Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies: Difference between revisions
→User:NYyankees51: purge comment |
|||
Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
Hello fellow WikiProject LGBT members! Anyone want to help me in my purge of all the brochures? [[User:NYyankees51|NYyankees51]] ([[User talk:NYyankees51|talk]]) 03:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC) |
Hello fellow WikiProject LGBT members! Anyone want to help me in my purge of all the brochures? [[User:NYyankees51|NYyankees51]] ([[User talk:NYyankees51|talk]]) 03:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC) |
||
:If you're doing a "purge", perhaps you could post a list here and add articles you think are "brochures" as you find them? That would give members of this project a chance to review them, chime in if they need to be deleted or merged, and/or find sources for keeping the articles? Then if they ''do'' need to be deleted or merged, you'll have several opinions already when they get taken to AfD. Just a thought :) -- <span style="background: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]] <small>([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</small></span> 16:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC) |
:If you're doing a "purge", perhaps you could post a list here and add articles you think are "brochures" as you find them? That would give members of this project a chance to review them, chime in if they need to be deleted or merged, and/or find sources for keeping the articles? Then if they ''do'' need to be deleted or merged, you'll have several opinions already when they get taken to AfD. Just a thought :) -- <span style="background: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]] <small>([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</small></span> 16:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC) |
||
::I'm shocked and apalled at the reception NYyankees51 has received from his fellow LGBTers. To say it was chilly would be an understatement. I think frothy sums it up nicely. Coming out is never easy. He shouldn't be made to bend over just to be accepted. I'm sure he's feeling pretty exposed right about now. I'm sure if you give him a chance he'll be on top in no time. The first thing you should do is find out which area excites NYY the most: L, G, B or T. And remember... LGBT didn't choose him: ''he chose LGBT.'' – [[user:Lionelt|Lionel]] <sup>([[user talk:Lionelt|talk]])</sup> 20:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:18, 20 February 2012
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject LGBT studies and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79Auto-archiving period: 30 days ![]() |
![]() | LGBT studies Project‑class | ||||||
|
|
Proposed deletion of Sean Eldridge
Soliciting comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sean Eldridge (since the nominator didn't add a notice here.) AV3000 (talk) 16:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
List of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender sportspeople
I don't even know where to begin, so I'm putting this out there for help from other editors.
In the past, I've worked on six or seven lists to get them to WP:FL status. I've recently been working on List of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender sportspeople, to that same end. At the moment, everything is ready to go *except* it needs a lede. Three or four paragraphs explaining what the list is, with references.
I'm not great at writing, and in this case, I'm not even sure where to begin. I've taken a look at Homosexuality in sports, but that article needs quite a bit of help.
Does anyone feel like helping me put something together? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:38, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky Featured Article Review proposal
See here - comments welcome.--Smerus (talk) 21:38, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
"LGBT rights in FOO" at WP:VP (policy)
Just a heads up, the "LGBT rights in FOO" are being discussed at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#LGBT_articles. Peachey88 (T · C) 00:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
People task force?
Would anyone be interested in creating a "People Task Force" as a sub-project of this one? Specifically to deal with BLP issues, the List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people and associated lists, etc? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- If anyone's interested: Wikipedia:Wikiproject LGBT studies/Task forces/Person has been created. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:42, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
WikiWomen's History Month
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:LGBT will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in LGBT studies. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 20:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Fictional LGBT characters in given media list article and other issues
Something about the list of List of LGBT characters in film, radio, and TV fiction that i find off compared to other list articles and not just the huge compilation of medias the characters come from. The list is justified per what the show theyre from, not the actual characters (and alot of them dont lead to individual characters). What i find this the most troubling is, compared to real people, how much of their sexuality is exposed or their role in the given series? What separates the "just happens to be LGBT, minor character that rarely reoccurs" to the "Clearly LGBT, constantly reoccuring character"? I think the issue i see now is that the list article as it stands is more of "list of TV series and films that feature LGBT in some way" rather than "List of LGBT characters in TV series and Films" and also it will vary to "they just happen to be the LGBT achetype" and "character that revolves around LGBT".
Basically, i think the list will vary significantly by role, by relevance, and by notability of the character. Its very broad, and i dont think the list is actually useful then people made it out to be in the last AfD nomination. I think a list more concrete such as "List of TV series with LGBT themes" would be much more narrow searches to show entries that have significant LGBT rather than having small bit.
This is also more of an issue to bring up anything that is what should we restrict and what should we look into more? Articles such as LGBT Themes in comics and various similar articles look well written and well researched. However unlike the list mentioned. It appears longer list of LGBT characters in comics. Im starting to wonder if theres a good reason behind it. Anyways i hope maybe we can discuss this issue and maybe others similar to it.Lucia Black (talk) 09:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- If you can think of some concrete criteria by which the list can be split and/or its contents expanded, feel free to propose them. The close at the deletion discussion made it clear that all the purported problems can be addressed by normal editing, so in what direction do you think that editing should go?. Diego (talk) 10:37, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- P.S. I think your efforts at cleanup of lists would be welcome with much more receptive replies if you centered at improving and organizing the lists instead of deleting them. Diego (talk) 10:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- i think people should have the chance to understand my point of view. I looked for hope in the article time and time again, but always ends up too broad and ambiguous. Theres not much to "expand" i just dont think things like LGBT can be flung around so easily into list articles or main articles. I think the entire list could be moved to a more stricter more focused such as "List of TV films with LGBT themes" or "List of LGBT themed films/Tv series". At the moment, any entry can be made into that article aslong as the article of the series exist. Sounds like "list of LGBT authors" and the onlyway to make them have an entry is if their works had an article. You understand?Lucia Black (talk) 11:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think there's anything wrong with including entries when the article of the series exist. I think that characters could be included even if no article existed (and only in that case a verifiable source for the character should be added). Given the results of the several deletion discussions that you promoted, it seems that many other editors agree with me. So if you want to make some change, I suggest you to follow a different strategy. I agree that there's room for improvement, but not if that improvement requires deleting verifiable information from Wikipedia. Diego (talk) 11:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- i think people should have the chance to understand my point of view. I looked for hope in the article time and time again, but always ends up too broad and ambiguous. Theres not much to "expand" i just dont think things like LGBT can be flung around so easily into list articles or main articles. I think the entire list could be moved to a more stricter more focused such as "List of TV films with LGBT themes" or "List of LGBT themed films/Tv series". At the moment, any entry can be made into that article aslong as the article of the series exist. Sounds like "list of LGBT authors" and the onlyway to make them have an entry is if their works had an article. You understand?Lucia Black (talk) 11:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I dont think removing verified information considering its a list article and its entries are dependent on the existence of the series its shown in. I find it to be too broad and thats with splitting the list with separate media. I myself find it wrong because its too ambiguous, people will be looking for anything lgbt. And yes editors have agreed, but then again other editors stayed away fearing of being accused of homophobia. And also the last counter argument was odd as someone tried to trump guide over rules. Others also used Wp:otherstuff exist. But i dont want to use previous discussions. Plus the article will never be finished, lgbt has beeen used alot more in comedy or parodies and even as an archetype. Its like making a list of "protagonists" in given media article.
A more settling article would be "LGBT themes in TV and films" or "LGBT themes in radio". Basically, a prose format of all the characters that have made significant part in history of the given media. Most of these are categories. I think theyre best suited so. But i find the issue of how ambiguous these list are, and i dare say "shallow".Lucia Black (talk) 11:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Also, it shows lacking "studies" part of the wikiproject.Lucia Black (talk) 03:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
This article about rather controversial Russian LGBT author was the subject for few attacks in the past (see the first and the second attempts for deletion); now one of the users who participated in the latest attempt is persistently cutting the article to clean out any supportive quotations and references: see Talk:Dmitry Kuzmin#Deletion of the relevant content and links. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Updating the map of U.S. SSM laws
As a heads-up, there's a discussion going on about the map of same-sex marriage laws in the U.S., and when and how to update it as legislation is passed/signed/comes into effect, if anyone wants to contribute their thoughts on that. Textorus (talk) 09:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
LGBT professions by nationality categories
Hello, everyone! A couple people have been discussing the possible deletion of "LGBT sportspeople by nationality". The closing admin basically said WP:OTHERSTUFF, mentioning that there are several categories in Category:LGBT people by occupation and nationality. User:Bearcat and I pretty much agree that a bunch of those don't need to exist - especially:
- Category:LGBT comedians by nationality
- Category:LGBT radio personalities by nationality
- Category:LGBT television personalities by nationality
I'm not convinced that some of these need to exist, mostly because they violate WP:OVERCAT#Intersection by location:
- Category:LGBT journalists by nationality
- Category:LGBT musicians by nationality
- Category:LGBT politicians by nationality
- Category:LGBT writers by nationality
What does the project think? Should the first three be brought up for CFD? All of them? None of them? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- I agree myself they are needed when there are categories. Maybe it should be drought up for CFD. I myself have not completely dedicated the project as im bsy with others.Lucia Black (talk) 22:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- Again, nationality is an accepted way of diffusing large categories even when it is not itself relevant. Some of these categories are very large. This was all pointed out in the previous discussion. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, Roscelese, nationality is an accepted way of diffusing large categories, though one could argue that it's not the preferred method of diffusing them (see WP:OVERCAT#Intersection by location). The first three, however, have very few articles - Comedians (125), Radio Personalities (81), and Television Personalities (224). None of those require diffusing - by nationality or any other method.
- Of the other four, Journalists only has 116 and Sportspeople has 172 - those don't seem to need diffusing because of size. The other three have arguably enough to need diffusing: Musicians (674), Politicians (603), Writers (1,379). The question there is whether nationality is the appropriate method for diffusing them. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:06, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
There can be better done. I honestly think the scope of this project should expand/restrict. Things to "anything that happens to be LGBT to something with a more narrow aim". By occupation should be enough.Lucia Black (talk) 23:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- I've started a CfD regarding LGBT comedians. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Oppinion
Can u guys look at this. Its about the timeline of same-sex marriage. Thanks (: --DrkFrdric (talk) 01:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Question on two similar articles
Please see question raised at here re two similar articles gay bashing and Violence against LGBT people --Noleander (talk) 10:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I Will Survive
I'd like to tell wikipedia that the article about the song "I Will Survive" has been constantly re-editet in order to erase all references to the music as a 'gay anthem'...
- If this is can't be changed with a simple revert and a couple of reliable sources, you could place a Template:NPOV tag on the article and some good old dispute resolution. But posting this comment here could be seen as a sign of canvassing, which is discouraged in situations like this. Diego (talk) 18:26, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
There's an ongoing RFC at Talk:Amber Heard#Bisexual label on how to categorize her sexuality. Siawase (talk) 18:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I lowered the rating to start, but this may be to low to some so, please feel free to adjust as the project sees fit. The article had a great deal of unsourced material, but some may still see this as a possible C class. Unsure, so I am making note on all the projects for input.--Amadscientist (talk) 07:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
User:NYyankees51
Has anyone else noticed this user's edits and AfD nominations almost exclusively on LGBT issues? Just wondered. Altairisfar (talk) 23:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes.--В и к и T 23:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 00:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes! Shrigley (talk) 00:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well now they appear to have a like-minded partner (diff) too on an article I recently created. I give up, not going to edit war. Altairisfar (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not surprised, as they've tag-teamed on LGBT-related articles before. At any rate, I've found sources on Udaan Trust and IGLYO, and I do wonder if the other nominations are just as frivolous. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing this out, Altairisfar, this user seems to be marking a bunch of articles for speedy deletion. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well now they appear to have a like-minded partner (diff) too on an article I recently created. I give up, not going to edit war. Altairisfar (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- This user probable just joined so he could nominate more articles for deletion and get in more edit wars JayJayTalk to me 04:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, I joined because I "aim to improve Wikipedia's coverage of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and Queer studies topics". Part of that is purging the advertisement articles in this project. NYyankees51 (talk) 04:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Okay well I hope you do continue to improve LGBT-related articles
JayJayTalk to me 04:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I've noticed.
Teammm Let's Talk! :) 09:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I've noticed.
- Okay well I hope you do continue to improve LGBT-related articles
- Actually, I joined because I "aim to improve Wikipedia's coverage of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and Queer studies topics". Part of that is purging the advertisement articles in this project. NYyankees51 (talk) 04:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow WikiProject LGBT members! Anyone want to help me in my purge of all the brochures? NYyankees51 (talk) 03:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- If you're doing a "purge", perhaps you could post a list here and add articles you think are "brochures" as you find them? That would give members of this project a chance to review them, chime in if they need to be deleted or merged, and/or find sources for keeping the articles? Then if they do need to be deleted or merged, you'll have several opinions already when they get taken to AfD. Just a thought :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm shocked and apalled at the reception NYyankees51 has received from his fellow LGBTers. To say it was chilly would be an understatement. I think frothy sums it up nicely. Coming out is never easy. He shouldn't be made to bend over just to be accepted. I'm sure he's feeling pretty exposed right about now. I'm sure if you give him a chance he'll be on top in no time. The first thing you should do is find out which area excites NYY the most: L, G, B or T. And remember... LGBT didn't choose him: he chose LGBT. – Lionel (talk) 20:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC)