Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:05, 4 March 2007

Latest revision as of 14:28, 26 August 2025

Line 1:

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/header}}

{{Shortcut|WT:LGBT}}

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/PageTabs}}

{{LGBT open tasks}}

{{archivesskip to bottom}}

{{Talk header|wp=yes|WT:LGBTQ+|WT:LGBTQ|WT:LGBTQIA|WT:LGBT}}

{{LGBT_Navigation}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies}}

{{WikiProject Gender studies}}

{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality}}

}}

{{pp-move-indef}}

{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn

|target=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Archive index

|mask=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Archive <#>

|leading_zeros=0

|indexhere=yes

}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}

|maxarchivesize = 200K

|counter = 80

|algo = old(30d)

|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Archive %(counter)d

}}

{{old move|date=6 September 2024|from=Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies|destination=Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ Studies|result=moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies|link=Special:Permalink/1248705219#Requested move 6 September 2024}}

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/to do}}

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/ReportBar}}

== [[Draft:List of intersex variations]] ==

==LGBT Publications==

I'm not exactly certain how to go about doing this, but I would like to put together a small task force of editors who would like to focus their attentions on a particular sub-set of articles in this WikiProject. I've noticed a large number of stubs that are all one or two lines for a variety of LGBT publications that say 'X is a publication in such and such place for the LGBT community' or something to that effect which is a real shame considering the vivid LGBT media landscape that exists not only in the US, but around the world. The reason I think some sort of task force seems approriate is that in doing some work on [[The Washington Blade]] recently, I noticed that in sources I and others found, they link several different publications together as though they are all intertwined and it is hard to go through and only edit one publication when really the same source could be used on multiple pubs -- but there are so many that a small group of editors could tackle more effectively than a solo editor. Only reason I think we need to expand these articles (aside from the standard arguments that putting knowledge into the Wiki is a great thing to spread...) is that I noticed in this talk page discussion [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anderson_Cooper/Archive_1#.22This_.5Bsection.5D_is_about_Anderson_Cooper.27s_identity.2C_not_his_sex_life.22.2C_and_the_Washington_Blade] of [[Anderson Cooper]] that the notability and significance of the Blade was called into question because the article was bare bones and lacked any sort of explanation of why this might be a worth while source even though mainstream media relies on it and many other LGBT publications to gain insight into the LGBT community... So does this sound like a reasonable proposition...and there may already be a model to set up a small task force like this, but I couldn't locate anything anywhere about something like this... Let me know your thoughts...and any volunteers to help? [[User:Jtowns|jtowns]] 10:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

:I think this is a *''fabulous''* idea! I'm over-committed so can't volunteer, but I support it wholeheartedly! I found two "task forces" I thought I'd bring to your attention as far as organization goes. The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Dutch military history task force|Dutch MilHist Task Force]] has a great organization and seems to be active. The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia|Bio/Science & Academia]] TF also has a good organization, though they don't seem to be too active. You may also be interested in [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Media|WikiProject Media]], who don't seem to be active, but may answer questions or provide resources. Good idea! -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 14:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

::Seems like a good idea to me. If a few editors are interested in participating in this task force / working group we can easily created a suitable project subpage. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 14:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I started a list of intersex variations: [[Draft:List of intersex variations]]. Can someone help me make it more accurate with the citations in line? Almost all of them are at the book (150 Variações Intersexo), and some of them are in the [[InterACT]] glossary. --[[User:MikutoH|<span style="color: #be1918;">'''MikutoH'''</span>]] [[User talk:MikutoH|^{<span style="color:#ee8b39;"> '''talk!''' </span>}]] 01:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Having been prematurely brought back from my Wikibreak for reasons I will explain tomorrow, I'd like to say that I think this is an excellent idea, but we need more than just one person in it. I'd say at least three. Is anybody else interested?

If no-one steps up to express their interest in joining this Taskforce, I will put a bullet in the next newsletter to inform everyone and add it to our proposed tasks until we have enough people. That OK with y'all? [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 12:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

:Thanks Dev! [[User:Jtowns|jtowns]] 21:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:Seems a little redundant to have its own list since variations are already listed in the "conditions" section of the "[[Disorders of sex development|Disorders of Sexual Development]]" page. [[User:Urchincrawler|Urchincrawler]] ([[User talk:Urchincrawler|talk]]) 12:40, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

== changes to ''New articles related to LGBT'' and ''Articles recently tagged as related to LGBT'' ==

==Improving visibility of Alerts report==

I've changed[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_LGBT_studies&diff=110190285&oldid=110184074] the format of these sections. First, I've expanded them to fifteen articles, since they're moving faster now (especially the newly tagged) with all the new members. Second, I've changed ''New articles'' so that new articles are added to the bottom, like ''Articles recently tagged''. The two different formats were causing problems, with new articles being added to the bottom and then being taken off in a couple of days when someone else added one to the top. This happened to [[Alfredo Ormando]]; it might have happened to other articles but I didn't check the whole recent history. Now that both are going the same direction this should hopefully not be a problem once everyone's used to it. I chose add-to-the-bottom since more users are already familiar with the faster-moving ''Articles recently tagged''. Also, I notice that some articles have been added to the tagged list without having their talk pages tagged. I added a note regarding this. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 23:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Based on the [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_July_19#Transgender people's gender|above-linked discussion]], the [[WP:LGBTQ+/Alerts]] report does have the visibility it should. One option to increase its visibility would be to make it one of the main project navigation tabs above. [[WP:LGBTQ+/Resources]] could become a subpage under [[WP:LGBTQ+/Editing]], and the alerts report could take its place as the new blue tab.--[[User:Trystan|Trystan]] ([[User talk:Trystan|talk]]) 22:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

:That all makes sense to me. I've thought for a while that 10 articles was too few, esp. in the rapidly-moving "recently tagged" list. [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 00:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

::Sure - Dev's not gone for long and you jump in and make changes! Just wait til your mother gets home, missy! :) :) :) Honestly, though, sounds good to me! -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 00:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Righto. What, is Dev on vacation? By the way I went through and tagged the ones that weren't tagged, one of them is likely to be controverial,[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASaint_George&diff=110212815&oldid=107329118] so fire up your watchlists. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 01:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

::::Awesome! Yeh - she's on a small WikiDrama Break™ -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 01:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

:::::Yarr, we all need one of those now and again. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 02:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

:I was curious about why [[Saint George]] was tagged. I glanced at the article and nothing immediately said "gay". I can't recall ever hearing or reading anything that suggested he "sings in our choir." [[User:Ganymead|''*Exeunt*'' Ganymead]] | [[User talk:Ganymead|Dialogue?]] 15:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

::I just had another look-see and did see the section about the Coptic tradition and St. George. Still, this section definitely needs expansion, though the source from [[E. A. Wallis Budge]] is about as reliable as one can get. [[User:Ganymead|''*Exeunt*'' Ganymead]] | [[User talk:Ganymead|Dialogue?]] 15:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

:::I tagged it since it was within the "recently-tagged" list without a tag. It does need expansion. Ideally every article should have a decent explanation put into the article itself that makes it obvious why it is tagged. However, when I tag non-obvious articles, I use the "explanation" parameter of the project template. See [[Talk:Saint George]]; the template includes information on why the article is tagged. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 16:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

:Agreed, that seems like the most logical thing, so I've gone ahead and [[WP:BOLD]]ly have done so.

Excellent, that had been concerning me. Thanks Coelacan! [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 12:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

:I have transcluded the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Resources]] page into the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Editing]] and added some {{t|noinclude}} magic, so the resources page can still exist as a real page for people that are wanting to still have a link to just there.

:=) But of course. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 18:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

:I'll make some refinements for the headers, but it's good enough for now. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 04:36, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks. To keep the Editing page easily readable, I've incorporated the list of policies and guidelines directly, then added summary sections for [[WP:LGBTQ+/Resources]] and [[WP:LGBTQ+/Templates]] (spun off from resources).--[[User:Trystan|Trystan]] ([[User talk:Trystan|talk]]) 13:42, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

== Combine/move content in LGBTQ aging and LGBTQ retirement issues in US? ==

I just tagged three Simpsons episodes, and rather than dropping a fifth of the list, I put all three on one line. Is this a good idea, or should I have done three separate entries? [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 23:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:Koweja, I think that's a good approach when adding several very closely related articles. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 16:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Some of the stuff in [[LGBTQ retirement issues in the United States|LGBTQ retirement issues]], particularly the healthcare and trans issues section, seem like they'd be better suited to the [[LGBTQ ageing|LGBTQ aging]] article. Should we merge the entire retirement issues article into the aging article? Alternatively, may I move just those sections?

=== Another idea ===

Instead of doing x number of articles, let's do a certain period of time, say 7 days. Quite often someone will go add numerous articles at once (I just added 8 today), which might mean some articles only get listed for a few hours before they're removed. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 02:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:Not a bad idea - I'm sometimes surprised at the articles that are NOT tagged. I try to be selective on the ones I actually add to the list(s). <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font>^{[[User talk:Zuejay|talk]]}</b> 06:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

::[[Image:Symbol opinion vote.svg|25px]] It sounds like a good idea, although then there's the possibility of the lists getting too long. I'm adding this little yellow attention-grabber to get more input, as this topic is starting to scroll up the page. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 16:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Well, if we group related articles (like I have been doing when I tag all LGBT characters/episodes for a tv show) then it'll help cut down on the size. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 16:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd personally support a merger, because it would allow for more elaboration on retirement issues in other countries, but I can also see the argument that both are valid topics to exist on their own.

== (not my) Bot removal of interwikilinks for Cat:LGBT ==

[[User:AspiringGnome|AspiringGnome]] ([[User talk:AspiringGnome|talk]]) 16:39, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Does anyone else think [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:LGBT&curid=698056&diff=110395372&oldid=91251904 this edit] is incorrect? -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 19:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

:Yeah, I do. I left a message for the bot operator.[http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discussion_Utilisateur:Vargenau&diff=14429724&oldid=14364861] <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 21:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

::Reading through this guy's talkpage his Bot seems quite literally minded, I particularly like the one "I think you are linking this article to articles about Love on other wikis. This is incorrect, Te Aroha is not about Love, it is the name of a mountain." LOL. Hopefully, the issue should be resolved fairly easily. His English seems fine but let me know if you need a French speaker to take up the issue. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 00:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

:::After further thought I really wonder if it's appropriate at all to have a bot removing interwiki links that humans added. Presumably humans know why they are adding something. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 05:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, here's the reply: <blockquote>Hello, The reason was to have consistent sets of interwikis. Some languages have two distinct categories, e.g. [[:fr:Catégorie:Homosexualité]] and [[:fr:Catégorie:LGBT]]. If in one languages that have only one you link both, the interwikis cannot be updated by bot. Regards, [[User:Vargenau|Vargenau]] 18:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Coelacan&diff=110629002&oldid=110042271] </blockquote> I'm not making anything of that yet. I need coffee. If anybody wants to investigate whether the wrong categories were being linked, be my guest. (Obviously the French category was already correct.) <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 18:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

:I have two thought on this:

:# Bots do not run the Wikis. Editorial judgment trumps Bot convenience. It is absurd to say that every Wiki must adopt identical categorisation systems to make life easier for Bots. Bots make life easier for us, not vice versa.

:# I have confimed that German wikipedia does not have an umbrella LGBT category, it uses [[:de:Kategorie:Homosexualität]] as its main category. Linking our main category, [[:Category:LGBT]], to their main category, [[:de:Kategorie:Homosexualität]], seems entirely appropriate.

:Sorry if the Bot doesn't like it but most editors are not Bots and (as far as I know) most users of Wikipedia are not Bots. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 16:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:One article is all about [[LGBTQ retirement issues in the United States]] (it was a bit confusing that you piped the link removing the "in the United States]] in your post). Including the sections you mentioned, so a merge/move doesn't make much sense.

==Pederasty categories==

:You are welcome to expand the [[LGBTQ ageing]] article to add broad (non-US exclusive) details about different aspects not currently covered there, but I don't see how merging content that points out specific US policies such as Medicare into a global article will improve it.

I've discovered several categories about "pederasty", all falling under the general rubric of {{cl|Pederasty}}. Does anyone else find this word pejorative and NPOV, or is it just me?

:That being said, the current [[LGBTQ ageing]] article is indeed in need of some TLC and updating, so hopefully some people get some moments to help improve it. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 03:48, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

:::--[[User:DrGaellon|DrGaellon]] | [[User talk:DrGaellon|Talk]] 23:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks, this makes sense. I will definitely write some more in the [[LGBTQ ageing]] article about healthcare, but once I do that, would it be appropriate for me to remove already covered information from the [[LGBTQ retirement issues in the United States]] article and instead link the [[LGBTQ ageing]] article? [[User:AspiringGnome|AspiringGnome]] ([[User talk:AspiringGnome|talk]]) 22:18, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry, what wrong with the categories on pederasty? [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 10:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Only remove content from the country-specific article if it isn't, otherwise leave it there. Also what we commonly do is have more broad articles that have high-level summaries having links to more specific (like e.g. country specific) articles that then go into more detail. E.g. [[Violence against transgender people]] as the broad article and you see the [[Violence_against_transgender_people#By_country|By country]] section has briefer summaries with hat-note links to the more precise country specific articles, e.g. [[Violence against transgender people in the United States]] and so on. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 05:17, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

::The word ITSELF is pejorative. I wonder if there's a more neutral word to use. --[[User:DrGaellon|DrGaellon]] | [[User talk:DrGaellon|Talk]] 14:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:::It is no more pejorative than "homosexual" or "gay", which can be pejorative indeed, if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. In brief, it can either be used descriptively or pejoratively, and here we are obviously using it as a neutral scholarly term, which it most certainly is. [[User:Haiduc|Haiduc]] 14:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

::::Okay. I'm POVing. I'll shut up now. :) --<span style="background-color: #0000cc; font-color: #ffffff; font-size: larger;"><font color="#ffffff">[[User:DrGaellon|DrGaellon]]</font> ^{<font color="#ffffff">[[User talk:DrGaellon|talk]]</font>}_{<font color="#ffffff">[[Special:Contributions/DrGaellon|contribs]]</font>}</span> 15:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:::::No prob. It raised my eyebrow the first time I saw it too! But it does seem to be the best word for course of conduct being described. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 16:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

On a related but different note, does [[American Boychoir School]] really belong in [[:Category:Modern pederasty]]? [[:Category:Pedophilia]] maybe, but pederasty? -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 22:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:Um, no? <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 17:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

==Article John Glines titles==

{{moved discussion from|Special:Permalink/1298115598#Article titles}}

It seems that (based on the article talk page where LGBT was moved to [[LGBTQ]]) the vast majority of Wikipedia article titles now use the "LGBTQ" form of the initialism (many are listed at [[Outline of LGBTQ topics]]). I propose that it's worth stating on the style guide here that "LGBTQ" has become the standard initialism for article titles on English Wikipedia, in order to avoid talk page debates around LGBT vs LGBTQ vs LGBTQ+ on every article talk page with some form of the initialism somewhere in the title (see for example [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ghanaian_anti-LGBTQ_bill#Requested_move_6_March_2025 here]). Alternatively, since many feel strongly that LGBTQ+ be the standard, should that be implemented across English Wikipedia as the recommended guideline for the titles of articles on LGBTQ topics? Thank you in advance for any thoughts on my proposal to add a guideline sentence recommending "LGBTQ" as the form of the initialism to use in article titles.[[User:Pastelitodepapa|Pastelitodepapa]] ([[User talk:Pastelitodepapa|talk]]) 03:25, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

:Hi @[[User:Pastelitodepapa|Pastelitodepapa]] - you accidentally posted this to [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Advice]] which was largely unmonitored. I moved your discussion to the central talk page to get attention from other editors.

That thing I came off Wikibreak for? Well, I was contacted by a friend of [[John Glines]], who asked me for help with his article. There was a copyright issue, but that has now been resolved and I could do with your help. The article needs referencing, NPOVing and general tidying. If anyone is willing to help me with this, I would be grateful, as Mr. Glines is the founder of the world's oldest gay arts production company and also is very nice. :) Cheers, [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 13:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:I agree it is probably a good idea of adding a note to the [[WP:LGBTQ+/Advice]] page on why we use LGBTQ for most articles on Wikipedia now. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 05:42, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

== Centralized Wikiproject talk ==

==Film Infobox Project==

I just finished adding the infoboxes to the last 3 LGBT films on the To Do page!!! Good job to everyone who helped with this effort! --[[User:DrGaellon|DrGaellon]] | [[User talk:DrGaellon|Talk]] 14:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:Yes, may I commend everyone who worked on this! [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 17:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello fellow [[WT:LGBTQ+]] people and watchers, relatedly to [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies#Improving visibility of Alerts report]], which was a result of a recent example of a CfD discussion that went unnoticed by WP:LGBTQ+ members for 2 full relists until @[[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] came here and [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies#Intersex topics part of LGBTQ?|posted a notice]] and attended the CfD for a rather pertinent discussion, I also stumbled across the somewhat internal to the project talk pages that have had some discussions where people missed the notice to come here instead since those sub-talks are mostly unmonitored.

== Newsletter ==

I've created the next newsletter draft [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Newsletter|here]]. Any news I may have missed out? [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 17:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

So I [[WP:BOLD]]ly centralized the splintered Wikipedia talk pages (for the visible primary pages) for the sub-project pages under [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies]] (i.e. the talk pages of [[WP:LGBTQ+/Collaboration]], [[WP:LGBTQ+/Editing]],..) to here ([[WT:LGBTQ+]]) with redirects and archived old existing discussions from the few pages that had some (most didn't). I also moved the [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBTQ%2B_studies#Article_titles|one right above here]] as it was more recent and relevant and a good example of why the separate talk pages that are mostly unmonitored on the sub-pages were not much use and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1298115598# people have missed the banner at the top of those asking them to come here], so instead of having the manual banner, just doing a straight redirect to this talk page here made more sense as is also done on some other WikiProjects, so that no discussions get missed in the future. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 06:24, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

== [[WP:GLBT]] redirect ==

== Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genderism]] ==

I've changed the [[WP:GLBT]] redirect to point to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies]] instead of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Notice board]]. It seemed odd to me that two shortcuts that were essentially the same thing except for a region variation go to two different pages. I've created [[WP:LGBT/N]] and [[WP:GLBT/N]] to go to the notice board instead. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 00:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[[File:Symbol watching blue lashes high contrast.svg|25px|link=|alt=]]&nbsp;You are invited to join the discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genderism]], which is within the scope of this WikiProject. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 18:55, 28 July 2025 (UTC)<!-- Template:WikiProject please see -->

:Fair enough. I think the noticeboard predates the project page. [[WP:LGBT]] used to redirect to it as well. I guess changing the [[WP:GLBT]] redirect didn't occur to anyone. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 15:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

== StubCollective tagShout ==

Wondering about a possible change to the LGBT-stub tag...The text reads: <br>''This article about lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender issues is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.'' <br>Can we make it something like: <br>''This article about lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender '''related''' issues is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.'' <br>Or create a second stub for articles related to but not necessarily about LGBT issues? <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font>^{[[User talk:Zuejay|talk]]}</b> 06:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:That's a good idea. [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 12:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

::Works for me! -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 14:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure this a good idea actually. In my opinion stub tags should place an article in the most relavent category or couple of categories. We don't want a list of half a dozen stub tags on articles or the stub tag list will be longer than the article. If the article is not about "lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender issues", I'm not convinced it should have an LGBT stub tag. Tagging the talkpage will already put it an appropriate list of stub-class articles. I don't think a broader stub tag for the article mainpage would be very helpful. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 15:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:Agreed. Also, if you want to start fiddling with stubs, then you have to deal with WikiProject Stub Sorting - and they're called [[WP:SS]] for a reason... [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 15:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

::Well, they were. They probably realised what a bad shortcut they were saddled with. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 15:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:::LOL. I see [[WP:Summary style]] is now blessed with that shortcut.<br/> If anyone is feeling brave with regards changes to stub categorisation, they should raise the matter at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals]]. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 15:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Judicious placement of stub tags makes sense...There are many articles that fall under the perview of multiple Wikiprojects, are tagged as stubs, and no one is working to expand them (I know a little bit about everything and nothing about one thing...so please don't remind me that I could expand them ;) so stub tagging seems necessary - but the wikiproject tag (with stub class) by itself makes it show up on our lists as a stub, which I didn't think was true... Ok... So advice for now is: place stub tag in article '''if''' about one of those issues, else just place the project tag with stub class... (Of course, I assume all this is "for now" until we get a handle on the primary LGBT articles, then we can move into "related" articles' improvement on a more regular basis.) I always worry about weasel words so I have a tendency to tag many things. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font>^{[[User talk:Zuejay|talk]]}</b> 16:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, companion @[[User:EvPath|EvPath]] did a lot of work on the new page [[Collective Shout]], which they created (I helped a small bit as I could) - but we have an issue with the references and after trying to resolve it, we weren't able to, so if any of you is a code master, don't hesitate :') [[User:Aristoxène|Aristoxène]] ([[User talk:Aristoxène|talk]]) 00:03, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

== List of non-tagged articles ==

If anyone's interested, there's a list of ~1,400 [[User:SatyrTN/test2|non-tagged articles]] available. These are articles that are under an LGBT category but do not yet have the {{tl|LGBTProject}} banner.

== Requested move at [[Talk:Genderism#Requested move 30 July 2025]] ==

If you go through the list and find articles tha '''belong''' to the category correctly, but '''don't''' need the banner (for instance [[Zoophilia]]), simply make a note next to the entry on the list, but leave it on the list until I can mark it in my database.

[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Genderism#Requested move 30 July 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 05:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

== Nomination of [[The Nico di Angelo Adventures]] for deletion ==

If you work off the list, remove entries as you add the banner. I'll be working off the list, so if you don't remove an article, I'll do it.

<br>Thanks!! -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 14:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:Erm, why does [[Zoophilia]] belong in an LGBT category!?! <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 15:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

::[[:Category:Sexual orientation and identity]], I would imagine. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 15:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Oh, OK. hadn't thought of that as an LGBT category. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 15:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

::::I would be inclined to hand it over to WikiProject Sexology, but there's too much gay stuff in there. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 15:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

:::::Umm, we could work together with WPSexology... nothing says these have to be either/or things. :) [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 00:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

::::::While I agree that the '''category''' is one that both groups can work on, I don't think the article [[Zoophilia]] is anywhere near our scope :) -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 00:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Notifying [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies|WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies]] of the nomination of ''[[The Nico di Angelo Adventures]]'' for deletion at '''[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Nico di Angelo Adventures]]''' as the article for ''[[The Nico di Angelo Adventures]]'' is within the scope of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies|WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies]]. [[User:Justthefacts|Justthefacts]] ([[User talk:Justthefacts|talk]]) 20:07, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

== "Gay Pride" series on Wikipedia. ==

== Requested move at [[Talk:Jujubee (drag queen)#Requested move 25 July 2025]] ==

[[Talk:Queer Eye]] is currently marked with "This article is part of the "Gay Pride" series on Wikipedia." Is there still a Gay Pride series, or is the tag something that's now outdated since we have the LGBT Project tag? [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 16:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Jujubee (drag queen)#Requested move 25 July 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''^{[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]} 06:06, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

:I found an old question[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CyntWorkStuff&diff=77791709&oldid=74946742] and response[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gilliam&diff=77936685&oldid=77529793] that suggest these are leftovers of a previous attempt at a WikiProject. The template itself seems to have been deleted and wherever you see it subst'd, it can be deleted. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 16:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks, I'll go ahead and delete them then. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 16:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Peer review/Firework (song)/archive1]] ===

== Feedback ==

I've started this PR and would welcome input. [[User:SNUGGUMS|<b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b>]] ([[User talk:SNUGGUMS|<b style="color:#009900">talk</b>]] / [[Special:Contributions/SNUGGUMS|<b style="color:#009900">edits</b>]]) 16:58, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

== Requested addition of "core" parameter to WikiProject LGBTQ+ banner template ==

I've been working on a merge and clean-up of [[Straight acting]] and [[Homomasculinity]]. The new combined page is on my user page [[User:Parammon/Straight Acting2|here]]. I would appreciate some feedback and/or editing if you feel so inclined. Thanks. --[[User:Parammon|'''ParAmmon''']]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:Parammon|cheers thanks a lot!]])</span> 17:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I've [[Template talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies#Request to add "core" parameter|made a request]] on the talk page for {{template|WikiProject LGBTQ+}} to add a "core" parameter that would increase the utility and visibility of the project's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Core topics|core topics list]]. If someone with template-editor privileges could take a look at the request, or if anyone else would like to weigh in over on the template talk page, I would greatly appreciate it. [[User:MidnightAlarm|MidnightAlarm]] ([[User talk:MidnightAlarm|talk]]) 13:09, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

== Scope. ==

== Emily Neves ==

I want to bring this up again, because we've recently tagged some articles that I really don't think are covered by us. [[Buffy the Vampire Slayer]]? [[V for Vendetta (film)]]? Why do we want to add these? Specific Buffy episodes, I can understand, but the entire series? What did all of Buffy have to do with LGBT? So V for Vendetta had two gay people in it, does this warrant our splashing our banner all over it? Are people likely to edit the article specifically for its gay content? No? So why do it?

Hello. There's an ongoing discussion on [[Talk:Emily Neves#Basic info: Middle name, date of birth, etc]] regarding how we should handle the article's lead section. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Thanks, [[User:Sjones23|Lord Sjones23]] ([[User talk:Sjones23|talk]] - [[User:Sjones23/Wikipedia contributions|contributions]]) 15:06, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I think we're getting far too liberal about our banner being placed on articles only tangentially associated with our project. We tag to help people wanting to edit LGBT articles in finding them - I do not see how adding every series with a gay person or storyline ever in it helps in any way other than boosting our stats. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 22:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

== Edits for articles about the state of transgender healthcare for youth in Finland ==

:Agreed. — [[User:Emiellaiendiay|Emiellaiendiay]] 02:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I’m planning to update the Wikipedia pages for Tampere University Hospital (TAYS) and transgender history in Finland to include documented allegations of clinical abuse against transgender youth, as reported by Kehrääjä (see [https://kehraaja-com.translate.goog/kuvaile-minulle-miten-masturboit-julkikuvan-takaa-paljastuu-transpolien-nuorten-synkka-tilanne/?_x_tr_sl=fi&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en Google translated article]), [https://www.assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/transgender-youth-speak-about-finland-transpoli Assigned Media] and [https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/abusive-practices-and-conversion Erin Reed]. These reports describe systemic mistreatment, invasive practices, and ethical breaches in Finnish gender clinics, particularly the EVA unit at TAYS.

:: I don't think we're being all that liberal. There are ~334 cats under "LGBT" with ~6,600 articles. That's about 0.4% of Wikipedia. But if a particular article doesn't belong in an LGBT cat and/or doesn't fall under our scope, remove the banner. As for Buffy, I told Dev I believe it belongs not only for the major character who's a lesbian (and a couple minor characters who are LGBT), but also because the way the show dealt with LGBT issues over time, and because of the way the LGBT community responded to the show. -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 03:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

''One of the most aspects that emerged from the interviews was the way the children were pressured to talk about their naked bodies, genitals and sexuality to strangers. In addition, the interviews of long-term stories of very young children encouraged to have sexual experiences observed before the diagnostic process and starting treatment.''

:::In that light, should we tag [[Xena: Warrior Princess]]? I just checked, and it's not, so far. [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 03:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

''13-year-old son had been encouraged to have sexual experiences so that “heguide who was not far away if he was missing if/when sexuality changes/disappears through the process.” It is incomprehensible that a young teenager should be encouraged to have sexual experiences. The mother of another boy says that the the trans polyclinic seen the child’s sexual development as delayed, as the boy had not had vaginal, penetrative intercourse by the age 15. In Finland, the age of consent established to protect children is 16 years.'' - Kehrääjä 2021

::::OK, now it is. :) [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 03:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

:::::I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other about these, but please make certain that all non-obvious taggings use the "explanation" parameter of {{tl|LGBTProject}} <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 04:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

::::::I agree that makes sense. I'm glad to have learned about the explanation parameter; I hadn't known of it until seeing it in the St. George tag. The Xena article actually has quite a lengthy discussion about the possible lesbian subtext and related matters; so I didn't think an explanation was needed for that one. If anyone disagrees with me, feel free to add one! [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 05:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

According to Kehrääjä (see [https://kehraaja-com.translate.goog/kuvaile-minulle-miten-masturboit-julkikuvan-takaa-paljastuu-transpolien-nuorten-synkka-tilanne/?_x_tr_sl=fi&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en Google translated article]), families and youth have described deeply distressing and ethically questionable practices during clinical evaluations at Finnish gender identity clinics. Children were reportedly pressured to disclose intimate sexual details, including masturbation, in settings that felt coercive and inappropriate. Some minors were misgendered and addressed by their birth names despite legal name changes, compounding emotional harm. The clinic allegedly discouraged transition by attributing transgender identity to trauma, peer influence, or personality traits—methods that mirror discredited conversion therapy models such as Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD), which have been widely condemned by medical professionals and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups. These accounts suggest a systemic pattern of psychological pressure and stigmatization that critics argue may constitute a violation of children's rights and medical ethics.

Mmm, to comment on the specific examples Dev brought up:

*[[Buffy the Vampire Slayer]]. No strong opinion. Ideally I think the main article should have a bit more converage of its pioneer status in portrayal of LGBT people in such a series and any impact wider impact this had, if this is the case, prior to tagging.

*[[V for Vendetta (film)]]. Definitely within our scope. Number of characters isn't the point. One of the main things the fictional totalitarian regime that runs the UK did was outlaw all homosexual conduct, punishable by death and horrific medical experimentation. Anti-gay laws are a major part of that film.

I think we have to trust that project members have a good reason for tagging articles and discuss it with them if we are unconvinced. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 08:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/abusive-practices-and-conversion Erin Reed]’s reporting further highlights how Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala, chief psychiatrist at TAYS, has become a central figure in international debates on transgender healthcare and is connected to such groups such as Genspect and SEGM, both anti-trans hate groups. Reed alleges that the clinic employs outdated gatekeeping methods and has influenced anti-trans legislation abroad. Patients have reported delays in care, emotional distress, and termination of treatment following attempts to access puberty blockers through private providers.

:I think Buffy should be included. It had at lest two entire seasons with major gay characters ''and'' LGBT topics, such as coming out and showing a lesbian relationship in a positive way on prime time. It's not The L Word, granted, but I think that at the time it was the closest thing anyone could ask for. V for Vendetta, I have more reserves. The lesbian character was important for the plot (it was quite a beautiful story), but... [[User:Raystorm|Raystorm]] 16:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Following the publication of allegations, TAYS chief psychiatrist Riittakerttu Kaltiala and HUS youth psychiatry chief Laura Häkkinen issued a joint statement denying misconduct (Kehrääjä (see [https://kehraaja-com.translate.goog/kuvaile-minulle-miten-masturboit-julkikuvan-takaa-paljastuu-transpolien-nuorten-synkka-tilanne/?_x_tr_sl=fi&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en Google translated article])). They asserted that discussions of sexuality, including masturbation, are part of age-appropriate psychiatric care and that misgendering does not occur in clinical settings.

::I think V probably qualifies - asWjB points out, the discussion of homosexuality, etc. in the film goes beyond "there's a lesbian in it" -although, admittedly, LGBT issues are ''much'' more prominent in the graphic novel than in the movie. [[User:Carom|Carom]] 16:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

However, I would argue that these responses fail to address the core issue: the coercive and inappropriate nature of the questioning, especially toward minors. The defense that masturbation is “a positive and safe way to get to know your own sexuality” has been criticized as a deflection from the reported pressure and invasiveness described by families. Similarly, the claim that chosen names are used “in context” has been challenged by testimonies of youth being repeatedly misgendered during evaluations.

In Lääkärilehti (see [https://www-laakarilehti-fi.translate.goog/terveydenhuolto/aktivistien-hampaissa/?_x_tr_sl=fi&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en Google translated article]), Kaltiala further accused "activists" of "spreading falsehoods", stating:

::: I completely agree. :-) It's much more light in the movie. Still, it could be included. [[User:Raystorm|Raystorm]] 16:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

''“Activists have tried to influence training event organizers and demanded lecture cancellations. They have made false claims to Tampere University and TAYS about my clinic, my work, and my research.”'' This framing has been criticized as dismissive of documented patient experiences of conversion therapy and as an attempt to shift focus from institutional accountability to reputational defense and to paint the people who have suffered as just mere "activists". This also ignores the fact that Kalttiala has strong connections to anti-trans pseudoscience.

How would I write a draft an edit for the relevant articles for Wikipedia about this issue?

==Gay young adult novels==

First I was working on ''[[Annie on My Mind]]'' for JAC. Then I thought I might as well add [[Lesbian teen fiction]]. Then I discovered [[Gay young adult novels]], which is close enough so I added it to my list of current projects. I soon realized that it really needs work. Let's put it this way: If you thought that the article [[LGBT stereotypes]] in the early versions was a mess, you should see [[Gay young adult novels]]. So if anyone would like to pitch in, and make this article decent enough for Wikipedia's quality standards, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks, — [[User:Emiellaiendiay|Emiellaiendiay]] 06:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

''- Sofie, a trans girl from Finland'' [[User:Sofiedotcafe|Sofiedotcafe]] ([[User talk:Sofiedotcafe|talk]]) 10:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

=="Homosexuality and ..." articles==

Article titles such as [[Homosexuality and religion]], [[Homosexuality and Wicca]], [[Homosexuality and Christianity]], etc. are starting really to bother me as they imply only the LG of LGBT(QI...). I'd like us to consider revising the names, and where needed, the content to match, to something along the order of "Sexual orientation and...", "Sexuality and...", or similar. I raise the issue in reference to the religion articles because those are the ones that started bugging me, but I don't mean it to be exclusive to those. In some cases, e.g. [[Homosexuality and Wicca]], the title is quite a misnomer given the amount of discussion of, in that case bisexuality. In others, the title may more accurately reflect the content that is there, but not necessarily where we need it to go to be inclusive of all LGBT. What do you all think? --[[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 01:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:"Sexual orientation and..." sounds right. "Sexuality and..." would probably unnecessarily expand the scope of the articles to include things like masturbation, fertility, puberty, birth control, etc. [[User:Fireplace|Fireplace]] 02:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

::Concur with Fireplace. Sexual orientation and... broadens the term enough to be inclusive without making the scope of the articles too large. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 04:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Does that leave out the "T"? -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 05:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

::::The articles don't cover the T. I suggest "Transexuality and religion" be separate as a lot of those articles are long enough already <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 11:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:::::While the Homosexuality and Christianity article doesn't specifically cover T, there are verses in the bible that are often considered to apply to T, discussion of those verses could be added. The only problem though is that such discussion could be considered POV, just as it is POV that the bible condemns homosexuality. --[[User:Avazina|CC Proctor]] 13:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:You could always draft an edit in [[User:Sofiedotcafe/sandbox|your sandbox]] (if you click the link you should be able to start that). You could copy and paste the text of the article you want to work on into your sandbox, edit to your heart's content, and then copy and paste it back into the article.

It doesn't seem to me that it is necessary to expand the articles to "sexual orientation." It's really not about sexual orientation as a whole — religions generally don't discuss "orientations"; it's more about actions. Besides, what religions condemn heterosexuality? The topic discussed is homosexuality. I would think the only need to call it "sexual orientation and..." would be to include bisexuality. However, since the articles only address the same-sex aspect, the "Homosexuality and..." titles seem apt. — [[User:Emiellaiendiay|Emiellaiendiay]] 03:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:In general, I'd also recommend working on your editing skills by performing small edits on other pages, to fix grammar, make small updates, or the like. You'll start to learn the Wikipedia style as you go :). You can also check out the [[Wikipedia:MOS|Manual of Style]], but it's better used as a resource than as something to read through all at once. [[User:ForsythiaJo|ForsythiaJo]] ([[User talk:ForsythiaJo|talk]]) 15:40, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

:As I pointed out initially, it's not true in all of these articles that only the same-sex aspect is addressed; bisexuality is discussed in at least one of them. Also, while it may be usually true (?), it is not always the case that behavior only is at issue. The orientation itself may be at issue (whether in approving or disapproving fashion). [[User:Aleta|Aleta]] 04:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

::I don't think it's necessary to wholesale change article names. Where it's appropriate like the mentioned [[Homosexuality and Wicca]], I say go for it. I haven't combed through them recently but [[Homosexuality and religion]], [[Homosexuality and Christianity]] look pretty specific in their scope. If they start addressing the rest of the LGBT community then we should discuss it then. Just my $.02 --[[User:Parammon|'''ParAmmon''']]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:Parammon|cheers thanks a lot!]])</span> 07:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== Requesting reassessment of Xulhaz Mannan ==

== Bot tagging ==

Hi, I[[Xulhaz justMannan]] wantedwas toassessed letand youmarked knowas a botStart taggedclass filmin [[Talk:Boys2024. LifeIn 2]]the withlast yourthree WPmonths template.or That'sso, onlyI’ve partmade ofsignificant aedits seriesto ofthe 5 articles, sopage youand mightwould wantlike to tagrequest the rest asa wellreassessment. CheersThanks! [[User:HoverfishBaberoothless|HoverfishBaberoothless]] <small>([[User talk:HoverfishBaberoothless|Talktalk]]</small>) 0816:4214, 2810 FebruaryAugust 20072025 (UTC)

:Thanks, Hoverfish! The tagging is a manual process assisted by the bot, and I got tired last night so didn't finish the Boys Life movies. But I'll get to them :) -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 16:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:{{done}} [[WP:CC-BY-SA|(CC)]]&nbsp;[[User:Tbhotch|<span style="color:#4B0082;">Tb</span><span style="color:#6082B6;">hotch</span>]]^{[[User talk:Tbhotch|<span style="color:#555555;">™</span>]]} 18:53, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

== Resources list ==

== Requested move at [[Talk:LGBT-free zone#Requested move 13 August 2025]] ==

I have created a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Resources|resources list]] for people wanting to write LGBT articles - I would be grateful is everyone could add to it. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 15:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:LGBT-free zone#Requested move 13 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --[[User:MikutoH|<span style="color: #be1918;">'''MikutoH'''</span>]] [[User talk:MikutoH|^{<span style="color:#ee8b39;"> '''talk!''' </span>}]] 19:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

== Featured article removal candidacy for [[J. K. Rowling]] ==

== Getting Involved page ==

[[J. K. Rowling]] has been moved from being reviewed to being nominated for removal of featured status.. [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive4#FARC section]]. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' ^{([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])}_{Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].}</span> 10:20, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

A while back, I suggested we create a Getting Involved page similar to the one that [[WP:COMICS]] has. Well, I finally finished it, here it [[Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Getting involved|is]]. I've tried to pitch it to someone who has a vague notion of what Wikipedia is about (as well as shamelessly plagiarised WP:COMICS]] but not much more. Thoughts? Anyone is welcome to edit it. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 18:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:It's brilliant, by the way. If I think of anything I'll add it to the page. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 21:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== Newsletter[[Gay day]] ==

Not everything is gloom and doom. Can somebody please add reliable sources to this article, which has been unsourced for 13 years? [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 03:39, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

The newsletter will be going out in approximately ten minutes. Can I congratulate us all on another good month - we've beaten our recuitment record for the fourth time in a row, elected a coordinator, built another department, designed a recruitment poster etc. Can I ask next month that we get a few more FAs in? They've slacked off a bit recently. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 22:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

:...And there is no way I am ever sending out that newsletter by hand again. *flops into bed* [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 00:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

::Perhaps SatyrBot can be recruited in future...? <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 00:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:::Thanks for the great work [[User:Dev920|Dev920]]! --[[User:Parammon|'''ParAmmon''']]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:Parammon|cheers thanks a lot!]])</span> 07:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay day]] ==

:::Yep, thanks Dev! :-) And I can't believe you sent all those newsletters manually... [[User:Raystorm|Raystorm]] 18:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[[File:Symbol watching blue lashes high contrast.svg|25px|link=|alt=]]&nbsp;You are invited to join the discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay day]], which is within the scope of this WikiProject. [[User:Rosaece|<span style="color: hotpink">''Rosaece''</span>]] ♡ [[User talk:Rosaece|talk]] ♡ [[Special:Contributions/Rosaece|contribs]] 10:29, 17 August 2025 (UTC)<!-- Template:WikiProject please see -->

::::Thank you both. I like to catch up with what everyone's up to, but I think that's just too impractical now, regrettably. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 18:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== Requested move at [[Talk:Homosexuality in Japan#Requested move 11 August 2025]] ==

== Added LGBT Portal to [[Seattle Men's Chorus]] ==

[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Homosexuality in Japan#Requested move 11 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:Jeffrey34555|Jeffrey34555]] ([[User talk:Jeffrey34555|talk]]) 00:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

== Requested move at [[Talk:LGBTQ rights in Somaliland#Requested move 18 August 2025]] ==

This is the largest LGBT community chorus in the world; I was surprised that the LGBT portal was not already on it. --[[User:Allyn|Allyn]] 13:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:LGBTQ rights in Somaliland#Requested move 18 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:QalasQalas|QalasQalas]] ([[User talk:QalasQalas|talk]]) 12:38, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

:That article was a word-for-word copy violation. It even said at the bottom: "Taken from the Seattle Men's Chorus Homepage http://www.flyinghouse.org/about". If this is an important article, maybe someone would like to start it again from scratch? <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 13:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== Requested move at [[Talk:List of Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss characters#Requested move 11 August 2025]] ==

== Current events - Trans city manager being fired ==

[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:List of Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss characters#Requested move 11 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''^{[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]} 12:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

== Transgender health care ==

[[User:Yksin|Yksin]] has been doing a great job with the [[Steve Stanton]] article. I'm posting here because I'd like to get more eyes and fingers on it right now. CNN Headline News is covering this story every half hour today, confirming that he is being fired for being trans. It's probably safe to expect that the article will be getting some hits. There might be a "Did You Know" in there somewhere, too. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 18:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

==Just a little self-tooting my horn==

I know this isn't the place, and I have no problem with somebody removing this message, but I was allowed to stand with the obnoxious paparazzi ("Who do you photograph for?" "Wikipedia." "Oh, Wikipedia...do you have some kind of card or anything?" "Not really...." "Okay, sure, go ahead.") and photograph [[Angela Bassett]] and her husband [[Courtney Vance]] - I am pretty happy about the results, and had to share them. Check out their pages. Dave --[[User:DavidShankBone|DavidShankBone]] 01:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:Great pics, David! You are just a gem, the way you go around taking pics and automatically sharing them on Wikipedia. You have so improved the encyclopedia with your numerous photographic contributions. A great big thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 06:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

There is [[Talk:Transgender_health_care#Medical_Education_and_Transgender_Healthcare|an edit request at the Transgender health care article]] that could do with more eyes. Thanks. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 01:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

==NAMBLA (cringe)==

== Rainbow crossings ==

I have removed the LGBT WikiProject tag from the NAMBLA article. Both due to the discussion on that article's talk page, in the RfC on the matter, and the unfortunate phrasing that made the tag format to something like "NAMBLA is supported by WikiProject LGBT studies" (eek). I also saw that a member left the project today over the impression that this WikiProject "supports NAMBLA". Does anyone have any thoughts on this? <font face="Georgia">[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:navy"> ~ Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]] [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 06:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:This comes up all the time and everyone goes 'cringe', myself included. Unfortunately, it does come under the remit of WikiProject LGBT studies. At least in that way it can be monitored closely and studied for POV/vandalism - [[User:Ali-oops|<font face="comic sans ms" color="green">Alison</font>]]^{<font color="green">[[User_talk:Ali-oops|&lt;talk&gt;]]</font>} 06:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:May I ask who left today over this issue? [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 06:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:: That would be [[User:Avazina]]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AWikiProject_LGBT_studies%2FMembers&diff=111993039&oldid=111966951 here] - [[User:Ali-oops|<font face="comic sans ms" color="green">Alison</font>]]^{<font color="green">[[User_talk:Ali-oops|&lt;talk&gt;]]</font>} 06:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

There is an ongoing effort to remove [[rainbow crossing]]s in the US state of Florida. Project members are invited to help improve the parent article and others about specific crossings. I've started a couple recently for FL:

:I agree the article should be monitored. But if that means having a template on the NAMBLA article that says, "This article is supported by WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia." I just can't be part of the WikiProject, either. Isn't there a way of '''monitoring''' them without '''including''' them? <font face="Georgia">[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:navy"> ~ Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]] [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 06:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

* [[Rainbow crossing (Boynton Beach, Florida)]]

Oppose removing the tag. While I'm not a big NAMBLA supporter (and likewise cringe), it '''is''' part of our history, and totally within the scope of our project. I would totally agree to adding something to the <code>explanation=</code> tag, or even adding a "faux" tag that words things better and still keeps it in our watchlist. -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 06:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

* [[Rainbow crossing (Delray Beach, Florida)]]

::(edit conflict) It seems that we're in a quandry, because if our project removes the tag from that article out of [[Political correctness|Political considerations]], I would consider leaving the project, myself. I'm sorry you are unconfortable with the tag on the article, but it is most definitely a LGBT issue. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 06:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

* [[Rainbow crossing (Orlando, Florida)]]

--[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy">Another Believer</span>]] _{([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#C60">Talk</span>]])} 20:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

:There was one in [[West Palm Beach]] as well, but I think it's been removed already. I might have some photos in my camera roll. [[User:MjolnirPants|<span style="color:#004400;">'''ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants'''</span>]] <small><small>[[User_talk:MjolnirPants|''Tell me all about it.'']]</small></small> 20:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I have always supported tagging the talk page, because I believe the article is within the project's ''scope''. But, '''this WikiProject needs active members''' much more than it needs strict tagging guidelines. The editorial dispute over whether or not the article should be in [[:Category:LGBT organizations]], [[:Category:LGBT history]], or neither, is a general content dispute that involves the larger Wikipedia community, and in my opinion shouldn't be anything that would drive anyone away from this WikiProject. (Take it up with [[WP:RFC]], not [[WP:LGBT]], you know?) But the WikiProject tag? That's LGBTProject-oriented, and that's optional, and if tagging the article is going to result in the loss of productive editors from this project, then the tag should be dropped. The project has an active editor who is not a member, and that arrangement seems to suit everyone fine. Similarly, the project can have an article that is actively monitored without being tagged. It doesn't mean the article isn't a concern of this project. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 07:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::@[[User:MjolnirPants|MjolnirPants]] Thanks! [[Rainbow crossing (West Palm Beach, Florida)]] ---[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy">Another Believer</span>]] _{([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#C60">Talk</span>]])} 20:45, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

:I looked at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AWikiProject_LGBT_studies%2FMembers&diff=111993039&oldid=111966951 Avazina's edit summary]. What bothers me is the misunderstanding of "LGBT[Project]'s DE FACTO approval". If a member of this project can have this misunderstanding, many more non-members will certainly believe the same. Project scope I don't disagree with. But the project should not appear to be in support of something it doesn't support. If it's misleading, then it's harmful, no matter which article is in question. The mere fact that this tagging is being misunderstood by ''several'' editors should be troubling. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 07:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::I've dug through my archives and camera roll and was unable to find it. I will, however, ask around. There was some discussion on a local forum about it recently, and I distinctly remember a few people saying words to the effect of "I'm glad I got a picture before they removed it." [[User:MjolnirPants|<span style="color:#004400;">'''ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants'''</span>]] <small><small>[[User_talk:MjolnirPants|''Tell me all about it.'']]</small></small> 14:28, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

:I have created an article about the [[removal of rainbow crossings in Florida]]. Project members are invited to help out in improving this article. [[User:Is it Juan?|Is it Juan?]] ([[User talk:Is it Juan?|talk]]) 01:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

::And someone else did [[Rainbow crossings in Florida]]. ---[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy">Another Believer</span>]] _{([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#C60">Talk</span>]])} 02:06, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

:::I love the idea of articles for states, so I've started [[Rainbow crossings in California]]! ---[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy">Another Believer</span>]] _{([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#C60">Talk</span>]])} 03:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

::::I think those should be renamed to [[List of rainbow crossings in X]], since they’ll inherently be list-articles (whether they use sections, bullets or tables, unless they actually encyclopedically have enough notable content like say [[Rainbow crossings in Seattle]].

::::Do note that I did create [[List of rainbow crossings]] two years ago, but at the time AfD consensus resulted in merging it into [[Rainbow crossing]] where is still is now - maybe consensus may have changed over the last two years and we could consider the split back out again?

::::Bringing it up as it might be a good [[WP:List of lists]] entry point to those subsidiary articles then. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 06:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

:::::I think a list/table would be massive, as there are probably thousands of rainbow crossings in the world. Fram just nominated [[Rainbow crossings in California]] for deletion, so I'll just go work on other things now. ---[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy">Another Believer</span>]] _{([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#C60">Talk</span>]])} 13:46, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

::::::[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainbow crossing (Toronto)]]. Whatever, I guess the spirit of collaboration has faded. ---[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy">Another Believer</span>]] _{([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#C60">Talk</span>]])} 14:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

== AFD ==

::Coelacan, I'm a little surprised that there's such confusion. Perhaps we need to consider '''rewording the tag''' if that's a legit option? It seems the tag wording is the problem. Or generate a special tag for it similar to the one used for Saint...shoot, I can't recall who, but we added an explanation as to why the tag was on his article. Either that, or can we develop a "reduced" LGBT tag that simply says we monitor the article (I could see placing something like that on [[V for Vendetta (film)]] instead of the full project tag). There are many options here. Removing it '''for now''' while we discuss the matter might be ok, as long as we come up with some alternative to add back later. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 07:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::I think this is a case of editors not reading carefully. The tag clearly reads "This '''article''' is supported by the LGBT Project", not "This '''organization''' is supported by the LGBT project". There's a crucial difference here, and it's not particularly subtle, either. And I do not support removing the tag while discussions are ongoing. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 07:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::I'm a little surprised by the confusion, but I can grasp it by trying to imagine that I don't know how the project works. And most people don't. There ''shouldn't'' be confusion. And I'm tempted to say, "well that's not what the tag means so those people are wrong and they should get over it". But there ''is'' such confusion. And I expect it will remain as long as that template, especially with its icon, is up there. There's just a strong psychological correlation that results from that visual. I wonder if the talk page needs to be tagged in any way? There must be ways of monitoring the article that don't involve tagging. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 07:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Project member may wish to comment at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay day]]. All opinions welcome.[[User:4meter4|4meter4]] ([[User talk:4meter4|talk]]) 12:47, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I believe the consensus of [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association#Request_for_comment|an RfC on the matter]] indicates that we should not imply that NAMBLA is an accepted part of the LGBT community. If the tag is not removed from the article, it seriously needs to be reworded. I disagree with Jeff and think that the tag should be removed while this is being discussed. <font face="Georgia">[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:navy"> ~ Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]] [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 07:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:Once again, kathryn, the LGBT Project does not take a position on NAMBLA. Individual members have in dividual opinions, though I believe the vast majority oppose the organization and what it stands for. That said, NAMBLA is part of LGBT history, just as [[Talk:Nazi Party|Naziism]] is part of German history. The article on Nazism is supported by Wiki project Germany--do you think they are advocating that country's return to a fascist, murderous dictatorship? The principle here is exactly the same. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 07:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Category for LGBTQ activists ==

::Jeff, I believe you are arguing in a perfect world. The fact that people should not misunderstand does not stop people from misunderstanding. I for one know what exactly what the tag means, and I think we should dispense with it ''because'' many other people do not. People don't seem to be making the mistake of believing that WikiProject Germany supports Nazism. But for whatever reason, several editors both inside and outside of the project made the mistake of thinking that this project supported NAMBLA. We can't fault people for misunderstanding, and we can't fault Kathryn or anyone for not wanting to be associated with that misunderstanding. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 08:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I just discovered, to my great astonishment, that there was no Category for "LGBTQ activists" - i.e. LGBTQ individuals who are activists in any field, including LGBTQ rights. Needless to say, we do have [[:Category:LGBTQ rights activists|Category:LGBTQ ''rights'' activists]] - which includes many individuals who are not themselves LGBTQ. And of course we also have countless other subcats of [[:Category:LGBTQ people by occupation]].

To remedy this major gap in the Category structure, I am about to create [[:Category:LGBTQ activists]]. However, this will be a massive undertaking, especially since it will need to have subcats by nationality. So I thought I had better give you folks a heads-up on this, as it is way more than I can take on by myself. So please lend a hand - both hands if possible! Regards, [[User:Anomalous+0|Anomalous+0]] ([[User talk:Anomalous+0|talk]]) 23:51, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

::Intersting choice - [[Nazism]]. Just went there and then to [[Holocaust]] to see how the various projects word their templates - they do not use the word "support" they simply say it falls within the scope. We have a tendency to read quickly online and not fully understand text all the time and that is what appears has happened here. Just as a I said "'''might'''" consider removing while we discuss, not "remove" alone. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 08:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:Update: I have gone ahead and created [[:Category:LGBTQ activists]] and its American subcat. I also discovered that there was a [[:Category:Non-binary activists]], which is now a subcat of this new Category. However, I did not ascertain whether those people are actually ''Non-binary '''rights''' activists'', so someone should check on that, as it might need to be renamed if that is the case. [[User:Anomalous+0|Anomalous+0]] ([[User talk:Anomalous+0|talk]]) 00:30, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

::I've asked the creator of [[:Category:Non-binary activists]] about this issue. [[User:Anomalous+0|Anomalous+0]] ([[User talk:Anomalous+0|talk]]) 23:39, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Satyr, is it possible to make a template, perhaps {{tl|WPLGBT-monitored}}, that just drops the class-category without adding any other visual? <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 08:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:Perhaps: "This article is monitored by WikiProject LGBT studies. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page." plus the rating. No rainbow flag, just text? <font face="Georgia">[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:navy"> ~ Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]] [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 08:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a project member, but it is hard for me to see how NAMBLA would not within the scope of the project given how many sources and critics of the gay-rights movement among others attempt to connect BAMBLA to the movement (I think it does also raise interesting issues about the nature of consent and related things that I'm not convinced most of the gay-rights movement is willing to really discuss, but that's my own POV). Regardless, the use of the language "support" is problematic. Why not have the template in all cases just say something like "This article is edit by the LGBT project" or soemthing like that? [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 08:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:I like the idea of using the explanation option on the template to give a little note as to why it's there, just like on [[Talk:Saint George]] (as SatyrTN suggested). Either that, or change the tag to read "This article falls within the scope of...", but don't remove it. This article obviously qualifies as one this project should be working on. —'''[[User:MiraLuka|<font color="cc00cc" face="Vivaldi">Mira</font>]]''' 08:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::It is within project scope. The nature of this particular article's subject is such that it impedes calm decision-making processes for many people. I do not expect the "explanation" parameter is obvious enough for this case. The primary reason for the template is to assist in tracking. That can be accomplished by simply adding [[:Category:B-Class LGBT articles]], without the graphic or anything else to provoke misunderstanding. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 08:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::Two words: [[Neville Chamberlain]]. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 08:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::That's got to be some corollary of [[Godwin's Law]]. Seriously, what do you want that [[:Category:B-Class LGBT articles]] doesn't accomplish? <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 08:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::How could it possibly be a "LGBT B class article" if it is not part of the LGBT project? And the next demand will be that it is removed from that category as well. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 09:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::Neither I nor Kathryn are suggesting that the article should be removed from the project. Only that the template is misleading in this case, unnecessarily so. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 09:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::::With all due respect, Coelacan, perhaps Kathryn should answer that for herself. If that is indeed so, then it looks like sleight of hand to me, done solely for image purposes to improve our PR. I don't mean to be combative here, but I truly feel it is wrong to remove the project tag. maybe I should make a little list of all the articles this project covers that offend me, and which I feel give this project a bad name. For instance, do we as a project really support the idea of [[Bugchasing|deliberately infecting ourselves with AIDS?]] That article certainly presents us in a wonderful light. Shouldn't we remove the tag from that, too? [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 09:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::::I believe she did.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies&diff=112032643&oldid=112031928] And keep in mind that these concerns are coming from outside the project as well. Non-members, self-identifying as straight, have complained on that talk page about the project tag. For whatever reason, nobody's making the mistake of thinking that the template means the LGBT project supports bugchasing. Yet that mistake is being made here, repeatedly. I can't explain it. But I think that rather than acknowledging that this misunderstanding is a problem, you are simply saying that it ''shouldn't be a problem''. I agree. That doesn't alleviate it though. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 09:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::::::Actually in her second comment on this page, I interpret it to mean she wants the article completely out of the Project. The diff you provided showed a modification of Alison's comment made by Kathryn. In any event, [[Talk:North American Man/Boy Love Association|please see the new tag.]] Comments? [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 09:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Just curious, since I posted my support of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ANorth_American_Man%2FBoy_Love_Association&diff=112127958&oldid=112041666 new article tag] it has [[Talk:North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association|changed again]]. I felt the first change gave greater protection and distance for LGBT members, which has been a [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies/Members|concern of mine]]. We Gays, Lesbians, Bi's and Transgendered persons have enough problems being perceived by society as perverts and sexual deviants; NAMBLA (albeit a dead organization now) has done enough damage to encourage the persistence of that perception by society. The last thing the LGBT Project should do is anything that might further encourage that perception. While I do understand that neutrality is the expected goal of any wiki editor, there are visitors to wikipedia who don't participate in editing and simply browse the various pages for information. The one thing we don't need is for any of them (or others) to miscontrue the intent or scope of the LGBT Project and conclude that the members subscribe to the more extreme aspects of the LGBT world. I don't think that a detailed and specific disclaimer in article tagging, when it becomes necessary, would be problematic to the LGBT Project's editing neutrality. In short, I preferred [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]]'s first version of the new tag, but that's just my opinion. --[[User:Avazina|Avazina]] 23:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

===arbitrary break===

(indent reset) The diff I linked was her most recent word on the subject. Anyway, I've changed the template to read "within the scope of" and added ''emphasis'' to your changes on the [[Talk:NAMBLA]] page. As I said earlier, I don't think the explanation parameter is going to be quite enough; the flag itself carries particular connotations and is very powerful psychologically as a visual cue. I still think that dropping the category alone is the best route. But I'd rather let this one sit while others chime in. I think America is going to bed now. Let's pick this up later. I'm going to go work on [[Steve Stanton]] for a while. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>acan]]</span> [[User talk:Coelacan|<span style="font-variant: small-caps">t</span>a<span style="font-variant: small-caps">lk</span>]] — 10:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:While America sleeps others awake. I think the template (for ALL articles) should be carefully worded to preclude the possibility of it being seen either as an endorsement or a condemnation. The problem is not with this or that article, it is with an overly effusive template. [[User:Haiduc|Haiduc]] 11:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::This American is just getting started on [[hir]] day and may not have had enough [[coffee]] yet to really be a part of this discussion. But... I'm opposed to just adding the "B-class LGBT articles" category and removing the tag. For one thing, I don't know if that would still keep the article on the LGBT Watchlist. However, I do support putting a text-only banner on NAMBLA that states that we watch and edit the article. Though I do wonder at Jeff's comment about where this will lead - Bugchasing is one thing, but personally I find [[Log Cabin Republican]]s offensive - would we use this banner there, too?

::So lets compromise a little. It's no big deal to add a parameter to the template like <code>image=no</code> that would suppress the image. That combined with a thorough review of the wording (per the comment by Haiduc and others) should address most concerns, no? -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 15:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::We have to be very careful about creating a two-tier classification with our template: "things we like and things we do not like about LGBT culture." We all have our betes noires, I am sure. Who shall we cast out farther? The NAMBLA rapists or the Bugchasing and Barebacking murderers? I suggest caution here. [[User:Haiduc|Haiduc]] 15:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::Thank you, Haiduc, for your take on the situation. I agree that this article is being handled differently because it makes people uncomfortable, and not because it is so difficult to classify. After giving this some thought, I think that if people are not comfortable participating due to articles falling under the scope of our project, they are free to leave. But to say that certain articles must be deleted if individual participants are to remain is both a form of censorship as well as an invitation to chaos. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 15:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::I agree with both statements [[User:Haiduc|Haiduc]] made above. We have to be careful of creating a two-class system and the template is/was overly effusive. The current version is better. A text only version would suit me, afterall many articles also have the LGBT template/footer - we don't have to have the flag on everything. It signals a tacit endorsement. --[[User:Parammon|'''ParAmmon''']]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:Parammon|cheers thanks a lot!]])</span> 16:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::So the wording on the tag has been changed to <blockquote>This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia.</blockquote>Which is much better. I do not think supressing the image is a good idea as then we might need to have this discussion every time someone wants to supress the image b/c they "disagree" in some way with labeling the article as LGBT related.<br>The explanation now attached seems incredibly redundant, and pretty harsh. I haven't read the article, but it appears by this statement that the project has taken a position on the topic of the article which is inappropriate conduct for the project at large. Can we simplify and reword this explanation - It should not be more than one (maybe compound) sentence. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 18:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::Zuejay, one could say that this entire discussion is based upon the project taking a position one way or another on the article. That disclaimer on the article was placed there in response to editors saying they were leaving (and in one case, had left) if the tag stayed at all. To me, removing the tag, as has been suggested, is taking an even stronger position. My feeling is that, as the article falls under our scope, we slap the same tag on it that we do on every other article, and let people manage their potential discomfort in their own way, as long as it doesn't disrupt the project or encyclopedia. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 19:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::I understand what it appears this discussion "looks like" but I've tried to avoid expressing opinions about the article subject matter. I have read this conversation and I do understand what is going on. I agree, '''now''', that there should only be one tag to avoid edit wars with the project tag and other similar foolish edit problems. I am simply expressing dissatisfaction with the current wording of the 'explanation'. May I propose another wording? <blockquote>This article falls within the empirical scope of the wikiproject. This tag does not imply acceptance or endorsemsnt of NAMBLA.</blockquote> I just want to simplify the bugger. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 20:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::::I didn't mean to imply that you weren't fully informed about the discussion. I know you have been following it closely. I was just confused at what seemed the full circle we were making with this discussion. The text as you wrote it seems fine to me, if, indeed, we need text at all. Coelacan, however, seemed to feel the text as it now is on the tag, was not strong enough, and wanted the flag removed. I am beginning to wonder if we can please everybody involved in this discussion. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 20:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::::Sorry if I got snippy - inflections in voice don't "show-up" online. It seems not everyone will be pleased no matter what. The tag does need to appear on the page just as it does on Exodus International (as someone pointed out on NAMBLA's talk page - which needs to be archived). I understand the desire to supress the image, I just think it will lead to more edit conflicts. And I feel the simpler the wording, the better off we all are - the more words, the more oppotrunity for mis-interpretation. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 20:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::I want to point out again that this isn't simply a project-internal discussion on what everyone's comfortable with. Non-members, self-identifying as straight, have complained on [[Talk:NAMBLA]] about the project tag. The template is generating false understandings. So the discussion has to be about more than simply making everyone comfortable; we have to try to see why the template is/was being misconstrued, and fix it, for the sake of facts. If there are elements of the tag that are contributing to false understanding, then those have to be on the table. I think the flag is one such visual cue. Since it's not a meaningless symbol, it carries along the frames that people have associated with it: often gay-positive. When people see it on that talk page, there's cognitive dissonance: "wait, no, that's wrong, NAMBLA isn't LGBT". All the text explanations in the world don't alter the underlying processing of frames that the symbol carries. I think this contributes to the misunderstanding. Anything else that does so also needs to be on the table. This isn't just about comfort zones, it's also about accuracy. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>]][[User talk:Coelacan|acan]]</span> — 23:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've created a custom version of the banner to try to make clearer what project's position on NAMBLA is. Regards, [[User talk:BenAveling|Ben Aveling]] 00:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:I appreciate the simplified 'explanation'. However, "maintained by" is not accurate as it implies the LGBT project alone works on the article. A disccusion on this is occurring further down this page. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 01:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

== Crossgender impersonators in film/theatre ==

Hi all. I have been working on a number of articles related to crossgender impersonators in Japanese performance. In [[Kabuki]], as in Shakespearean theatre and other forms, all the roles are played by men, and some men play only women's roles. Similarly, the [[Takarazuka Revue]] features all-female troupes and casts, in which some women specialize in only male roles. This phenomenon extends beyond just these two forms, and beyond just Japan, of course. But I can't seem to find any extensive articles on the subject (just a small section under [[Transvestism]]), and no categories for actors who professionally specialize in impersonating the opposite sex.

You all likely know as well as I do that people who crossdress professionally in this way are not necessarily gay. So I apologize somewhat for bringing this somewhat out-of-scope topic up here. Any thoughts or suggestions - if you know where to find these articles & categories, and I'm just looking in the wrong places - would be most appreciated. Thanks. [[User:LordAmeth|LordAmeth]] 13:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:Hi, LordAmeth! I ran in to a couple of similar situations when reviewing the articles in [[:Category:Drag kings]] and [[:Category:Drag queens]]. Some of the articles in those cats (though not many) aren't LGBT. Though some might argue that drag in general falls under "T". I don't believe there's a category for [[:Category:Performers who cross-dress]], which might include [[Eddie Murphy]] and [[Robin Williams]]. But equating [[Kabuki]] players with [[Drag queen]]s does seem out of place. -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 14:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::Do you think I should create something? [[:Category:Female impersonators]] and [[:Category:Male impersonators]], or something like that? A man like [[Taichi Saotome]] (not a kabuki actor) or [[Tamasaburo]] (who is), playing the role of a woman in a play is not the same as [[Eddie Izzard]] playing himself - a man - in drag. Though I do see your point about Robin Williams, Eddie Murphy, Monty Python actually playing women's roles. [[User:LordAmeth|LordAmeth]] 15:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== [[Classification of transsexuals]] and [[Gender identity disorder]] ==

... are on the main page this morning in the [[Wikipedia:Did_you_know|DYK]] section. They're a prime target for vandalism so please add to your watchlist! - [[User:Ali-oops|<font face="comic sans ms" color="green">Alison</font>]]^{<font color="green">[[User_talk:Ali-oops|&lt;talk&gt;]]</font>} 16:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Wording of project banner ==

Evidently, Dev's not too keen on "within the scope of" for the project banner. As I recall it sets off her [[synesthesia]]. Do we reopen the discussion on the wording of the banner? Or is the explanation on the NAMBLA banner enough for those concerned? -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 23:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:On further review, [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies/Archive 2#Template rewording|we voted 6 to 1]] for the phrase "within the scope of". -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 23:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

::There's also the problem that many of the articles tagged are not supported by this WikiProject. By that I mean they've been tagged, but not edited significantly or even cleaned up. I tag a lot of talk pages without touching the articles themselves (shame on me, but I'm lazy like that). WjB pointed out that "within the scope of" avoids any appearance of taking credit for other editors' work. Appearing to take credit for no work at all is undesirable too. ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors|League of Sloppyeditors]]?) <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>]][[User talk:Coelacan|acan]]</span> — 23:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

:::I think "within the scope of" remains the best wording at this point; I'd really like to hear what others think, including other suggestions. Perhaps, now that there are significantly more members, another list of options should be entertained and another vote needs to be held? <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 01:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::::Discussion can't hurt. I favoured "within the scope" at the time of the last discussion and still do. In my view "supported by" implies an approval of the topic and commitment to maintain the article. The former we simply should not do. The latter we we cannot commit to given the shear number of articles with this project's scope. However, our membership has expanded considerably since the discussion last December and it may be a good idea to revisit the matter. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 01:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::::I would like to see that I think it's ridiculous that you want to change the wording of the banner for the sake of one sodding article. This also goes back to my attitude towards tagging articles like Buffy and V for Vendetta - if we aren't going to at least plan to support them we shouldn't tag them. However, 6-1 is a fairly definitive ratio, so if you all decide to go with that I only ask that you chnage "scope" to "remit", because my eyes are starting to water. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 01:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::How are we changing the banner for one article? The discussion in Dec was way before the recent probs with the NAMBLA article. Surely we should now discuss what the banner should read for all articles, rather than having disclaimers on some articles but not others, which I find problematic. Either we disavow approval on all articles or none- otherwise a subjective judgment will creep in as to which articles need the disclaimer. By the way, can I ask why you prefer the word "remit" to "scope"? <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 01:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::::I have changed the banner 'just for this one article' by expanding the macro and editing the result. (Currently "This article falls under the scope of", but feel free to change it.) There is no need to change the overall banner just because of one article, if we don't want to. Regards, [[User talk:BenAveling|Ben Aveling]] 04:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::::Better. Please, feel free to contribute to this conver., too. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 04:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::::That should help prevent any revert warring and calm people down, though it is just a temporary solution. Banners need to be transcluded templates rather than substituted because it makes it harder to maintain the banner, makes a mess of the talk page, and besides, we should have a uniform statement. If we have separate messages for subjects we don't like we haven't solved the problem at all. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 05:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::::::With [[synesthesia]], certain combinations of letters can cause unpleasant sensations, if I learned anything from the Discovery Channel (and others can be pretty awesome). Anyway, thesaurus.com suggests bounds, breadth, field, purview, range, span, sphere, stage, and ... purlieus. I remember the discussion that Satyr linked; I don't remember how it changed after that. But, whatever. I'm partial to "breadth", myself. Makes me think of warm loaves. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>]][[User talk:Coelacan|acan]]</span> — 03:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::::Thanks for clarifying [[synesthesia]]; I must have read the first few sentences at least three times and still wasn't certain how it applied here. So Dev920, let us know which words trip your troubles and which don't; as you are Coordinator, we can certainly come up with a reasonable alternative to the dreadful sko-p-e. Also found: gamut, spectrum, ___domain (from Merriam-Webster). <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 04:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::This isn't just for one article. There was already a minor issue at [[Homer's Phobia]] because someone thought that "supported by" meant we were claiming credit for it reaching GA status. I thought supported would be an acceptable alternative, but apparently not. An alternative to skope (does it help if we misspell it?) would be fine but we have to be careful that we don't imply that we a)own in whole or part, b)are actively involved with the development of, or c)agree with the subject of the article. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 02:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

== DYK ==

Is it just me, or are we getting a '''lot''' of main page articles? I mean, [[Classification of transsexuals]] and [[Gender identity disorder]] as DYK's yesterday, and I see that [[Same-sex marriage in Spain]] will be Featured on the 14th, and [[Buffy the Vampire Slayer]] on the 10th. I think that speaks '''very''' well of our project! -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 01:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:Aye! It's pretty sweet. Help me squeeze a DYK out of [[Steve Stanton]]! The article's approaching 36 hours now. Is there a tidbit there? "Did you know that Steve Stanton was fired by jerks?" That doesn't seem to work. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>]][[User talk:Coelacan|acan]]</span> — 03:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::Did you know that successful [[city manager]] of [[Largo, Florida]] &mdash; [[Steve Stanton]] &mdash; has been fired for pursuing [[sex reassignment]]? -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 05:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:::Thanks Satyr, that inspired me to be just NPOV enough. =) We'll see how it goes. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan|coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps">l</span>]][[User talk:Coelacan|acan]]</span> — 06:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::::Quick note - make sure the [[sex reassignment]] link is disambig. Perhaps [[sex reassignment therapy]] with the "therapy" hidden. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">[[User:Zuejay|Zue]]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Zuejay|Jay]]</font><small> ([[User talk:Zuejay|talk]])</small></b> 06:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

==Not a member of your project, but would like to request help==

I keep coming across your tags and have enjoyed browsing around your project. Now I'd like to ask for advice. What criteria should editors use when deciding where in an article (or whether) to include a person's sexuality? The two examples I have in mind are fairly straightforward, in that the individuals are out and have used gay issues as some part of their political work, so their sexuality is of relevance to their public lives. Even in these cases, there is some debate on the talk pages. (The two I am thinking of are [[Irshad Manji]], controversial Canadian writer, and [[Waheed Alli]], Tony Blair's youngest appointment to the [[House of Lords]].Any comments you would care to make there would be gratefully recieved as well.) But what about more generally, when the person is out in some contexts? Or it is of less relevance to their work? If it's of no relevance to their work, or they are not out, then it is reasonable not to mention it. But otherwise? Do you have a proto-policy about this? Many thanks. [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] 17:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:If they are a gay activist, or their work is based in gay themes (such as writers, artists etc.), this should be mentioned in the introduction and expanded on in their career sections. If they are simply someone who happens to be gay (e.g. [[Evan Davis]]) than it should simply be mentioned in their personal life section section and as a category. IMO, anyway. It's the principles I follow when editing articles. [[User:Dev920|Dev920]] (Have a nice day!) 17:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

== Assessment of importance ==

I see people here have been doing a wonderful job of assessing articles by quality. I was looking over the results to see if there were any "important" articles that were in a bad state, but there are so many lower-quality articles, it can be hard to get a handle on the situation. I was wondering if it would be useful to also assign an important level to all LGBT articles, using the [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Release_Version_Criteria#Importance_of_topic|standard importance scale]] like the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0|Math project]]. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] 19:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:Importance ratings for articles are a sticky barrel of worms, IMHO. To rate an article's quality can have a degree of subjectivity, but importance? I can only imagine the arguments over that. Maybe I'm over-worrying, but whenever I do article assessments, I never rate importance, only quality. My two cents, for what it's worth. --[[User:Ebyabe|Ebyabe]] 20:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

::Importance is really something that has to be determined by the Project, not an individual, which makes it difficult (judging quality is hard enough, which is why I avoided it at first). Obviously articles on [[LGBT]], [[Homosexuality]], [[Bisexuality]], etc are high importance, but there are thousands of articles tagged. Perhaps we could elect a committee of Project members to evaluate the importance of the articles? [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 23:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

:::To tell you the truth, since we have ~6,000 articles (rather than ~221,000 that WP:WPBIO has, or ~31,000 that WP:MILHIST has), I'd rather spend my time [[WP:LGBT/J|increasing the quality]] of articles than worrying about their "importance". Just my $US0.02. -- <span style="background-color: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</span></span> 01:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

:::Well, yes that should of course be everyone's goal. However if we want "our" articles to make into the Wikipedia release then we need to allocate our time so we focus on getting the most important LGBT articles ready. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 02:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)