Talk:Gay Liberation Front

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Manifesto[edit]

Was this group armed? Were/are there armed gay groups in the tradition of the Black Panther Party? etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.214.234 (talk) 06:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, though in the manifesto the intent was to defend themselves: "If this involves violence, it will not be we who initiate this, but those who attempt to stand in our way to freedom." -- Ashley VH 15:17, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Section on New Left Historians[edit]

This seems like an important topic, but the paragraphs currently under this section are incoherent at best.Dpmath (talk) 22:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back at the page as it was at the beginning of the year shows that multiple edits by different people have reduced the cohesiveness of the article and important facts have been dropped. Perhaps the structure and/or pasting back in key paragraphs from the page's previous versions would help? -- Ashley VH (talk) 23:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I see that the original (unsigned) version from January 21, 2007 does make more sense, though it does feel a little "dropped into" the page---like it was spliced from elsewhere. It seems to address an argument that doesn't appear elsewhere on this page. I would agree that it might be good to restore this first version, but it could use further editing to make it appropriate to the article as a whole. I can come back and give it a try in a few weeks, if nobody with some sound background in this area doesn't want to step up to the plate in the meantime. Cheers. Dpmath (talk) 07:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken it out. As currently written, it's incoherent and does not even address the topic - it's about unspecified historians of the "New Left". It could be re-incorporated if there is a complete section on e.g. "Historical treatment of the movement". But without context and balance it just irritates. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For reference - this is the content and ref removed. Banjeboi 10:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"However, many New Left historians of the period have downplayed its importance or have excluded it entirely."[1]

References

  1. ^ Kissack, Terence. Freaking Fag Revolutionaries: New York’s Gay Liberation Front, 1969-1971. Radical History Review 62, 1995 p.105

Need to separate into two articles one for GLF-New York City and one for GLF-Britain[edit]

As it stands this article is very confusing with the overlapping references. Both groups are significant enough to have their own separate articles. Anyone interested in teasing this apart? Pjefts (talk) 16:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:GLF badge.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:GLF badge.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gay Liberation Front. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]