![]() | 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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 25 |
I unfortunately do nto have the time to devote to WP as I used to. But after searchign the article, I have noticed it has a 99 positive spin, with zero little mention of his behavioral problems and his often Homophobic coments. Thought I would bring it to the projects attentiona dn see if anyone wants to run with it. 74.62.46.90 ( talk) 00:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
The following was in an email sent to several gay writers and newspapers, written by a man named Billy Glover. I got hold of it by magic. Though he seems a bit cranky, he does have some points. I think it has food for thought. Discuss? -- Moni3 ( talk) 17:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I have been looking at journalists and the media since about 1960. And I have yet to find the journalists as a group or individually doing even a minimally good job of covering most aspects of homosexuality. As they have done about Britney, or gay marriage and now seem to be doing on trans issues, as to compensate for failure to attack HRC etc because of shouting by a small segment of the population, they mostly have ignored the major issues we have faced. They ignored Don Slater, continue to never mention ONE, which was the largest organization, and for some time the only publication, because of two things-ONE did not fit the popular stereotype of "gay," and we were not young and cute and they didn't agree with our positions.
Hal Call was attacked for going into porn, but we got no support for NOT going into porn. We picketed the Los Angeles Times and were ignored-except that the paper then changed its policy which is what we wanted. Our Motorcade, even though for once the New York Times actually did a good article-written by Peter Bart, now in Hollywood at Variety I think-but no one else did, not even the gay media.
Don Slater was doing the military issue long before anyone else, he was in court, won cases, even though the policy didn't change, but his work was ignored, except for a brief mention, mostly in error, in Randy Shilts book. I was on Regis Philbin's tv talk show on the issue, and he was rude and there was no coverage of this in the media, as there was no coverage of Harry Hay and John Burnside's appearance on other tv shows.
There has been silence on the few books that actually try to cover our history, such as the book Vern Bullough edited, of short bios of pioneers, Before Stonewall, and Paul Cain's interviews in Leading The Parade. Most other books are East Coast oriented.
Show me one article in any g/l publication, by any g/l journalist on the g/l libraries/archives.
As I understand it, one of the two men whose legal case got rid of the sodomy laws ( Lawrence vs Texas) died in Houston, ignored and unhonored. Now I want g/l publications to sell. But how many covers and long articles can we have on non-gay celebrities while we ignore the people who have DONE the work that changed this nation for homosexual citizens?
Do young homosexual men and women ever hear of actual homosexuals who have worked for change? Instead they are given as "inspirationals" young, cute, girls and boys who know nothing on the subject, do nothing for the cause, but look good.
Who is working to try to get academia to use homosexual educators who KNOW the subject and should be teaching classes instead of some hacks who just are handed the course to fill a pc duty to say they have "done" the gay thing? Why are universities allowed to give their students less than the best education on this subject?
I gather there is a convention of g/l journalists meeting as I write. Who are they hearing from? Is Frank Kameny being heard? Who is speaking for our cause? What we will hear are attacks on HRC by trans people who came out of the closet, if they have, a year or so ago and have done nothing on their own but want to become leaders and take over existing g/l organizations instead of taking time to learn about life.
Or we will hear from Ellen and Elton. As if they can give much insight as to how to live as an average homosexual. And as if they actually did much work to change laws and attitudes.
I wait to hear some coverage of people and groups in our community/movement that are daily working yet are never heard from yet are the ones who actually are making the changes.
There is what could be a major event in New Orleans on Sep. 3d, (manystoriesonevoice.org) of religious homosexuals. Has any media covered this? Has any publication ever covered a meeting of the Seventh Day Adventist Kinship (g/l) group? How are the g/l Front Runner groups doing? Maybe somewhere on a website I don't know about there are listings that young people can find of groups they might want to know about, but do they know about them?
Just listing a name and phone number of some groups iknsmall print in the back of a g/l newspaperis not "serving" the community/movement. And why do we need g/l journalists if most of the articles we see are in general publications. As I've said many times before-I see the same travel news in g/l publications I see in general travel publications-so homosexual travelers have no need to buy a "gay" travel magazine that hs the samelistings-museums, Broadway plays, etc.
It seems that gay bars are not growing in number, yet that is the major coverage many g/l papers give us. And page of reviews of movies with no gay content.
And i the midst of all he fawning over gay marriage-with a brief mention of divorce-such as the two women who are filing for divorce 3 days after they married-is there any article on the g/l community that is NOT interested in marriage-such as the Alternative to Marriage Project?
One or two major g/l publications have very little gay news but lots of ads for million dollar homes and $40,000 cars and expensive clothes, which means the average homosexual, or average American will ave no interest in the publication.
And when was the last time you saw a ""quote" in the columns of someone who is NOT a celebrity, mostly non-gay celebrities are quoted, with silly hings such as,"Oh, Ilike my gay fans." Howinsulting. Is that what our community is desperate for, approval of celebrities?
There are probably gay artists, musicians, actors,that I have ever heard of, because all I read about in the g/ papers are the current non-gay people. Perhaps if they are "popular" in the gay clubs that is because they are the ones "celebrated" n the gay press. The general media keeps telling us that they give us what we want, and that ratings confirm this-I don't believe it-we have to take what they give us.
But a new day is coming, with internet, blogs, etc so that they will no longer be the deciders. Perhaps they will give us a column of good blog sites, gay websites-such as the new outhistory.org, which will give balanced information and resources and news.
I just declined a speedy delete on this. Is this a notable book company? If not, let me know, I'll delete it. Thanks! Keeper ǀ 76 19:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
After Keeper's wonderful diplomatic work, one of the editors who had previously objected to the project tag on Charlie Crist and Larry Craig re-added the tag to Charlie Crist. Another editor, who looking at the tag page seems now to be clearly in the consensus minority, objected and remove the tag under the reasons of Delete LGBT project tag because (1) tag included no reason for why this article is relevant to the project; (2) unclear whether the Project ever made the decision to tag the article. While reason #1 has been talked to death. I think reason #2 can be dispelled quite clearly if some of the folks from LGBT who are interested in maintaining accuracy and standards in the Charlie Crist came over to the talk page and note that interest. It still seems like an uphill battle with the LGBT needing to explain every little step and not having the freedom to be treated like other Wiki-projects, but it looks like progress is being made-one baby step at a time. Agne Cheese/ Wine 18:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Let me know what you think. Jaakobou Chalk Talk 21:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just noticed that our slang pages could use a bit of standardizing...
Would anyone object if we changed the following pages to be along the lines of "Word (slang)"? That would fall in line with some of the other slang terms on Wikipedia, and would satisfy my need for organization :) Furthermore, the "gay" in the title is unnecessary - none of these are found in other types of slang.
Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 18:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-08-11/News and notes In case anyone missed it. Banjeboi 00:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Yo,
I just created an article on Minority Sexual and Gender Identity, or MSGI, which is the next acronym on from LGBT. I'm having problems finding academic references to it though - it seems to be in semi-common usage around LGBT politics (especially queer politics), but I can't find any written references. Help/use of journal subscriptions would be appreciated. Dev920, who misses Jeffpw. 12:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm tempted to AfD Gaysploitation, unless anyone can provide some sort of references? The "refs" currently in the article are either alleged examples or barely mention the term. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 17:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, Benji, but I just don't see anything worthwhile yet as it appears to be a neologism. The book refs seem to be more about using the term in passing, so I have to go with Keeper on this. It was put up for prod in January 2007, so it would have to go to AfD. Transwiki as a dicdef, I think. — Becksguy ( talk) 04:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Ran across another term that needs some serious work - or needs to be deleted. Homonormativity has self-referential links, needs wikification, needs actual refs. Does anyone know if this is even notable? Or should it just be transwikied to wiktionary? Or deleted? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 04:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
An anon IP just posted that she died. I checked CNN and SFgate.com, with no news. -- Moni3 ( talk) 18:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Interested editors may wish to participate in a discussion on the Talk:E.O. Green School shooting page regarding a NPOV tag recently placed on the article. Exploding Boy ( talk) 20:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't think we should list Coquille Indian Tribe (Oregon) as a place where marriage is legal. It is not a state, unless this is some huge tribe, that I know nothing about, and is prominent. Ctjf83 Talk 02:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey guys - there has been some recent image vandalism on LGBT articles. Can you guys please watch these pages:
--David Shankbone 15:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
It's those skimpy Speedos, Satyr. And Greg Louganis, Mark Spitz, Michael Phelps, &.... ;-) — Becksguy ( talk) 11:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
The 72.76 vandal seems to be back and now targeting Davids other photos. If you notice images disappearing this may be why. Banjeboi 12:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
The "current" one is the one we picked for January. Are we doing this at all? Is it dead in the water? Have we just run out of what we want to do on that one and need to pick a new one? Or do we want to abandon the CotM idea altogether? Thoughts? Aleta Sing 18:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I have no clue what to do with Transgender Rights in Tamil Nadu. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 05:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
What about Male homosexual and gay poetry - anyone want to take a crack. At it? The title is way problematic (un-encyclopedic at best), and I'm not sure if it's trying to be a list or an article. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 04:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to clean-up this gem --> Gay_community#Criticisms. Banjeboi 23:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Heya. A newsletter should have been sent out by now for August, obviously. I think this is part of my reaction to Jeffpw's passing. I thought it had to be addressed in the next issue, and I am unable to advance farther than that. Every time I think about the newsletter I enter a mental void that has me contently staring at a blank wall instead of turning around to confront sadness or anger. So - I'm not slacking... I'm avoiding. If someone who is better emotionally equipped than I would like to do the next one, please feel free. Maybe just to kick start me. -- Moni3 ( talk) 16:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I've proposed three category upmerges:
Please comment at: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 10. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 00:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Someone else nominated several categories for renaming, mostly along the lines of "Rename 'LGBT music' to 'LGBT-related music'". See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 9#Category:LGBT media for more info. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 15:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm concerned about the ( talk links history). On the one hand, it's the rule, not the exception. In other words, it's *much* more notable that someone is a part of the Republican party and LGBT. Also, why is it notable what party affiliation someone LGBT has? And finally, I haven't researched it, but party affiliation is probably a bit difficult to determine with a reliable source unless they're a politician, in which case they're already covered by Category:LGBT politicians. Thoughts? CfD? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 15:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have the book "The Life of Langston Hughes"? There are no references I can find about Gilbert Price, though I've read a couple places that Langston Hughes was in love with Price. If anyone has the book, could you find a relevant passage that says that Price was gay - or not? Thanks! -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 19:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
You should all be warned that the banned “ Gay Pornography vandal” (ban date: March 6, 2008) is back on Wikipedia on a different IP range. Although he still has access to his old IP range, he has begun using multiple IP ranges. Commons has been wrestling with the issue for awhile.
Aside from death threats and his usual boogedy-boogedy, he is also back to working on the porn articles, specifically, his vendetta with Michael Lucas, which spread to me. It also spurred the creation of new meta tools to deal with cyberstalking.
This is the range he is working in currently. Can someone please softprotect that article ( Michael Lucas (director)) for a month. There is a long, voluminous, and threat-laden history to this page and its talk page. I suggest the longer soft-protect, the better.
As everyone remembers, this person's boundless anger quickly transfers to other people, and disrupts the incident board endlessly with complaints from multiple editors. I will cross-post this on a few former targets to give them a heads up. --David Shankbone 16:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Currently creating BLP violations, and removing a professional photo Lucas released GFDL for a lesser photo (mine). --David Shankbone 19:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose we change our project box, adding on a link to the talk page, recent changes, and stubs, like is done on the Simpsons project box Template:User WikiProject The Simpsons and the Oregon project Template:User WikiProject Oregon Ctjf83 Talk 16:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
There's another interesting discussion on Talk:Sally Kern about whether she's homophobic enough to be included in Category:Homophobia. That's not actually what's being discussed, but sometimes that category seems to invoke that kind of discussion :)
In any case, I'd love to get a couple more opinions on the discussion. Thanks! -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Could it be mere coincidence that a series of articles and category pages on the topic of pederasty are all of the sudden being "edited" by brand-new users with no history other than the removal of cited as well as uncited material in a wide range of related articles? Established users are also active in a simultaneous attack, at the main article on Pederasty which they intend to gut and rewrite according to their "consensus." I will certainly not dash myself against the windmills if there is no interest among responsible editors in preserving and expanding this field of information. For a better idea of what is going on I suggest a look at Pederasty in the Middle East and Central Asia and at Reza Abbasi, as well as all the other articles these two "editors" have "worked" on. Another fly-by-night is here, regardless of validity of edits: this diff The anon attacks are suggestive of a concerted campaign orchestrated off-site. Is this any way to compile an encyclopedia?! Haiduc ( talk) 00:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Should Federación Estatal de Lesbianas, Gays, Transexuales y Bisexuales be moved to National Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transsexuals and Bisexuals? Or does it stay under the Spanish name? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 02:08, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Pretty noncontroversial renaming I proposed Category:Gay sportspeople to Category:Gay athletes. Discussion here Ctjf83 Talk 01:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm back. Anyway, this page I created on Irving Bieber, a homophobic psychoanalyst, has been changed into praising him. The trouble is, things are referenced. I would do with a bit of help to put the record straight. (For instance, citing Charles Socarides, another homophobic psychoanalyst, doesn't seem fair. I can try to find a book of psychoanalytic theory which would be more balanced.) Also, the same editor has deleted a wikilink for a page to be created on Edmund Bergler, another homophobic psychoanalyst of the McCarthy era. I thought the idea was that anyone could create/edit articles on wikipedia as long as they were referenced and balanced/fair? Zigzig20s ( talk) 08:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I could use some help. An editor continues to assert that "boyloving" (his term for pedophilic rape) is the same as being homosexual. The argument is occurring on Jon Schillaci. Stop on by if you have any desire to participate :) -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 18:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I notice this article is included in the LGBT portal thing. I don't really understand its inclusion. Pope Julius II was a pederast. Surely the link shouldn't be made to homosexuality just because it was same-sex pederasty. If it had been a young girl (which under the Catholic regime wouldn't be possible but just say) would it be marked as a 'heterosexual' relationship? To me, it is troubling to identify a relationship such as this as homosexual, particularly in light of the current pope's witch hunt against so-called 'gay' priests, who are in fact pederasts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.155.72 ( talk) 22:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Michel Foucault has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Thanks! Lesgles ( talk) 20:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm tempted to just delete the 'reviews' section because are we even allowed to insert such long quotations? Also it doesnt seem standard with the WPNovels guidelines. Zigzig20s ( talk) 23:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I've tried to improve the layout for this page; it would be good to find references for a biography section. The French page on Wikipedia says he was a proponent of barebacking and he had a public row with Didier Lestrade because of that. He also started a series of LGBT publications in France, Rayon Gay. But we need references for all that...and google isn't helping with the first hits anyway. I didn't categorise him as gay or anything because we need references. Can anyone please help? Zigzig20s ( talk) 22:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Is it ok to ask for a project collaboration on the peer review for this article? If things start to work for the article, I'd like to see it get featured by the time the Gus van Sant film come out in late November. Maybe... appear on the main page November 27. The day the film trailer came out, the article recorded 24,000 hits. -- Moni3 ( talk) 02:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to use:
[2] -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 03:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I know this article has been contentious in the past. A new user has (with his/her only edits thus far) removed the LGBT category from the article and the project template from the talk page. I have restored the project template. I do not know enough to get into the article dispute, but thought I'd post something here to call attention about it to those more familiar with the article and past discussions of this issue. Aleta Sing 19:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
New article Gay culture in Russia has been created, in case anyone is interested in working on it. ElmerBront ( talk) 03:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I am trying to verify the origins of the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club, specifically who founded the organization. The earliest recorded source that I am aware of is the July 19, 1972 issue of The Advocate ("Christopher Street West SF Gay Parade", page 3). I understand that this issue is available at Northwestern University along with some of Alice's reports, but they don't photocopy/loan items from their special collections. Are there any students, faculty, staff, or nearby residents who would be willing to check on this? See Talk:Harvey Milk#Alice for the whole story. Thanks, Queerudite ( talk) 04:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
If anyone's interested, there are 172 articles that are within our project's purview as well as within the demesne of WP:ANIME. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 05:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Some interesting new info on the former Idol star. Just a heads up that this project may be interested in making sure the Clay Aiken article is factual and accurate. Cheers! Keeper ǀ 76 23:04, 23 September 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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 25 |
I unfortunately do nto have the time to devote to WP as I used to. But after searchign the article, I have noticed it has a 99 positive spin, with zero little mention of his behavioral problems and his often Homophobic coments. Thought I would bring it to the projects attentiona dn see if anyone wants to run with it. 74.62.46.90 ( talk) 00:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
The following was in an email sent to several gay writers and newspapers, written by a man named Billy Glover. I got hold of it by magic. Though he seems a bit cranky, he does have some points. I think it has food for thought. Discuss? -- Moni3 ( talk) 17:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I have been looking at journalists and the media since about 1960. And I have yet to find the journalists as a group or individually doing even a minimally good job of covering most aspects of homosexuality. As they have done about Britney, or gay marriage and now seem to be doing on trans issues, as to compensate for failure to attack HRC etc because of shouting by a small segment of the population, they mostly have ignored the major issues we have faced. They ignored Don Slater, continue to never mention ONE, which was the largest organization, and for some time the only publication, because of two things-ONE did not fit the popular stereotype of "gay," and we were not young and cute and they didn't agree with our positions.
Hal Call was attacked for going into porn, but we got no support for NOT going into porn. We picketed the Los Angeles Times and were ignored-except that the paper then changed its policy which is what we wanted. Our Motorcade, even though for once the New York Times actually did a good article-written by Peter Bart, now in Hollywood at Variety I think-but no one else did, not even the gay media.
Don Slater was doing the military issue long before anyone else, he was in court, won cases, even though the policy didn't change, but his work was ignored, except for a brief mention, mostly in error, in Randy Shilts book. I was on Regis Philbin's tv talk show on the issue, and he was rude and there was no coverage of this in the media, as there was no coverage of Harry Hay and John Burnside's appearance on other tv shows.
There has been silence on the few books that actually try to cover our history, such as the book Vern Bullough edited, of short bios of pioneers, Before Stonewall, and Paul Cain's interviews in Leading The Parade. Most other books are East Coast oriented.
Show me one article in any g/l publication, by any g/l journalist on the g/l libraries/archives.
As I understand it, one of the two men whose legal case got rid of the sodomy laws ( Lawrence vs Texas) died in Houston, ignored and unhonored. Now I want g/l publications to sell. But how many covers and long articles can we have on non-gay celebrities while we ignore the people who have DONE the work that changed this nation for homosexual citizens?
Do young homosexual men and women ever hear of actual homosexuals who have worked for change? Instead they are given as "inspirationals" young, cute, girls and boys who know nothing on the subject, do nothing for the cause, but look good.
Who is working to try to get academia to use homosexual educators who KNOW the subject and should be teaching classes instead of some hacks who just are handed the course to fill a pc duty to say they have "done" the gay thing? Why are universities allowed to give their students less than the best education on this subject?
I gather there is a convention of g/l journalists meeting as I write. Who are they hearing from? Is Frank Kameny being heard? Who is speaking for our cause? What we will hear are attacks on HRC by trans people who came out of the closet, if they have, a year or so ago and have done nothing on their own but want to become leaders and take over existing g/l organizations instead of taking time to learn about life.
Or we will hear from Ellen and Elton. As if they can give much insight as to how to live as an average homosexual. And as if they actually did much work to change laws and attitudes.
I wait to hear some coverage of people and groups in our community/movement that are daily working yet are never heard from yet are the ones who actually are making the changes.
There is what could be a major event in New Orleans on Sep. 3d, (manystoriesonevoice.org) of religious homosexuals. Has any media covered this? Has any publication ever covered a meeting of the Seventh Day Adventist Kinship (g/l) group? How are the g/l Front Runner groups doing? Maybe somewhere on a website I don't know about there are listings that young people can find of groups they might want to know about, but do they know about them?
Just listing a name and phone number of some groups iknsmall print in the back of a g/l newspaperis not "serving" the community/movement. And why do we need g/l journalists if most of the articles we see are in general publications. As I've said many times before-I see the same travel news in g/l publications I see in general travel publications-so homosexual travelers have no need to buy a "gay" travel magazine that hs the samelistings-museums, Broadway plays, etc.
It seems that gay bars are not growing in number, yet that is the major coverage many g/l papers give us. And page of reviews of movies with no gay content.
And i the midst of all he fawning over gay marriage-with a brief mention of divorce-such as the two women who are filing for divorce 3 days after they married-is there any article on the g/l community that is NOT interested in marriage-such as the Alternative to Marriage Project?
One or two major g/l publications have very little gay news but lots of ads for million dollar homes and $40,000 cars and expensive clothes, which means the average homosexual, or average American will ave no interest in the publication.
And when was the last time you saw a ""quote" in the columns of someone who is NOT a celebrity, mostly non-gay celebrities are quoted, with silly hings such as,"Oh, Ilike my gay fans." Howinsulting. Is that what our community is desperate for, approval of celebrities?
There are probably gay artists, musicians, actors,that I have ever heard of, because all I read about in the g/ papers are the current non-gay people. Perhaps if they are "popular" in the gay clubs that is because they are the ones "celebrated" n the gay press. The general media keeps telling us that they give us what we want, and that ratings confirm this-I don't believe it-we have to take what they give us.
But a new day is coming, with internet, blogs, etc so that they will no longer be the deciders. Perhaps they will give us a column of good blog sites, gay websites-such as the new outhistory.org, which will give balanced information and resources and news.
I just declined a speedy delete on this. Is this a notable book company? If not, let me know, I'll delete it. Thanks! Keeper ǀ 76 19:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
After Keeper's wonderful diplomatic work, one of the editors who had previously objected to the project tag on Charlie Crist and Larry Craig re-added the tag to Charlie Crist. Another editor, who looking at the tag page seems now to be clearly in the consensus minority, objected and remove the tag under the reasons of Delete LGBT project tag because (1) tag included no reason for why this article is relevant to the project; (2) unclear whether the Project ever made the decision to tag the article. While reason #1 has been talked to death. I think reason #2 can be dispelled quite clearly if some of the folks from LGBT who are interested in maintaining accuracy and standards in the Charlie Crist came over to the talk page and note that interest. It still seems like an uphill battle with the LGBT needing to explain every little step and not having the freedom to be treated like other Wiki-projects, but it looks like progress is being made-one baby step at a time. Agne Cheese/ Wine 18:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Let me know what you think. Jaakobou Chalk Talk 21:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just noticed that our slang pages could use a bit of standardizing...
Would anyone object if we changed the following pages to be along the lines of "Word (slang)"? That would fall in line with some of the other slang terms on Wikipedia, and would satisfy my need for organization :) Furthermore, the "gay" in the title is unnecessary - none of these are found in other types of slang.
Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 18:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-08-11/News and notes In case anyone missed it. Banjeboi 00:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Yo,
I just created an article on Minority Sexual and Gender Identity, or MSGI, which is the next acronym on from LGBT. I'm having problems finding academic references to it though - it seems to be in semi-common usage around LGBT politics (especially queer politics), but I can't find any written references. Help/use of journal subscriptions would be appreciated. Dev920, who misses Jeffpw. 12:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm tempted to AfD Gaysploitation, unless anyone can provide some sort of references? The "refs" currently in the article are either alleged examples or barely mention the term. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 17:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, Benji, but I just don't see anything worthwhile yet as it appears to be a neologism. The book refs seem to be more about using the term in passing, so I have to go with Keeper on this. It was put up for prod in January 2007, so it would have to go to AfD. Transwiki as a dicdef, I think. — Becksguy ( talk) 04:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Ran across another term that needs some serious work - or needs to be deleted. Homonormativity has self-referential links, needs wikification, needs actual refs. Does anyone know if this is even notable? Or should it just be transwikied to wiktionary? Or deleted? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 04:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
An anon IP just posted that she died. I checked CNN and SFgate.com, with no news. -- Moni3 ( talk) 18:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Interested editors may wish to participate in a discussion on the Talk:E.O. Green School shooting page regarding a NPOV tag recently placed on the article. Exploding Boy ( talk) 20:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't think we should list Coquille Indian Tribe (Oregon) as a place where marriage is legal. It is not a state, unless this is some huge tribe, that I know nothing about, and is prominent. Ctjf83 Talk 02:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey guys - there has been some recent image vandalism on LGBT articles. Can you guys please watch these pages:
--David Shankbone 15:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
It's those skimpy Speedos, Satyr. And Greg Louganis, Mark Spitz, Michael Phelps, &.... ;-) — Becksguy ( talk) 11:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
The 72.76 vandal seems to be back and now targeting Davids other photos. If you notice images disappearing this may be why. Banjeboi 12:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
The "current" one is the one we picked for January. Are we doing this at all? Is it dead in the water? Have we just run out of what we want to do on that one and need to pick a new one? Or do we want to abandon the CotM idea altogether? Thoughts? Aleta Sing 18:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I have no clue what to do with Transgender Rights in Tamil Nadu. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 05:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
What about Male homosexual and gay poetry - anyone want to take a crack. At it? The title is way problematic (un-encyclopedic at best), and I'm not sure if it's trying to be a list or an article. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 04:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to clean-up this gem --> Gay_community#Criticisms. Banjeboi 23:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Heya. A newsletter should have been sent out by now for August, obviously. I think this is part of my reaction to Jeffpw's passing. I thought it had to be addressed in the next issue, and I am unable to advance farther than that. Every time I think about the newsletter I enter a mental void that has me contently staring at a blank wall instead of turning around to confront sadness or anger. So - I'm not slacking... I'm avoiding. If someone who is better emotionally equipped than I would like to do the next one, please feel free. Maybe just to kick start me. -- Moni3 ( talk) 16:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I've proposed three category upmerges:
Please comment at: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 10. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 00:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Someone else nominated several categories for renaming, mostly along the lines of "Rename 'LGBT music' to 'LGBT-related music'". See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 9#Category:LGBT media for more info. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 15:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm concerned about the ( talk links history). On the one hand, it's the rule, not the exception. In other words, it's *much* more notable that someone is a part of the Republican party and LGBT. Also, why is it notable what party affiliation someone LGBT has? And finally, I haven't researched it, but party affiliation is probably a bit difficult to determine with a reliable source unless they're a politician, in which case they're already covered by Category:LGBT politicians. Thoughts? CfD? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 15:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have the book "The Life of Langston Hughes"? There are no references I can find about Gilbert Price, though I've read a couple places that Langston Hughes was in love with Price. If anyone has the book, could you find a relevant passage that says that Price was gay - or not? Thanks! -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 19:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
You should all be warned that the banned “ Gay Pornography vandal” (ban date: March 6, 2008) is back on Wikipedia on a different IP range. Although he still has access to his old IP range, he has begun using multiple IP ranges. Commons has been wrestling with the issue for awhile.
Aside from death threats and his usual boogedy-boogedy, he is also back to working on the porn articles, specifically, his vendetta with Michael Lucas, which spread to me. It also spurred the creation of new meta tools to deal with cyberstalking.
This is the range he is working in currently. Can someone please softprotect that article ( Michael Lucas (director)) for a month. There is a long, voluminous, and threat-laden history to this page and its talk page. I suggest the longer soft-protect, the better.
As everyone remembers, this person's boundless anger quickly transfers to other people, and disrupts the incident board endlessly with complaints from multiple editors. I will cross-post this on a few former targets to give them a heads up. --David Shankbone 16:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Currently creating BLP violations, and removing a professional photo Lucas released GFDL for a lesser photo (mine). --David Shankbone 19:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose we change our project box, adding on a link to the talk page, recent changes, and stubs, like is done on the Simpsons project box Template:User WikiProject The Simpsons and the Oregon project Template:User WikiProject Oregon Ctjf83 Talk 16:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
There's another interesting discussion on Talk:Sally Kern about whether she's homophobic enough to be included in Category:Homophobia. That's not actually what's being discussed, but sometimes that category seems to invoke that kind of discussion :)
In any case, I'd love to get a couple more opinions on the discussion. Thanks! -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Could it be mere coincidence that a series of articles and category pages on the topic of pederasty are all of the sudden being "edited" by brand-new users with no history other than the removal of cited as well as uncited material in a wide range of related articles? Established users are also active in a simultaneous attack, at the main article on Pederasty which they intend to gut and rewrite according to their "consensus." I will certainly not dash myself against the windmills if there is no interest among responsible editors in preserving and expanding this field of information. For a better idea of what is going on I suggest a look at Pederasty in the Middle East and Central Asia and at Reza Abbasi, as well as all the other articles these two "editors" have "worked" on. Another fly-by-night is here, regardless of validity of edits: this diff The anon attacks are suggestive of a concerted campaign orchestrated off-site. Is this any way to compile an encyclopedia?! Haiduc ( talk) 00:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Should Federación Estatal de Lesbianas, Gays, Transexuales y Bisexuales be moved to National Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transsexuals and Bisexuals? Or does it stay under the Spanish name? -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 02:08, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Pretty noncontroversial renaming I proposed Category:Gay sportspeople to Category:Gay athletes. Discussion here Ctjf83 Talk 01:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm back. Anyway, this page I created on Irving Bieber, a homophobic psychoanalyst, has been changed into praising him. The trouble is, things are referenced. I would do with a bit of help to put the record straight. (For instance, citing Charles Socarides, another homophobic psychoanalyst, doesn't seem fair. I can try to find a book of psychoanalytic theory which would be more balanced.) Also, the same editor has deleted a wikilink for a page to be created on Edmund Bergler, another homophobic psychoanalyst of the McCarthy era. I thought the idea was that anyone could create/edit articles on wikipedia as long as they were referenced and balanced/fair? Zigzig20s ( talk) 08:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I could use some help. An editor continues to assert that "boyloving" (his term for pedophilic rape) is the same as being homosexual. The argument is occurring on Jon Schillaci. Stop on by if you have any desire to participate :) -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 18:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I notice this article is included in the LGBT portal thing. I don't really understand its inclusion. Pope Julius II was a pederast. Surely the link shouldn't be made to homosexuality just because it was same-sex pederasty. If it had been a young girl (which under the Catholic regime wouldn't be possible but just say) would it be marked as a 'heterosexual' relationship? To me, it is troubling to identify a relationship such as this as homosexual, particularly in light of the current pope's witch hunt against so-called 'gay' priests, who are in fact pederasts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.155.72 ( talk) 22:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Michel Foucault has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Thanks! Lesgles ( talk) 20:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm tempted to just delete the 'reviews' section because are we even allowed to insert such long quotations? Also it doesnt seem standard with the WPNovels guidelines. Zigzig20s ( talk) 23:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I've tried to improve the layout for this page; it would be good to find references for a biography section. The French page on Wikipedia says he was a proponent of barebacking and he had a public row with Didier Lestrade because of that. He also started a series of LGBT publications in France, Rayon Gay. But we need references for all that...and google isn't helping with the first hits anyway. I didn't categorise him as gay or anything because we need references. Can anyone please help? Zigzig20s ( talk) 22:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Is it ok to ask for a project collaboration on the peer review for this article? If things start to work for the article, I'd like to see it get featured by the time the Gus van Sant film come out in late November. Maybe... appear on the main page November 27. The day the film trailer came out, the article recorded 24,000 hits. -- Moni3 ( talk) 02:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to use:
[2] -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 03:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I know this article has been contentious in the past. A new user has (with his/her only edits thus far) removed the LGBT category from the article and the project template from the talk page. I have restored the project template. I do not know enough to get into the article dispute, but thought I'd post something here to call attention about it to those more familiar with the article and past discussions of this issue. Aleta Sing 19:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
New article Gay culture in Russia has been created, in case anyone is interested in working on it. ElmerBront ( talk) 03:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I am trying to verify the origins of the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club, specifically who founded the organization. The earliest recorded source that I am aware of is the July 19, 1972 issue of The Advocate ("Christopher Street West SF Gay Parade", page 3). I understand that this issue is available at Northwestern University along with some of Alice's reports, but they don't photocopy/loan items from their special collections. Are there any students, faculty, staff, or nearby residents who would be willing to check on this? See Talk:Harvey Milk#Alice for the whole story. Thanks, Queerudite ( talk) 04:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
If anyone's interested, there are 172 articles that are within our project's purview as well as within the demesne of WP:ANIME. -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 05:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Some interesting new info on the former Idol star. Just a heads up that this project may be interested in making sure the Clay Aiken article is factual and accurate. Cheers! Keeper ǀ 76 23:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)