Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies

Categorization of subjects and Douglas Coupland

I do not understand the process or the documentation needed to place someone in the LGBT category. For instance, I was surprised to see Douglas Coupland, Canadian writer, listed in the Gay Writers / Gay artists etc. category. I have never seen a public reference to Coupland as gay, nor does the article Douglas Coupland make any reference to his sexual orientation. I am not particularly disputing whether Coupland is gay or queer, just failing to understand what is the standard for including someone in this category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VanArtGuy (talk • contribs) 17:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the sentence from the article, "Coupland currently lives in West Vancouver, British Columbia with his partner David Weir."

It refers to a sentence from a New York Times article, "Meanwhile, Mr. Coupland still lives in his longtime residence next door, with his partner, David Weir."[1]

Is this sufficient reference to characterize Coupland as gay?--Kevinkor2 (talk) 04:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is OK, though I might have preferred something more explicit, like the Advocate interview of February 2005. As a Vancouverite, I am pretty well saturated in Coupland media material, and it nevers mentions his sexual orientation; he apparently prefers it that way. Then, when skimming the article (because saturated) I missed the concept of "partner" (because it is a little ambiguous). But he certainly has confirmed his orientation publicly, though in such a low-key way.--VanArtGuy —Preceding undated comment added 07:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Anyone got access to Attitude?

Hullo all, bit of a kerfuffle at the Tom Hardy article about an alleged interview he gave in Attitude in which revelations about his sexuality were allegedly divulged. It was apparently published in the December 2008 issue, around the time of the release of RockNRolla, but we haven't been able to verify this; might any of you have a copy you could check? Ta, Skomorokh 23:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MCC clergy pages are being deleted

Several of the people listed at Metropolitan Community Church#Notable clergy have recently had their pages deleted for lack of notability. Is there anyone here who can help bolster the remaining pages so that we don't lose more? Thanks, Aristophanes68 (talk) 06:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We just lost another clergy page. :-( Aristophanes68 (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tobit2

There are many problems with Tobit2 vandalism. Please editors see the issue and comment on relevant talk pages. He do a damage to long and hardly developed version of articles about LGBT parenting and adoption. Thank you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tobit2 --Destinero (talk) 18:08, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

6 of 1 & half-a-dozen of the other. I gave up editing articles you were involved with because of your approach, and IMHO you have done a disservice to the 'cause' you seek to promote. So, you made your bed, you can lie in it, mate. Do not expect support from me now somebody less sympathetic has called you out on your self-centered approach to certain articles. - MishMich - Talk - 21:19, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gaps in article

Hello,

Marriage privatization has an interesting discussion in it, but it unfortunately does not currently seem to include any gay perspectives. In particular, it might seem that it is an important social goal to apply the name "marriage" and privatization denies that. I'd just like to attract attention to that article in hopes that someone might add more things like this.

Best Regards, Sugar-Baby-Love (talk) 00:27, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arrest of Bradley Manning

Currently, there seems to be an organized effort to remove any mention of Bradley Manning's sexuality here. Manning is gay, as confirmed in multiple reliable sources. His disaffection with the military due to the DADT policy is evident from the New York Times story published yesterday. [2] This is a notable factor in the story. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 14:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1.8.7

Hello people, an editor notified on the talk page that this subject is a transgender person who was a man and now is a woman (since 1998). Add it to your watchlists and please add information! Worromp Warg (talk) 20:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sourcing in that article is shocking. Needs clean-up work and bettering sourcing or it's off to AFD. --Cameron Scott (talk) 21:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Sexual orientation" vs. "LGBT policy" in military articles

I'd like to open a discussion to generate consensus over a naming convention for articles about the way the militaries of various countries treat LGBT personnel. There seem to be two options in use. 1) "Sexual orientation and..." as in Sexual orientation and military service and Sexual orientation and the United States military (which I moved first from "LGBT policy in the U.S. military" to "LGBT policy in the United States military" to expand the abbreviation, then to its current name to match Category:Sexual orientation and the United States military). 2) "LGBT policy and..." as in LGBT policy in the Canadian military and LGBT policy in the Military of the Netherlands.

I favor "Sexual orientation and..." because it's broader in scope. There was no formal policy, for instance, in the US military until relatively recently but there's a history there dating back literally to the American Revolution. A strict policy focus would exclude that information whereas the broader scope allows for its inclusion and discussion of the various policies in the article and sub-articles. I also generally believe that it's best to avoid initialisms in article titles because not everyone knows what they mean. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 00:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Please help to finish - Pink Triangle Park, Gay and Lesbian Memorial Isaac Epstein (talk) 18:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autoandrophilia

I have just expanded the autoandrophilia namespace into a short article. Autoandrophilia was previously redirecting to autogynephilia. The autoandrophilia article is very short; anyone who can assist with expanding and improving it, please do. Riverstones (talk) 13:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce and Pepper Wayne Gacy's Home Movies

A user dropped by my talk page to mention that Bruce and Pepper Wayne Gacy's Home Movies is up at AfD. I don't see in the article that the movie is particularly LGBT-related, though the fact that it's a Bruce LaBruce film, I have no doubt that it's at least somewhat related. Just an FYI. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New template: Crossdressing

Please visit and contribute to Template:Crossdressing, newly created. Thank you. Riverstones (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason that it is a sidebar compared to say a navbox? Peachey88 ^{(T · C)} 04:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, navboxes appear at the very bottom of the page, making them less obvious (and possibly less accessible to users who do not realize how they work). The sidebar as it is, now, is fairly small and narrow, making it relatively unobtrusive, while still useful. Riverstones (talk) 16:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request assistance on Norbert Basil MacLean III article

I am not a member of your WikiProject but I request assistance in the Norbert Basil MacLean III as an editor who is also not in your WikiProject has nearly eraticated all references to the BLP's homosexuality. This is of major concern because if you read a 2003 Navy Times article it states:

"In a 1994 Navy Times story, MacLean said he felt he was the victim of a conspiracy because officials learned he was a homosexual. MacLean ended up filing an Article 138 complaint against Cosgriff in February 1992, citing harassment - a complaint his lawyers say belatedly was found to - have merit."

The 2003 Navy article can be found at: http://www.navytimes.com/legacy/new/0-NAVYPAPER-2153773.php Not only does the Navy Times mention MacLean's homosexuality in both 1994 and 2003 articles but also the Washington Post does in articles in 1994.

Editing out the BLP's homosexuality in the Wikipedia article is concerning and I wanted to refer the matter to this WikiProject for its review and input.

This same editor also put the article in for a re-assessment from its year long GA-status, then made lots of edits, then re-assessed it on his own after making the edits from a GA to B status, also on his own re-assessed its important status from high to mid and then eventually to low and has now called for it to be rated a C status article. This editor specifically changed this WikiProject's evaluation of it and I don't believe he is a member of your project.

Any help or assistance in reviewing and editing the Norbert Basil MacLean III article from this WikiProject would be most appreciated. (Mattwashdc (talk) 23:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]