Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies/Archive 67

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

Anderton Park School in need of expansion

The ongoing situation at Anderton Park School has been gathering a fair bit of attention at least in the UK, and the current legnth of the article doesn't really do the subject justice. Inter&anthro (talk) 15:15, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

The Singing Nun

There is currently a Request for Comment open at Talk:The Singing Nun#Request for comments to which editors from this project may be interested in contributing. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

A Special Agent: Gay and Inside the FBI

I was asked to update my browser after I created this. Never heard of the book or this man. There are many more reviews on Newspapers.com. I am going to remove the "in use" tag for now, if anyone else wants to expand it. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 23:43, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2019 currently lacks coherence & clarity

I hesitated writing a "negative" title to this section, but in my experience such headlines attract more attention. My intention though is to improve the clarity and cohesiveness of Wiki Loves Pride 2019 messaging.

Allow me to first identify the problem. I will do this by describing the "path" I took after clicking the Wiki Loves Pride 2019 banner about 20 minutes ago, along with questions a Wikipedia beginner might have.

Click banner > which goes to Wiki Loves Pride 2019. Note that the URL, https://wikilovespride.org, also goes to Wiki Loves Pride 2019

Question (that I had and I suspect others have when they arrive on this page): What is Wiki Loves Price 2019? It says it's a photo contest. Ok, that's cool. I wonder what kind of photographs they're seeking?

  • Oh it seems it's also about an "edit-a-thon" ... not sure what that is. (I know what it is, but most beginners don't.)
  • And also about an "Art Writing Contest"--I wonder if that's writing about art or writing as an art?
  • It says, "Placeholder for photography component of Wiki Loves Pride 2019, modeled on Commons:Wiki Loves Love 2019." Whoa, I think I'm in over my head here. ... But this topic is important to me so I'll see if I can learn more and understand it better.

Therefore, I click on +Art Writing Contest > Arrive at meta:Wiki_Loves_Pride/2019/Art. The first two sentences are: "Wiki Loves Pride Art & Artists 2019, supported by WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of Art, is an affiliated event of Wiki Loves Pride 2019. The flagship in-person event will be Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon NYC at the Metropolitan Museum on Sunday June 23."

  • Oh, that sounds interesting, but I don't live near New York City, so I'm not sure this is for me.
  • I didn't know there was a WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of Art, that's interesting. --> Click on the link and go to Wikipedia:GLAM/Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art. Hmmm. GLAM? I thought it was GLAD. Maybe it's related to Glam rock? No, that doesn't make sense. ... Hmmm. I don't understand. (I know that GLAM = "galleries, libraries, archives, and museums", but I doubt most beginners know this acronym. Yes it is linked, I'm simply trying to imagine the perspective of someone who hasn't been on Wikipedia for 11 years.)

That's all I can write at the moment, but I promise to return within 24 hours and offer suggestions, make edits, etc. Oh, one more thing: I think the Signpost article contains well-written content to adapt to relevant pages.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 05:49, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I made several changes to the introductory paragraph of Wiki Loves Pride 2019 in an effort to improve clarity and coherence. Please discuss at Edits to project page (23 Jun 2019). Thanks!   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 15:59, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Post on r/GenderCritical

Just an FYI about this post on an anti-trans subreddit that singles out various Wikipedians, including yours truly. I'm not concerned about it, but think it may be worth knowing about.

"The transgender activists taking over Wikipedia"

Tsumikiria, Fæ, Mooeena, Newimpartial, GorillaWarfare, Wickedterrier, LokiTheLiar.

WanderingWanda (talk) 01:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Eh, you know you're doing good if the TERFs are against you. :P
Thanks for the heads-up, though! LokiTheLiar (talk) 01:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Surprised I wasn't included. Not going to click on the link to check though. Funcrunch (talk) 03:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Yuck. Thanks for letting me know. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh well,
Hark, hark, the sea lions bark!
The TERFs have come to town!
Harass those males
With your based reddit squeals!
And actually it's about protecting the sex-based rights of *realll* women
--In honor of this immortal masterpiece. Tsumikiria⧸ 🌹🌉 03:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Village People pump

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Encyclopedic_Mission --ApexUnderground (talk) 21:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Historic categories

The discussion here has pointed to a need for better historic categories for people who do not fit binary trajectories. Anyone here have any interest in trying to develop better categories? SusunW (talk) 15:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm deep into categories. -ApexUnderground (talk) 21:30, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
ApexUnderground What would you suggest in a situation where we have a Boston marriage but are unclear about the nature of the relationship, i.e. economic, sexual, asexual, etc.? SusunW (talk) 23:14, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Its not a sexual category because the term "marriage" is euphemistic. Unless there is proof of sexuality. The idea comes more from the fact that living costs are high, and unusual living arrangements have to be made.-ApexUnderground (talk) 23:22, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Tilda Swinton

Over at Talk:List_of_people_with_non-binary_gender_identities#RFC_about_Tilda_Swinton there's a discussion about including Swinton with non-binary people. Feel free to join the discussion. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 13:44, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia community needs you!

Did you know that Wikipedia doesn't protect against LGBT discrimination or hate speech? It could however! I just worked with a few others to create a proposal for this, which could become enwiki policy and hopefully, later on, a rule community-wide.

The first step is mostly done – creating the proposal. What's needed is some positive, friendly, approachable messages – for the RfC, for spreading on WikiProjects and other venues, and a user-friendly FAQ for it. Then we just have to get the momentum moving toward implementation.

As well, any feedback you all could give would be immensely helpful at this stage!

This issue is important - as a starting base, this New York Times article shows why. Incidents like the Signpost Humor article controversy show the necessity for the policy, while Fram's WMF ban shows the necessity for transparent, community-developed processes rather than relying on WMF judgement.

If you have any questions or are happy to help, please email me!

Thank you! –ɱ (talk) 15:26, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Ɱ, Seems similar to Wikipedia:Discrimination (evidently a failed proposal). Maybe the two pages should be merged? Edit: I see this one mentions that one. If this passes it should probably be redirected to this. Adam9007 (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes this helped me with ideas for the current NDP draft! I don't believe it was ever formally proposed, received sufficient feedback, or was voted on. Will hope to redirect that title if this passes. ɱ (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support adoption of Wikipedia:English Wikipedia non-discrimination policy We as the Wikimedia community need to reform our practices, and to do that, we should adopt policies to inform those practices. I like the idea of implementing a non-discrimination policy as a way to inform the conversations we have about what we should accept and what we reject or question. Lots of organizations have non-discrimination policies so if we as a community adopt one, there would be nothing unorthodox about it and also I think doing so would make for a friendlier environment and more efficient decision making. If anyone has ideas on improving this then I would like to hear comments and criticism. I do various projects on moderation on Wikipedia and having a policy like this would help me explain to collaborators how to make quick decisions about contributing in our unusually diverse community. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:43, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion of "The Kingdom in the Closet" from The Atlantic on the reliable sources noticeboard

The reliability of "The Kingdom in the Closet", by Nadya Labi from The Atlantic, is being discussed on the reliable sources noticeboard. This article was previously cited in the LGBT in the Middle East article. If you're interested, please participate at WP:RSN § The Kingdom in the Closet by Nadya Labi. — Newslinger talk 00:11, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Template:POTD/2019-10-28

Could people review this? I think it's important we get this right, and I want to make sure we educate people about intersex people - especially on Intersex Awareness Day - but have to navigate a bit of a minefield related to things such as the photographic series using an obsolete term as its title. Of course, it might get pulled from the mainpage, WP:NOTCENSORED or no, but I want to get it right. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 13:02, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Wording of Woman article's lead

A conversation which may be of interest to this WikiProject:

Talk:Woman#Proposed_edits_to_lede

WanderingWanda (talk) 19:43, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

There is now an RfC about this: Talk:Woman#RfC: Article lead

Two distinct questions here:
Is there a need to discuss gender identity or the gender/sex distinction in the lead of this article?
--and--
Does the current lead spend undue length discussing transgender and intersex women?

WanderingWanda (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Queens at Heart

I've recently created the article Queens at Heart, a pre-Stonewall look at some trans women living in New York, and have started the process for a WP:DYK. I invite others to look at the article and make improvements they see fit before it (hopefully) goes on the main page. Also if you have better ideas for a hook for Template:Did you know nominations/Queens at Heart, I'd appreciate those as well. Also, while WP:Notability (film) does say The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release., I'm wondering if perhaps someone might find reason to delete the article. I've found as many sources as I could, but if you know of additional sources that would be great as well. Thanks! Umimmak (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion of double Venus flag in LGBT symbols on the reliable sources noticeboard

There is a discussion on whether the double Venus flag should be included in the LGBT symbols article on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Getty Images. — Newslinger talk 23:06, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

For separate discussion in LGBT symbols Talk page about deleting the Lesbian Pride rainbow flag (i.e. Double-Venus flag) from the article: Talk:LGBT symbols#Double-Venus flag. Pyxis Solitary yak 08:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

RfC on nude image of intersex person for main page

Opinions from members of this WikiProject would be appreciated in this discussion on Talk:Main Page. – WanderingWanda (talk) 17:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

FA transgender persons

Hi, are there any FA or, if not, GA articles about transgender persons? I am looking for precedent to use at Talk:Stephanie Hirst/Archive 1#Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 July 2019, where a person claiming, I believe honestly, to be the article's subject is requesting that any mention of her birth name be removed because of the personal distress it is causing her. Any project guidance on how to handle this would also be welcome. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:34, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning and Caitlyn Jenner are both GA. I do not know of FA articles about trans people yet. You are likely familiar with this policy already, but I did not see it mentioned on the Stephanie Hirst Talkpage, so just in case, see MOS:MULTIPLENAMES, which relates to situations like this.--MattMauler (talk) 15:18, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Feedback requested at Talk:Gay pride

Hello. Your feedback would be appreciated at this discussion at Talk:Gay pride. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

PRIDE Act

  • Jagoda, Naomi (July 24, 2019). "House passes bill to update tax code to help same-sex married couples". The Hill. Retrieved July 26, 2019.
  • LeBlanc, Paul (July 25, 2019). "Pelosi celebrates the Pride Act passing the House as 'long-overdue justice'". CNN. Retrieved July 26, 2019.

I was going to create a stub, but probably too soon?Zigzig20s (talk) 03:13, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride art + health writing contests extended to July 31!

We are extending the Art Contest with the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Health Contest for Wiki Loves Pride to July 31! We've created a custom artwork article draft generator for LGBT artists in the Met collection, as well as tools to ease translation (including into English). This is all in addition to the Wiki Loves Pride photography contest.--Pharos (talk) 18:15, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to encourage all the good editors here to join Wiki Loves Pride/2019/Art, which has art book prizes and perhaps not as much competition as you might think. We also have a custom tool to start article drafts for works by LGBT artists that you are very welcome to make use of.--Pharos (talk) 14:21, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Sonny Kiss

Apparently, Sonny Kiss, a a trans male wrestler of AEW is deleted. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

  • I'm seeing a decent amount of coverage on Google News, and he's one of the few red links on that AEW list, so I'll look into remaking the article. Also a note that I believe he is gay, not trans. WanderingWanda (talk) 03:27, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Deadname in reference to bio article

I discovered an article that referenced a person's bio article by its deadname, "... was done by Joe Smith", where "Joe Smith" linked to the "Jane Smith" page. This seemed wrong to me, but my edit to change it to "Jane Smith" was reverted, and I've been on a long discussion with the editor who did it on the talk page. I'm hoping someone here can give me some guidance on how to proceed, or if I should give up on this, or what.

MOS:CHANGEDNAME has a statement that implies that deadnaming is Wikipedia policy: "they should be referred to by the name they were using at the time of the mention". MOS:GENDERID is ambiguous "Use context to determine which name or names to provide on a case-by-case basis". The Recommendations section that follows is more nuanced, but seems not to be a policy. I did suggest doing what MOS:GENDERID shows for The Matrix as a way to accommodate, but that isn't flying.

So the question I'm trying to lawyer out here is whether policy actually requires deadnaming in this case. And if not, how do I show this? --Kcrca (talk) 16:34, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

In terms of Curses, it may depend on which name she used at the time when the event occured. If prior to 1981, the Deadname should be used. This seems to be very parallel to the "1976 Summer Olympics" situation, which was decided to use Bruce Jenner.
As for the Mary Ann Horton article, based on WP:CHANGEDNAMES, it is my belief that she had reached notability before she adopted the name Mary Ann, so the lead should start out "Mary Ann Horton (born Mark Horton; December 17, 1987)".Naraht (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for feedback on draft addendum to MOS:GENDERID

There is a draft of a set things to consider adding to the current MOS:GENDERID policy at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Gender identity#Recommendations, your input on them would be greatly appreciated. For the sake of centralization it would be best to add your feedback/comments to the page's talk page, thanks The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Relevant RFC

Is the addition to Catholic Church and homosexuality, of a statement to the effect that the Catholic Church believes that homosexual orientation can mitigate the sin of gay sex, appropriate? Please join the RFC here. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:05, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

What about Jessica Yaniv?

What does anyone think of Jessica Yaniv should she get an article as her court case could have long term consequences in Canada Dwanyewest (talk) 03:31, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Could be a WP:BLP1E right now. However, it's possible that material about the case could belong in other articles? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Citations for adding "Personal Gender Pronouns and their Effect on Mental Health" to the Preferred Gender Page (Personal Gender Page)

American Psychological Association. (2015). Guidelines for psychological practice with transgender and gender nonconforming people. American Psychologist, 70 (9), 832-864. doi: 10.1037/a0039906

Glynn, T. R., Gamarel, K. E., Kahler, C. W., Iwamoto, M., Operario, D., & Nemoto, T. (2016). The role of gender affirmation in psychological well-being among transgender women. Psychology of sexual orientation and gender diversity, 3(3), 336–344. doi:10.1037/sgd0000171

James, S. E., Herman, J. L., Rankin, S., Keisling, M., Mottet, L., & Anafi, M. (2016, December 17). The report of the 2015 U.S. transgender survey. National Center for Transgender Equality. Retrieved from https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS-Full-Report-Dec17.pdf

Matsuno, E. (2019). Nonbinary-Affirming psychological interventions. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2018.09.003

Nadal, K. L., Whitman, C. N., Davis, L. S., Erazo, T., & Davidoff, K. C. (2016). Microaggressions toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and genderqueer people: A review of the literature. Journal of Sex Research, 53(4/5), 488–508. https://doi-org.libproxy.sdsu.edu/10.1080/00224499.2016.1142495

The Trevor Project. (2019). National survey on lgbtq mental health. The Trevor Project. Retrieved from https://www.thetrevorproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/The-Trevor-Project-National-Survey-Results-2019.pdf

University of Houston. (2015, October 8). Study sheds light on protecting transgender individuals from suicide. ScienceDaily. Retrieved July 23, 2019 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151008152950.htm Empirical qualitative study


University of Washington. (2016, February 26). Transgender children supported in their identities show positive mental health. ScienceDaily. Retrieved July 28, 2019 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160226081528.htm Melodysoto316 (talk) 06:32, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Jaz Dorsey

Jaz Dorsey, who died in late June, was a composer, lyricist and playwright. I've only found one obituary, so he probably fails to pass GNG, but I've added a sentence to the "legacy" subsection of his grandfather's article (see Hugh Dorsey).Zigzig20s (talk) 22:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

We should add wikidata labels of Butch and Femme

We should add missing labels to Butch (d:Q30072520) and Femme (d:Q28129894). We can extract these labels from butch and femme (d:Q852338) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:2d8:e363:1add::ba08:e200 (talk) 16:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Harry Hay

Hi, I found some content that seemed wrong on Harry Hay and opened NAMBLA content on Harry Hay. Any interest is appreciated. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Jessica Yaniv genital waxing case

Created today. Would benefit from several pairs of eyes with regard to notability and sourcing. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 15:50, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

TERF category and BLP discussions

An important LGBT-related category discussion is happening here. See also this discussion of the same term (at the BLPN). Newimpartial (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:The Boys (2019 TV series)#Shaun Benson as Ezekiel

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Boys (2019 TV series)#Shaun Benson as Ezekiel. — YoungForever(talk) 14:35, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

A discussion of interest is taking place at Talk:James_Martin_(priest,_born_1960)#Wikipedia_should_not_repeat_the_attacks_of_homophobic_bigots

This community may be interested in the discussion taking place at Talk:James_Martin_(priest,_born_1960)#Wikipedia_should_not_repeat_the_attacks_of_homophobic_bigots. --PluniaZ (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Attraction to transgender people

Additional perspectives would be appreciated at Talk:Attraction_to_transgender_people#Attraction_to_trans_men. Among the topics of discussion are how best, and whether, to incorporate an Andrew Sullivan opinion piece into the article. WanderingWanda (talk) 21:21, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Discussions of interest

There are a number of discussions on Talk:James Martin (priest, born 1960) which may be of interest to the members of this group, in particular this RfC. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

What About Drag queens?

Should Drag Queen Story Hour have an article? What are other users opinions! Dwanyewest (talk) 05:10, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Certainly. It’s on my list to write. Gleeanon409 (talk) 05:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Editor input needed

There is some back and forth playing out at the LGBT rights by country or territory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) that needs looking at. While there have been some posts on the talk page it is mostly playing out in edit summaries. As I am not familiar enough with the particulars of this any assistance that others can offer would be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 02:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Project coordination between projects for content dispute and LGBT label of Catholic Priest/s

Would it interest anyone here to coordinate between this project and Wikipedia:Wikiproject Catholicism in order to help possibly form a consensus on disputed content at Theodore Edgar McCarrick that has become stuck. DRN may not be possible at the moment and perhaps this outreach between groups might at least move a stalemate. A copy of this message will be placed at the other project. Thank you.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Mark Miller, I think you misunderstand the nature of the dispute. The editors are not disputing whether McCarrick is LGBT. Epiphyllumlover (talk · contribs) made that edit recently, but it is unrelated to the content dispute that was brought to DRN. McCarrick has not publicly self-identified as LGBT, so in accordance with Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity,_gender,_religion_and_sexuality#Sexuality, he simply cannot be placed in that category. --PluniaZ (talk) 04:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
I understand the content dispute. Thank you.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:00, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Well you mischaracterized it. We are not disputing the LGBT label. --PluniaZ (talk) 05:18, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
I have not characterized it at all.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:19, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
In the title of this section, you wrote "content dispute over LGBT label of Catholic Priest/s". We are not disputing the LGBT label. You should probably change the section title. --PluniaZ (talk) 05:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Typo. Meant to say "and" as you are also attempting to discuss LGBT categories that I do believe are related because you did remove the figure from LGBT categories.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:33, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
I understand now. Thanks for the clarification. --PluniaZ (talk) 05:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I am still listed as a member here under my old account; User:Amadscientist. Aloha!--Mark Miller (talk) 05:12, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Article Children in the Holocaust

While going through the list of unassessed articles for the Project, the article Children in the Holocaust was included. I wonder if it is really in the scope of LGBT studies (it may be tagged for the mention of jewish boys have to disguise as girls at times to avoid identification). So I'd like to ask for opinions: Should we just rate it and keep the tag or should we remove the tag? Gehenna1510 (talk) 18:52, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

I would have assumed it was not because of the cross-dressing, but because someone was mechanically or semi-mechanically tagging a lot of Holocaust-related articles with this project for obvious reasons. I would agree that it's probably not in scope. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:53, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Revisionist history in Transgender article

I left a comment on the talk page of Transgender. According to the current revision, two early publications of isolated uses of the term "transgender" have been discovered: one in 1965, and another in 1984. In the latter case, the author used the phrase "transgender community." This is now being used to imply that the community has used these terms to self-describe since the 1960s, and that there has been been common usage of "the transgender community" since 1984.

However... everyone here who is old enough knows that this is not true. Just because someone wrote it doesn't mean anyone read it, or used it. The term "transgender" saw some usage in the early/mid-'90s, but did not come into general community usage until after Feinberg published "Transgender Warriors" in '96; and even then, few people were using it until the '00s. Widespread usage is actually very recent - it didn't hit the mainstream until this decade. I don't know if this is an honest mistake or something else, but this needs more eyes on it. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 19:57, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

RFC at TERF

There's an RFC going on at Talk:TERF about how to attribute the term "transphobic". Loki (talk) 03:58, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Morgane Oger is surely deserves an article?

Does anyone think Morgane Oger deserves to have a Wikipedia article she did run for public office in Canada. Dwanyewest (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Generally, simply running for office is not sufficient to confer notability. If someone meets WP:GNG or WP:BIO based on significant coverage in reliable sources they may still merit an article, but anyone can be a candidate. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:51, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Roscelese is correct: running for office is not a notability claim that gets somebody into Wikipedia in and of itself. To be eligible she would have to either win election to a notable political office (e.g. Parliament, the provincial legislature or Vancouver city council), or be properly sourceable as having had preexisting notability for other reasons besides the candidacy that would already have gotten her an article anyway. In theory, a person might also be able to clear the bar if they're sourceable as representing a historic first, such as if she had been Canada's first-ever transgender candidate for political office, but Morgane Oger definitely can't claim that status as she was preceded by numerous other trans candidates — she can't even claim to have been the first in BC, let alone the entire country. I'll happily add her to the future-tracking list at WP:CANQUEER, but no, just running for political office is not in and of itself enough. Bearcat (talk) 21:19, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Bearcat, Roscelese are these source notable? [1][2] Dwanyewest (talk) 09:00, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
The fact that one or two pieces of campaign coverage happen to exist in the candidate's own local media market does not constitute a free pass over WP:GNG that exempts them from having to pass WP:NPOL — every candidate in every district in every election can always show a couple of pieces of campaign coverage in their own local media market, so such coverage does not automatically make some candidates more notable than other candidates. So no, that is not enough coverage to get Morgane Oger over the bar she would actually have to clear — she still has to either win election to a notable office, or be properly sourceable as having already been notable enough for an article for other reasons independent of her candidacy. Bearcat (talk) 20:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Homosexuality in association football

Shouldn't Homosexuality in association football be moved to Homophobia in association football?Zigzig20s (talk) 22:36, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

This was discussed a decade ago (see Talk:Homosexuality in association football#Article name). Perhaps we need to rephrase the lede to include content that's not just about homophobia?Zigzig20s (talk) 22:39, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
I agree, the lead should be rewritten/expanded to reflect the page contents. I prefer the broader scope of the current title. Cheers, gnu57 22:44, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
User:Genericusername57: Would you like to do it please? I like reading about the business of sports in general, but I know nothing about football/soccer players.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
I created another redirect, Homophobia in soccer.Zigzig20s (talk) 02:17, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Should Super Happy Fun America be a standalone or a redirect?

If a redirect, Straight Pride#Boston, Massachusetts, U.S. (2019) seems a likely target. --Doug Weller talk 16:20, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Image at Pride parade

Your feedback is requested, at this discussion at Talk:Pride parade. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:05, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata conflation of gender identity and trans status

At present, Wikidata conflates trans status with gender. For example, trans women are often given the gender "transgender female", while cis women usually get simply "female".

I have started a discussion about this on Wikidata's project chat. I invite anyone to comment who can supply useful thoughts:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#Conflation_of_trans_status_with_gender_identities

Marnanel (talk) 17:32, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

RfC on Transgender talk page: Rewriting the first sentence of the lead

An RfC has been started to see if there is consensus for changing the first sentence of the lead of the Transgender article. Link to the RfC: Talk:Transgender#RfC:_How_to_word_the_WP:LEAD.--MattMauler (talk) 18:32, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Editnotices for non-binary people

I've just noticed on Sam Smith (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) that there is a hatnote regarding their non-binary status. I think that might be a bit WP:UNDUE; on the other hand, I can envisage a bit of consternation even from experienced editors regarding the use of singular they. In that case, what are everyone's feelings towards an editnotice regarding pronouns in articles regarding non-binary people? Sceptre (talk) 22:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

A similar issue was happening with the article for Indya Moore, where many well-intentioned editors “fixed” the article’s “misgendering” by changing pronouns from they/them to she/her. What ended up happening was that someone brought up their gender/pronouns in the lede to try to make it more obvious for other editors what the accurate pronouns would be, although that also might be UNDUE. Unfortunately a lot of editors don’t really read hidden comments in the code. Umimmak (talk) 23:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, which is why an editnotice might be the way forward, as they show up in both VisualEditor and classic unless you deliberately suppress the notices. Sceptre (talk) 23:30, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Having reverted those "helpful" fixes many times, despite explanations in the lead, edit summaries, and talk page, I fully expect the "corrections" to resume moments after the protection on the Indya Moore article expires.... Funcrunch (talk) 03:19, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Doi, I've just notice we have {{pronoun notice}}. Excuse my ignorance, please. :) (That said, we should really expand it out more; I find it hard to believe there are less than a dozen BLPs that need this EN…) Sceptre (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
I'd love to add that template to more articles (thanks to Kaldari for creating it), but I don't have the permissions for it. I have been adding the MOS-NB template (which I created) to talk pages of all nonbinary subjects, regardless of their pronouns. That said, my unfortunate experience is that, particularly in unprotected articles, notices of any kind are simply ignored by people who are deadset against using singular they pronouns. Funcrunch (talk) 03:11, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Merge discussion

There's a merger proposal that may be of interest to this Wikiproject. You are invited to weigh in at Talk:19th century in LGBT rights § Merge discussion. Jay D. Easy (t • c) 18:08, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Mexican Football Federation#Homophobia

FYI.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:34, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested move

At Talk:Norrie May-Welby that could use input from this project. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Barbie

I'm not sure if this is the best place to ask this, but I have started a new section on the talk page of the article about the gender neutral Barbie doll line. I think it's relevant to the article, but I'd like another editor's input. Clovermoss (talk) 02:58, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

List of LGBT-related suicides

The lede says, "This is a list of notable lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people who have committed suicide. This includes people who were, and whose peers suspected to be, part of the LGBT community." But they were not necessarily notable in their own right. The suicides were deemed sufficiently notable to be reported in the media. We need to rephrase that.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:20, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I've rephrased the lede.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:21, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Resolved

Obergefell

It's also come to my attention that within the past week, somebody created a standalone BLP of Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in Obergefell v. Hodges. However, looking at the article, it is not at all clear that a standalone biography of him is necessary at all — it depends entirely on the court case itself for notability-supporting sourcing, and otherwise uses a mix of primary sources and completely unsourced biographical claims to support anything not directly relevant to the court case. On this basis, it is not at all clear to me that we need a standalone biography of him separately from what the court case's article already says about him, and that he should most likely just be redirected back to the court case rather than having his own standalone BLP that delves into his private personal life as a separate topic from his role in the court case itself. But again, I'd like to ask for outside input before acting arbitrarily. Bearcat (talk) 17:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bearcat: He may be a WP:BLP1E. Consider whether or not to do a AFD after you do a WP:BEFORE. ミラP 23:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Definitely BLP1E. The sources all tie his notability specifically to this case. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

RuPaul's Drag Race UK (series 1)

Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:05, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

LGBT singers

It's just come to my attention that somebody recently started a scheme of subdividing Category:LGBT singers by nationality with the creation of a Category:LGBT singers from the United States (but not creating similar categories for any other country). The thing is, while both Category:LGBT singers and Category:LGBT musicians from the United States are large enough that diffusion could be defensible on size grounds, this project has also had a longstanding consensus that we do not always want all LGBT-related categories to be subcategorized by nationality willy-nilly, but want to maintain some modicum of control over where national subcategorization is warranted and where it isn't. So we've traditionally wanted the question of where national subcategorization is or isn't warranted to be discussed here before a new scheme goes into place, rather than just letting every new LGBT-related category stand just because somebody created it without asking if we wanted it or not.

Accordingly, I wanted to ask for some outside opinions: is this a case where we should permit a new subcategorization scheme by nationality, or should we list it at CFD for reupmerging back to the parents on the grounds that it's not warranted or useful to subcategorize LGBT singers by nationality? (Note, however, that the category's current size is not actually representative; it has not been added to by far the majority of the people it could still be added to, and many, many LGBT singers from the United States are still sitting in the parent categories rather than having been moved here — so my question hinges solely on the question of whether we need it at all, not on the fact that there are only 14 people in the new category right now.) Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Anyone? Bearcat (talk) 22:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
I’m not really up on the categories system, on the surface I think it would be fine to do so if there isn’t drawbacks. Especially if the size of the categories is relatively large which I would think makes them harder to deal with. Gleeanon409 (talk) 00:59, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Obergefell

Please comment. Bearian (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Updating of statement on List of LGB people articles

On these list articles the intro might need to be revised. I saw

Americans are divided – a thin majority (51 percent) believes homosexuality should be accepted, while 42 percent disagree."

Which looks to be sourced to 2003. Gleeanon409 (talk) 22:39, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

I guess it is List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people. I have modified the statement to reflect that it might be outdated (diff). --MarioGom (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for cleanup/support on "Discrimination against asexual people"

The article on Discrimination against asexual people (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has some serious issues with NPOV and other things that seem to be a result of being a relatively new article with a very small group of people controlling the page. The edit history is full of these same people reverting edits that attempt to add more citations or water down overly-sweeping statements and weasel words. For example, the introduction currently states that asexuals sometimes "face greater amounts of prejudice and discrimination than those of other sexual minorities," and editors have reverted attempts to remove it or add "citation needed" by claiming it is supported in the body text. It is not; there is nothing in the body of the text that refers to a type of discrimination that asexuals face that other sexual minorities do not, simply evidence of lateral prejudice from other LGBTQ people. (I would argue that that kind of "Oppression Olympics" comparison between discrimination that different marginalized groups is inherently subjective and impossible to "support" as it is, and as such should be left out of an objectively factual article.) I think it is important that we have a page on prejudice and discrimination against the asexual community, but I think the page as it is inaccurate, unhelpful, and needs more people monitoring it, particularly those who are able to edit it with more of an eye toward maintaining the neutrality policy. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 03:22, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Dog Day Afternoon

I've reverted changes in gender terminology twice, and prefer not to edit war with a WP:SPA. More eyes appreciated. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:51, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Millie (short story) up for deletion

Important author, Katherine Mansfield, particularly of short stories. Lots of sources at Google books. Referencing needs improvement. Only pretended compliance with WP:Before. Nominator says this is "a test case." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7&6=thirteen (talk • contribs) 1:51, 19 October 2019 (UTC) 7&6=thirteen (☎)

7&6=thirteen: This kind of message may be considered canvassing (see WP:CANVASSING). Posting notices of deletion discussion to WikiProjects is allowed and even desirable, but they should be done in neutral tone. You should not call others to !vote for one option or the other. This is an example of neutral notice. Best, --MarioGom (talk) 23:05, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
FWIW, I didn’t even read anything but the first few words of the edit summary. So wasn’t swayed one way or another. Gleeanon409 (talk) 23:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
I thought that was neutral. And exact. I did not make up the quote. I did not tell anyone what to say or do. I expect them to see what is being done, evaluate the situation, and choose to participate (whichever way) or not. It was light, not a solicitation or canvassing.z
If you don't identify anything or provide context, disembodied listings will not get anyone to think about it, let alone participate or respond. Bringing the process into the light, and out of the shadows, gets more participation by interested editors, of whatever persuasion they may be. And that is a good thing.
I note you availed yourself to add your thoughts at the AFD. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Again fixing pronouns to "she/her: for Rachel McKinnon's entry

Trans cyclist Rachel McKinnon was referred to in the entry about her as "he." I changed it but I fear given the transphobia in the reaction to Rachel's recent cycling win, that my changes won't stick. Advice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamJaneB (talk • contribs) 22:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

SamJaneB: If vandalism is frequent and persistent, you can request page protection. --MarioGom (talk) 22:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
Actually DanielRigal already did: Wikipedia:Requests for page protection § Rachel McKinnon. --MarioGom (talk) 22:44, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race: Collaboration of the Month for November 2019

I thought this might be a good selection for Collaboration of the Month, considering Aja's recent Tweets about their Wikipedia article and ongoing talk page discussions. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:13, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Category:LGBT people

There is a debate about the parent categories for the category LGBT people. It would be appreciated if more people from the project chimed in with their opinions.★Trekker (talk) 10:06, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Discussion about including bioqueens in the lead at Drag queen

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Drag queen about whether it is appropriate to acknowledge female drag queens in the lead of the Drag queen article. Further input is welcome and appreciated. Armadillopteryxtalk 19:30, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Discussion about transgender/transsexual pornography categories

There is an ongoing discussion here concerning the names of categories for transgender/transsexual pornography and pornographic performers, transgender and transsexual literature and related sub-categories, and transsexual and transgender culture. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Discussion about gay/gay men's/gay male categories

There is an ongoing discussion here concerning the naming of categories related to gay men, fictional gay males, and gay pornography. Input and discussion from LGBT studies participants would be useful. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Jordan Evans (politician) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jordan Evans (politician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Evans (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy rename proposal for "Gay (male) romance novels" category

I have proposed that Category:Gay (male) romance novels be speedy renamed to Category:Gay male romance novels, to remove the unnecessary parentheses. I consider this an uncontroversial proposal, but I'm adding a notification here to be safe. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 00:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Bohemian Baltimore. I support the rename. It looks like for speedy renames that me voicing support is unnecessary, unless there is opposition? = paul2520 (talk) 01:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Renaming discussion for "List of male performers in gay porn films" article

I have suggested that the article List of male performers in gay porn films be changed to List of male performers in gay pornographic films. Porn is slang and Wikipedia generally uses the term "pornography" for categories and articles, as it does with the main gay pornography article. Adding notice here to alert editors. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 03:01, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Renaming discussion for "Gay male sex workers" and "Gay male prostitutes" categories

There's an ongoing discussion here concerning the renaming of the Gay male sex workers category and its prostitute subcategory. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 09:20, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

If anyone is looking for a fun topic to work on

In the AfD for Themyscira (DC Comics) (the island home of Wonder Women) which I withdrawn we have found some sources that discuss this location with relation to LGBT themes and studies. Right now the article has nothing on real world significance, analysis, reception. Perhaps someone here would find it a nice topic to work on. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:05, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Renaming discussion for Category:Transsexual female adult models

There is a category renaming discussion for Transsexual female adult models going on here. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Renaming discussion for Category:Gay (male) television channels

Proposal here to rename Category:Gay (male) television channels to Category:Gay male television channels to remove the unnecessary parentheses. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

RuPaul's DragCon UK up for deletion

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuPaul's DragCon UK. Gleeanon409 (talk) 14:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Early US transwoman

My attention was drawn in a comment on Dreamwidth to Hedy Jo Star (born 1920; misspelled Starr in the comment, and also known as Hedy Jo Bucinskas according to this source, which offers some local news stories to start with), a US pioneer to set beside the UK's Roberta Cowell. Anybody? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Chick-fil-A same-sex marriage controversy#Requested move 22 November 2019

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Chick-fil-A same-sex marriage controversy#Requested move 22 November 2019. - MrX 🖋 21:56, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Some LDS LGBT pages are redundant or at least should be templatized

The same content presented the same way in multiple pages should either be condensed to one article or (if left as it is now) should be templatized. There are a number of LDS-related pages that linked to the (relatively newly-renamed) Family Services which have near identical lists of "here's what happened in this date range". That's redundant. I've also posted this at Portal talk:Latter Day Saint movement as there doesn't appear to be a cross page. Banaticus (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Rfc on James Martin (priest, born 1960)

There is an open RfC at Talk:James_Martin_(priest,_born_1960)#Request_for_Comment_2 that may be of interest to this community. --PluniaZ (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

What about Posie Parker?

Should Posie Parker have an article she seems to be a notable Terf. Dwanyewest (talk) 03:14, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Here are the sources I would use [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. What does everyone else think? Dwanyewest (talk) 15:10, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
One of those sites is Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull (Parker)'s own site (which would not demonstrate notability even if it could be used to source some WP:ABOUTSELF facts), and Quilette is a marginal source (I've seen debates over whether or not it's usable). Eh, I've seen biographies with fewer sources kept, and others (including a certain scientist...) deleted. Mock something up in the "Draft:" namespace and see what other editors think, if you like. -sche (talk) 11:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Eyes needed

GLSEN could use some folks keeping an eye on it. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

 Done Following. Thanks, NatGertler! = paul2520 (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

notice of RfC on rainbow/LGBT+/pride flag

Please share your comments on naming the article "Rainbow flag" or "LGBT pride flag". — HipLibrarianship talk 05:21, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

@Hiplibrarianship: Per Elizium23's response there, I think it would make more sense as a requested move. Otherwise, there might quickly be several differing suggestions and no clear majority consensus. = paul2520 (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
RfC withdrawn. — HipLibrarianship talk 16:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race: Collaboration of the Month, January 2020: Kimora Blac


WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race's
Collaboration of the Month for January 2020:
Kimora Blac


Happy New Year, and happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Queering Wikipedia conference - Austria - May 2020

Wikimedia LGBT+

The Queering Wikipedia Conference will be in Linz, Austria Fri-Sun 22-24 May, 2020. This is the first LGBT+ conference in the history of Wikimedia events, and is supported by Wikimedia LGBT+ and Wikimedia Austria. The call for proposals is open now for presentations, panel discussions, capacity building workshops, strategy meetings, and team building sessions centering LGBTIQ+ information, participation, identity, and safety within Wikimedia projects. Travel scholarships are available.

Please share notice of the conference page at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Queering_Wikipedia

Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Last call for scholarship requests. Visit Meta-Wiki for details if you're interested in this conference. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Sue the dinosaur a non-binary icon?

There's a discussion that might interest some members of this project, at Talk:Sue (dinosaur)#Sue -- preferred pronoun, etc.. Please comment there and not here, to keep the discussion in one place. Thanks. — Mudwater (Talk) 14:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Washington Post

Obsessed with Wikipedia ‘personal life’ entries? You’re not alone. For the interested, there's some LGBT-stuff in there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Notable?

I happened to find Draft:Ash (Ashlyn) Haffner, created by User:5232TheElder who apparently edited Wikipedia just once in their lifetime, just for this occasion. As is, the draft will never be accepted as a Wikipedia article. However, there are quite a few web pages around with information about Ash Haffner. Would they be enough of a basis for a (new) article? Marcocapelle (talk) 10:55, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle: Ash is redlinked on List of LGBT-related suicides. Based on a couple other entries and seeing a number of news articles, I think we could start a new article on Ash. I would suggest moving the draft & writing over it, to preserve the history (the draft has at least some usable content). = paul2520 (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @Paul2520: What do you think of the revised draft? This is actually the first time that I am writing a (nearly) whole new article, so I have no idea if it's already good enough to convert to an article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
It looks good, Marcocapelle! I was worried about notability, but I believe the news sources you found established it. = paul2520 (talk) 20:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Portal:LGBT related portal on Portal:Erotica and pornography

Portal:LGBT is a long-time portal listed as a related portal on Portal:Erotica and pornography. Is this relationship correct or does it represent some kind of stereotype?Guilherme Burn (talk) 23:11, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

RfC on Ronan Farrow’s coming out

Input is welcome at Talk:Ronan Farrow#RfC Ronan’s coming out. Gleeanon409 (talk) 20:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

RM for Sex assignment

A requested move for the article Sex reassignment surgery is currently underway. I saw the banner on the talk page and thought people here might be interested. Sakura CarteletTalk 04:52, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion discussion: List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2020s

You are invited to join the discussion to retain or delete List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2020s. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 10:45, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Article issues

There are comments at Talk:Jane Addams#Article issues that might be of interest to members. Otr500 (talk) 13:22, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Bisexual topics cleanup

Hi all. I'm new to the group and new to substantial editing, so let me know if this isn't the right place to post this.

BECAUSE (Conference): I'm looking for help with this topic in particular. It's the first article I created, and it has already been flagged for deletion once. I'm struggling to find reliable sources. If anyone would like to come to the talk page and help me with it, I'd appreciate it.

It's one of a number of bi+ conferences (see the BiCon disambiguation page). I've been doing a little bit to expand the ones I can find more information about, but they're in a similar situation - there aren't a lot of sources even though they're a relatively big deal to the bi community.

I've been on a bit of mission to clean up and expand the bisexual topics (if you can't tell). I'd like to look for collaborators to help me make a more cohesive series on bisexuality. The Bisexual community talk page shows it has been a bit of a disaster for a while, and there are a lot of little topics like Bisexual Awareness Week that could be expanded or merged with other topics (or, in that case, already are. See: Celebrate Bisexuality Day). Bisexuality in the United States is doing a lot of work right now to cover a whole bunch of different things (like media rep) that already have their own articles.

Thanks! Heterochromia (talk) 00:04, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on that article, Heterochromia. It looks great! I disagree that it reads as promotional/as a PR, but the editor who added it has more experience than me.
Feel free to reach out with questions. I have things I'd like to focus on myself (including queer topics!), but I'm happy to be consulted & be a resource for questions. = paul2520 (talk) 21:01, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
One more thing... I'm not sure the best way to get rid of that template about PR/advertisement.
But I'd be happy to help nominate this (or other articles you create) for Did you know... to be featured on the Main Page. You can view the criteria here. Note that they have to be nominated within seven days of creation (or 5x expansion).
Let me know what you think! = paul2520 (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, paul2520. A nomination to Did you know... would be appreciated! I see there's an image requirement. I added a bi pride flag for now, but I'm going to email BOP to see if I can add the conference logo to the article.
I'll keep plugging along with my bi project, but I'll let you know if I have any questions. ~ Heterochromia (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the creation! I am agreed with paul2520 that the article does not warrant the PR tag, so I've removed it (if two people agree then that's enough of a consensus; if someone wants to add it back then they should explain further what the issues are). I've moved the page to BECAUSE (conference) (note the lowercase "c") per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) and rated it C-class, because it already looks like a nicely written article which covers the main facets of the subject. The article has a good number of sources, though it would be nice to find more secondary sources, if any more exist. The only one I can find not already in the article is MinnPost. — Bilorv (talk) 00:48, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for both of those fixes and the rating, Bilorv. And thanks for the article - added! ~ Heterochromia (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the PR tag, Bilorv. @Heterochromia: an image is not required, but sure, if we can get the conference logo, that would be great. See here for getting the permissions to Wikimedia for legal reasons. = paul2520 (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Okay, great, paul2520 - I misunderstood the DYK guidelines. In that case, no need to wait for it to nominate the article. Let me know if you need anything from me. I'll see about the logo for the future. ~ Heterochromia (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
@Heterochromia and Bilorv: Nominated! See Template:Did you know nominations/BECAUSE (conference). I'd recommend suggesting changes to hooks, and following-along in case reviewer(s) leave comments that need addressing. = paul2520 (talk) 14:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
@Paul2520: Awesome, thanks. ~ Heterochromia (talk) 18:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Nicole Maines name issue

Input requested at the Nicole Maines talk page regarding including the prior name of the transgender subject. Funcrunch (talk) 23:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Second opinion re: Garth Greenwell

Hello. I don't really see that many primary sources in Garth Greenwell. Do you think the tag is obsolete, or is that still a problem please?Zigzig20s (talk) 18:34, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Zigzig20s: I looked through the references and think the tag is obsolete. I have removed it. Citrivescence (talk) 00:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I also wonder if we should create a separate articles about each novel...Zigzig20s (talk) 00:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

LGBT travel guides

Would you like to help write an LGBT travel guide for your city, or a city you've visited? Over at Wikivoyage, the free worldwide travel guide that you can edit, we have LGBT travel guides only for Toronto and Stockholm, in addition to a topic article on LGBT travel. You can help by creating a new article, or by expanding an existing article. Leave a note on my talk page, and I'll help with formatting and linking from other Wikivoyage articles. Thank you. Ground Zero | t 21:59, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race -- Collaboration of the Month: Pit Crew


WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race's
Collaboration of the Month for February 2020:
Pit Crew (RuPaul's Drag Race)


Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:17, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

two references that may be of use

I have a copy of the recently-released Stout, Zaylore (2020). Our Gay History in Fifty States. Wise Ink. ISBN 978-1-63489-257-5. It's a compendium of LGBTQ+ figures from around the US. I'd be happy to reference it or search it if anyone is looking for another cite for an article.

I also just stumbled upon this .pdf, which looked worth sharing. Seems to be mostly New York focused:

= paul2520 (talk) 14:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

(Spam) Help editing draft

I created the following Draft:Sharpe Suiting, but I would appreciate some assistance editing and extra eyes on it. As far as I am aware Sharpe Suiting is one of the bigger genderqueer fashion labels right now, so I started with them and am going to work on others next. Halloucinations (talk) 21:15, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

User was blocked for undisclosed paid editing of Sharpe Suiting. Is anyone aware of other instances of spammers coming to our community board and asking for volunteer labor for their corporate employer? Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Logging misconduct targeting LGBT contributors and content

I was talking with User:Ɱ who with others has developed Wikipedia:English Wikipedia non-discrimination policy with LGBT+ editors in mind. I am a fan of that policy proposal and any other conversation about protection of LGBT people in wiki and for content creation of LGBT topics. I would like to use that policy to demonstrate how different demographics experience varying amounts of friendliness and acceptance of their wiki engagement, and to support the groups which face more discrimination in wiki participation.

LGBT people are special targets of hatemongering in all sorts of situations, including in Wikipedia. Negativity of this sort takes many forms. Here is an example of this sort of misconduct. I have no idea if it is representative, but it is familiar.

Ɱ said that they found this edit using the script at User:SD0001/hide-reverted-edits. Thanks SD0001 for developing the script. Tools can have many purposes, and when I saw this one, I was thinking that identifying types of hostility is an interesting use of it, and wondered when and how we might ever plan to gather examples of lots of misconduct in order to plan for protection against it and peer to peer support for anyone who experiences harassment and attacks.

If we had more data then we could discuss it. Ɱ pointed out that in this case the article is about a particular city, and the IP address of the offending editor registers near that city. It would be interesting to study what kinds of users do misconduct, like for example, to explore whether it seems to come from community outsiders, or from people editing topics familiar in their own lives. I am curious what sorts of topics get the most hostility against LGBT+ people.

Does anyone have ideas for how to identify and collect edits logging misconduct against LGBT+ people? Has anyone seen past such projects? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:04, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

  • I imagine it shouldn't be too hard to come up with keywords and search for them in edit summaries and in revision text. That is, assuming it hasn't been redacted, which much of this may qualify for revdel. GMGtalk 20:14, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Somebody pointed this discussion to me. In fact on the francophone wikipedia, I am trying to set up a table where contributors could just list factually all the terms and formulations they find problematic. This would not mean asking necessarily for sanctions, it is meant first of all to list what people "feel" problematic. You can set up filters about certain words, but you cannot filter the way they are perceived, and the perception is key to evaluate the impact of the hostility. So it would not be a code generated table (we can also get away from an all dev perspective that data needs to be robotically generated in an exhaustive way). In fact, when it comes to harassment human eyes are badly needed, although this approach is more costly and time consuming. Here is the link to our discussion harassement. I would also favor cross project discussions on how to efficiently counter these hostilities. I dont believe we only need admins to do that, we first need to document then to start raising voices about the fact that such attitudes are not acceptable. These tables can also be relayed to the "strategy discussions" that are taking place and to T&S, to the village pump or whatever relevant space on a monthly or weekly basis.Nattes à chat (talk) 16:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
@Nattes à chat: I suppose we should have a central hub, perhaps at meta:Wikimedia LGBT+, where we link out to these different report centers. Maybe there could be one in English, and another in French, and we interlink them somehow.
I agree with you - the start to the solution will not be primarily in tech development or in seeking admin support, but from typical people reporting the instances and circumstances of harassment in some way that can support more conversation about how we should respond to protect ourselves. Is there a plan for next steps at French Wikipedia? Perhaps if there has been more discussion there, English can follow the French plans. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
I find this discussion creepy, Orwellian, and chilling. Elizium23 (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
@Blueraspberry: following the harassment of a contributor, some people have opened their eyes and we are working on a dedicated project page : Fighting against harassment. I've set up a new page to gather data based on what people feel as abusive (no names mentioned on the page just the actual words). People can either post or send me the diffs and we will set up an email to gather diffs. We could start a page on meta documenting such things in all languages IMO. This can be relayed to the talks on strategy and the called for "cultural change".Nattes à chat (talk) 09:21, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Best practice regarding LGBT categories for historical figures

Hi - I'm taking Margaret Macpherson Grant through FAC review at the moment. She was in a number of LGBT categories, but this was queried because no source explicitly says that that she was in a sexual relationship with her female partner - she lived with her for most of her married life, gave her a ring, referred to her as wifie, etc, but there's nothing explicitly about their relationship having been sexual, or about her being gay. The FAC review suggested removing them for the time being, and reaching out WikiPorject LGBT Studies to see whether the categories would be considered appropriate under the circumstances. Any thoughts would be welcome, thanks. GirthSummit (blether) 16:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Whatever Wikipedia decides will influence Wikidata policy. Wikidata is more straightforward, as it reports like
sexual orientation (P91) -> gay (Q592)
Maybe for this person, there could be Wikidata modeling like "gender = female" plus matched with a female life partner
If you can model the ambiguity of people outside of contemporary Western tradition then Wikidata can group them, and Wikipedia and Wikidata can inform each other. Wikidata is having challenges with the fundamentals of gender in the most obvious cases. If we could sort that discussion, then LGBT discussions would be much easier.
Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

I can't speak for Wikidata but I think it's fair to categorize a woman who lived with a "wife" as LGBT. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:43, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Discussion about categorization of transgender articles

A discussion is taking place about the categories "Sexual and gender identity disorders" and "Identity disorders":

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_February_5#Category:Sexual_and_gender_identity_disorders

Any input would be appreciated. WanderingWanda (talk) 06:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Question - quick response sought

Does this Project have any sort of welcome template for brand new users, other than {{LGBT Welcome}}?

In about 12 hours time, I'm helping out at a LGBTUA+-themed editathon, and thought it would be a nice touch to post a relevant welcome with a few beginner links to attendees. I fear that the LGBT welcome is a bit too advanced, and project focussed, so was hoping you might have something like this you could recommend. Failing that, I'll just use one of the standard Twinkle welcomes.

I'd really appreciate a ping with any reply. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

OK, so, assuming there isn't a more suitable newbie-focussed welcome template, I've now hastily managed to address my own question with the template below. Please feel free to improve any of the wording or links, by editing it in my sandbox at User:Nick Moyes/sandbox4. Thanks.

Welcome!

Hello, WikiProject LGBT studies, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
I noticed you have an interest in editing on LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning)-related topics, and I hope today's Editathon will encourage you to participate, and become a regular and valuable contributor. Should you decide to stick around, you might wish to join our LGBT studies project.
Meanwhile, here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) This automatically inserts your name and the date. If you get stuck, please see our help pages.
If you can't find what you are looking for there, feel free to ask at the Teahouse or at the LGBT Project's Talk Page. Alternatively, contact me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to assist you. Again, welcome! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Denaming discussion

Please see Talk:Peppermint (drag queen)#Deadnaming. Thank you. Gleeanon409 (talk) 05:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Gender dysphoria article discussion

Please see Talk:Gender dysphoria beginning with Let's move away from U.S.-centric articles (DSM-5 vs. ICD-11) for the debate.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.) 06:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

The original disagreement has been resolved, but the article still needs work, so your help is welcome!   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.) 16:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Second opinion: Pronouns for bi-gender artist B-complex

The article for B-Complex has been subject to a set or reversions over pronouns, in particular repeatedly reverting to unevidenced masculine "he/him" pronouns. The artist was known before being out so removal of the birth name in the side box does not seem contentious.

MOS:GENDERID generally uses the latest self-identified pronouns which for B-Complex are "she/her" as referenced in the interviews and the publicly available facebook coming out post. However B-Complex is out as Bi-gender. I am aware that Bi-gender people often use a range of pronoun combinations, including (but not limited to 1. using only the gendered pronoun for their current gender at any given time, 2. using "they/them" pronouns, 3. choosing and sticking to a single set of gendered pronouns.

I would like as to how to handle each of these cases as well as ambiguous cases with regards to article accuracy. In the first example is hard on encyclopedia recording, they/them captures it but can it offend? The second and third cases are clear when the subject has explicitly expressed their pronouns explicitly.

B-Complex appears to be under case 3 using primarily "she/her" pronouns but I worry that using these under the latest pronoun doctrine could be inaccurate in lieu of an explicit statement. Also I do not read Slovak so I may be missing nuance in the sources.

In my attempt to resolve I have tentatively used "they/them" pronouns as they avoid inaccuracy. Looking for a second opinion either based on better translation of the primary sources, and/or better experience with using "they/them" pronouns for Bi-gender BLP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.76.3 (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

There is now evidence of consistent self-identification with female pronouns so the article has been adjusted by another editor. Still not sure what guidlines for poorly resolved bi-gender pronouns should be. 128.40.76.3 (talk) 13:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Lawrence Lindell

This artist is notable but the draft needs quite a bit of work if anyone is interested. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

FloridaArmy I did some cleanup. What else is needed? I'm unsure of a few references (Amazon.com might be OK, but I believe I've seen that IMDb shouldn't be used.)
I'm not sure how much time I can devote right now, but it's great to learn about Lindell, and if you have some specific tasks maybe I can help... = paul2520 (talk) 03:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I am not certain that Lawrence Lindell will pass the notability test yet, as I did not see anything in the article that warrants this actually being an article. Additionally, a number of the sources there are to blogs or Facebook posts, which are not considered credible in Wikipedia. I recommend addressing both these issues before the article draft gets reviewed to prevent it from being rejected. --- FULBERT (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Just to be clear, amazon.com is absolutely not a suitable or notability-supporting reference. The notability test for writers (including cartoonist/graphic novelists) is not passed just by offering technical verification on an online bookstore that their work exists — it's passed by showing evidence of external attention, such as published reviews of their work and/or notable awards. So you can never use Amazon in and of itself as evidence of the notability of a writer, any more than the existence of a song on iTunes constitutes evidence of a musician's notability per se. Bearcat (talk) 16:10, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies/Archive_67&oldid=1045695525"