Jump to content

Talk:Homophobia: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Homophobia/Archive 15) (bot
Line 52: Line 52:
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect [[:Gaycism]] and has thus listed it [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|for discussion]]. This discussion will occur at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 17#Gaycism]] until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> [[User:AFreshStart|AFreshStart]] ([[User talk:AFreshStart|talk]]) 21:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect [[:Gaycism]] and has thus listed it [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|for discussion]]. This discussion will occur at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 17#Gaycism]] until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> [[User:AFreshStart|AFreshStart]] ([[User talk:AFreshStart|talk]]) 21:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

== Criticism Section possible revisions ==

While a criticism of the term is welcomed as there is a lot of debate academically, are such outdated sources and possibly fringe views (such as those in the section about the non-neutrality) necessary? If not supplemented by the consensus view, a reader of the article could come away thinking these views are more valid than they are widely seen. Are my concerns at all reasonable?

Revision as of 15:44, 23 February 2022

Template:Vital article

Heterophobia Section Inaccuracy

The section regarding heterophobia is largely sourced from an unreliable and non-neutral source [1] (source 127 from reference list). Quotes referencing this source are out of date and not verifiable in any way. [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaise299 (talkcontribs) 23:31, December 16, 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://home.bway.net/rjnoonan/Conf1999.html. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ^ Noonan, Raymond J. "Heterophobia: The Evolution of an Idea".

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2021

Change "Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT)" to "Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuals or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT)"

This edit request pertains to the very first line of the page. The reasoning for this request is that the sources used in the creation of the original statement (on the page) do not reference any association of homophobia with negative attitudes pertaining to homosexuality as an abstract idea or character trait; rather, the sources more-or-less define homophobia as predjudice against people (of whom happen to have those traits).

AIRopant (talk) 20:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC) AIRopant (talk) 20:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. The lead is a summary of the entire article. If it is explained and sources in the body it's fine as is. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Supreme Court case law

I recently spent several hours, all night, writing an entire section for this article. I discussed an important landmark case by the SCOTUS, and I discussed criticisms of the SCOTUS decision. I added dozens of paragraphs to the end of this article, because I think that public animosity towards gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals was being very thoroughly discussed by the SCOTUS, and animosity is a version of homophobia. Isn't it? Why has all of my addition to this article been erased? Vincent Labine (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • For the reason in my edit summary - this article is a worldwide overview of the subject of homophobia. It is not a forensic examination of a few legal battles regarding gay rights in one particular country. I'm sure the material belongs somewhere, but it isn't here. Black Kite (talk) 22:49, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vincent Labine All the material is preserved here and it could be useful in starting an article like List of LGBT-related cases heard by the United States Supreme Court (c.f. List of LGBT-related cases before international courts and quasi-judicial bodies) (t · c) buidhe 06:32, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Buidhe, thank you very much for that constructive suggestion. I will have to learn about starting new articles in Wikipedia, but I will follow up.Vincent Labine (talk) 23:59, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Gaycism" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Gaycism and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 17#Gaycism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. AFreshStart (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism Section possible revisions

While a criticism of the term is welcomed as there is a lot of debate academically, are such outdated sources and possibly fringe views (such as those in the section about the non-neutrality) necessary? If not supplemented by the consensus view, a reader of the article could come away thinking these views are more valid than they are widely seen. Are my concerns at all reasonable?