]])a.k.a."sebastianvs").
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Historical_pederastic_couples" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadrianvs et antinovs ( talk • contribs) 01:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
(posted on main page, moved by -- Moni3 ( talk) 02:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC))
There is a deletion review which can be found at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_21#Category:Queer_Wikipedians. DuncanHill ( talk) 01:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Several heavyweight admins have joined the deletion review and spoken in well-reasoned terms. There have also been calls there lately to just go ahead and relist Queer Wikipedians thereby invoking an RfC that could potentially produce genuine consensus. (BTW: My humble opinion is that bisexuals could count as "queers," like the rest of us -- and that we ought to be inclusive and welcoming. Anyway, I think that the RFC has to be cast not as comment on Queers, but comment on self-identification categories as such. So, if the RfC is successful, then bisexuals and others could chose to have their own categories too.)
The deletion discussion has suggested that the relisting should be done by somebody experienced who understands the technicalities. However, no one has stepped up to do it. I think I've reasoned out ways to frame the summary of previous discussion in a perceptibly fair, comprehensive way. But, as a newbie, I still find the technical issues (how to "tag" the catergory, how to get the RfC listed, etc.) daunting. Depending on how much time I have for research tomorrow morning, I may take a crack at it. Good idea? Or no? William P. Coleman ( talk) 00:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello all. After seeing a conversation on the Administrators's Noticeboard, I had replied that whether or not categories for "Wikipedians by sexual preference" were a good idea on Wikipedia, these sorts of categories would be more than appropriate on Wikiversity (both as part of the demographics resource and as a way of organizing "learning groups"). I finally had time today to add a survey about sexual preferences and opinions, if anyone would like to give it a spin.
The survey is very general (and incomplete), but I would be more than happy to help make surveys that are specifically aimed at the GLBT community (I'm honestly not quite sure what should be asked). The basic questions I included are the obvious one (are you hetero-/bi-/homo- sexual), and the others ones stem from topics I hear about on the radio: "is homosexual sex immoral?" and "is sexual preference genetically determined?" I didn't add one on "Gay marriage" yet because I'm not sure how "global" the issue is (is this just an American provincial thing, or is it discussed in other places as well?), and likewise "Gays in the military" (same reason).
As far as Category:Queer Wikipedians is concerned, I wasn't entirely sure whether the controversey was in the term "queer" or about the category in general (apparently Category:Christian Wikipedians is acceptable?), but it did strike me that a question about how one refers to their sexual preference (for example: "straight" vs. "heterosexual" vs. "...", etc.) could certainly have some merit.
I'm guessing this is the first most of you have heard of Wikimedian Demographics, but it's a learning resource aimed at learning how demographics works, but also about the dempgraphics of "we, the Wikimedians". The surveys are in the form of templates you fill out, and instructions are provided at every step (follow the wikilink and hopefully it will all make sense. Templates are editable, but the #if+#switch stuff can be a bit daunting for those without a good bit of experience, so don't be afraid to just point out problems for someone else to do the fixing. -- SB_Johnny | talk 18:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The DRV has now been closed. You can read the result at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_21. DuncanHill ( talk) 16:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see Category:LGBT Wikipedians. Avruch talk 21:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I have awarded the Special Barnstar to Avruch for his actions in creating and defending category:LGBT Wikipedians. Jay*Jay ( talk) 14:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Per the recent drama on the Rosie O'Donnell article, folks deleting first then discussing when compelled, I have rewritten, resourced and refocused Rosie O'Donnell#Accusations of anti-Catholicism and would appreciate others keeping an eye on it since the article just came off protection. Benjiboi 17:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Why on earth is that in this project? I see that Satyr added it, which is only reason I didn't delete our tag immediately. Is there something I'm missing? Aleta (Sing) 22:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)