Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies

WikiProject LGBT studies
Project navigation links
Main project page
→ Project talk page
Watchlist	talk
Members
Departments
→ Assessment	talk
→ Collaboration	talk
→ Community	talk
→ Core topics	talk
→ Jumpaclass	talk
→ Newsletter
→ Peer review	talk
→ Person task force	talk
→ Translation	talk
Useful links
Infoboxes and templates
Guidelines	talk
Notice board	talk
Sexuality and gender deletion discussions
Info resources
Bot reports
Newly tagged articles and assessment level changes
Article alerts
Unreferenced BLPs (Biographies of Living Persons)
Cleanup listing
New articles with LGBT keywords
Popular pages
Recognized content
Portals we help maintain
LGBTQ portal
Transgender portal

Nicole Maines name issue

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

Second opinion re: Garth Greenwell

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 Do you think the tag is obsolete, or is that still a problem please?Zigzig20s (talk) 18:34, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Zigzig20s: I looked through the references and think the tag is obsolete. I have removed it. Citrivescence (talk) 00:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I also wonder if we should create a separate articles about each novel...Zigzig20s (talk) 00:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(Spam) Help editing draft

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

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

LGBT travel guides

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

Logging misconduct targeting LGBT contributors and content

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

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

• special:diff/793598894

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

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

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

• I imagine it shouldn't be too hard to come up with keywords and search for them in edit summaries and in revision text. That is, assuming it hasn't been redacted, which much of this may qualify for revdel. GMG^talk 20:14, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Somebody pointed this discussion to me. In fact on the francophone wikipedia, I am trying to set up a table where contributors could just list factually all the terms and formulations they find problematic. This would not mean asking necessarily for sanctions, it is meant first of all to list what people "feel" problematic. You can set up filters about certain words, but you cannot filter the way they are perceived, and the perception is key to evaluate the impact of the hostility. So it would not be a code generated table (we can also get away from an all dev perspective that data needs to be robotically generated in an exhaustive way). In fact, when it comes to harassment human eyes are badly needed, although this approach is more costly and time consuming. Here is the link to our discussion harassement. I would also favor cross project discussions on how to efficiently counter these hostilities. I dont believe we only need admins to do that, we first need to document then to start raising voices about the fact that such attitudes are not acceptable. These tables can also be relayed to the "strategy discussions" that are taking place and to T&S, to the village pump or whatever relevant space on a monthly or weekly basis.Nattes à chat (talk) 16:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nattes à chat: I suppose we should have a central hub, perhaps at meta:Wikimedia LGBT+, where we link out to these different report centers. Maybe there could be one in English, and another in French, and we interlink them somehow.

I agree with you - the start to the solution will not be primarily in tech development or in seeking admin support, but from typical people reporting the instances and circumstances of harassment in some way that can support more conversation about how we should respond to protect ourselves. Is there a plan for next steps at French Wikipedia? Perhaps if there has been more discussion there, English can follow the French plans. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I find this discussion creepy, Orwellian, and chilling. Elizium23 (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Blueraspberry: following the harassment of a contributor, some people have opened their eyes and we are working on a dedicated project page : Fighting against harassment. I've set up a new page to gather data based on what people feel as abusive (no names mentioned on the page just the actual words). People can either post or send me the diffs and we will set up an email to gather diffs. We could start a page on meta documenting such things in all languages IMO. This can be relayed to the talks on strategy and the called for "cultural change".Nattes à chat (talk) 09:21, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Best practice regarding LGBT categories for historical figures

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

Whatever Wikipedia decides will influence Wikidata policy. Wikidata is more straightforward, as it reports like

sexual orientation (P91) -> gay (Q592)

Maybe for this person, there could be Wikidata modeling like "gender = female" plus matched with a female life partner

If you can model the ambiguity of people outside of contemporary Western tradition then Wikidata can group them, and Wikipedia and Wikidata can inform each other. Wikidata is having challenges with the fundamentals of gender in the most obvious cases. If we could sort that discussion, then LGBT discussions would be much easier.

• d:Wikidata:WikiProject LGBT/gender

Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

two references that may be of use

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

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

• Springate, Megan E., ed. (2016). LGBTQ America: A Theme Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer History (PDF). National Park Foundation. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-03-02.

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

Question - quick response sought

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

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

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

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

Welcome!

		Hello, WikiProject LGBT studies, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I noticed you have an interest in editing on LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning)-related topics, and I hope today's Editathon will encourage you to participate, and become a regular and valuable contributor. Should you decide to stick around, you might wish to join our LGBT studies project. Meanwhile, here are some pages you might find helpful: Useful Wikipedia links: Wikipedia:Introduction The Wikipedia Adventure (fun interactive tour) Your first article Easy Referencing for Beginners Simplified Manual of Style The five pillars of Wikipedia Links for Wikipedia's LGBT studies Project: Guidelines for writing about LGBT-themed subjects How to write about transgender and non-binary people Categories for LGBT articles Editing biographies of living persons Wikipedia:Writing about women
		I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) This automatically inserts your name and the date. If you get stuck, please see our help pages. If you can't find what you are looking for there, feel free to ask at the Teahouse or at the LGBT Project's Talk Page. Alternatively, contact me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to assist you. Again, welcome! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Discussion about categorization of transgender articles

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

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

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

Gender dysphoria article discussion

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

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

LGBT-related categories

Tommy, the protagonist of Tommy (TV series) is lesbian. Dex, the main character of Stumptown (TV series) is bisexual. Yet neither article has LGBT-related categories, and when I added them to Stumptown they were deleted. I'm posting this comment here because all of us interested in LGBT+ subjects need to stay vigilant of efforts to ignore or deny the existence of LGBT+ elements in these and other articles. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 07:29, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I have seen the opposite problem. Categories often remain long after supporting sources and prose have been deleted from articles. This is not in accord with WP:CATV - all categories must be sourced. I have seen people labeled as "activists" without a whiff of any activity that might qualify. I must also wonder about the categorization of people as LGBT strictly based on the types of relationships they have or had. If a man has a partner with a male name, he is automatically awarded the "gay" categories, but that seems strange when no WP:RS is involved to, for example, identify his partner as a man, or even identify the subject as a man as well. WP:EGRS would come into play requiring self-identification, rather than just the admission that he or she is in a relationship with a person of the same sex. Elizium23 (talk) 07:41, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Except that RS confirms that Tommy is lesbian and Dex is bisexual. For Tommy, I made a point in the talk page of listing RS that supports it. In the case of Dex, Cobie Smulders has stated in interviews that Dex is "definitely attracted to women and men" (the series is based on the comics in which Dex is bisexual); furthermore, in episode 1x06 Dex hooks up with her old girlfriend, and in 1x13 she has sex with a woman she met in bar. We're not dealing with marginal characters. These are characters that are intrinsic to the story. Stumptown has the "Down syndrome in television" category because Dex's brother has DS. If supporting sources and prose regarding LGBT+ characters and storyline is deleted from an article, it may very well be that the undercurrent for doing so is homophobia. If characters are lead and recurring/supporting, they exist in the history of the series even when they leave the series, and who/what they were in the storyline doesn't change because of it. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 08:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

@Pyxis Solitary: the overcategorization problem I've seen is the opposite - stuff getting labeled as an LGBT-related show because it's got one LGBT side character in two episodes or something, making the category impossible to navigate productively. Obviously we should be making sure not to overcorrect! @Elizium23: you seem to be going down a bizarre path here. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

As I said in my above comment, "We're not dealing with marginal characters. These are characters that are intrinsic to the story." If a main/lead character of a TV program is LGBT+, then related categories belong in its article; same applies with recurring/supporting characters -- especially when there is RS to support the information. Bit characters, however, do not count. Nor does an occasional episode with LGBT+ included in the plot. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Denaming discussion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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