Talk:International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia

	LGBTQ portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Human rights Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why reference the state?

Ok, being from Boise, Idaho I have to ask. I'm assuming since the 'ho' is taken from the first two letters of the last word in the acronym, that they intentionally referenced the state. My question is whether they were just trying to make a pronounceable word out of it, or if it was supposed to be a tounge-in-cheek joke. We did pass an anti-gay marriage act recently but I don't think we're noteworthy one way or another for anything. Thanks. ~ User:joel.a.davis —Preceding comment was added at 01:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was just an attempt to get a pronpuncable word. Remember this movement was started in France. (Sally Peck, Australia)

Cultural controversies

I noticed that there were various controversies about IDAHO, many of which oppose gay activists with pro-family, pro-life and Christian activists. [1] [2] [3] [4] ADM (talk) 08:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Transphobia

So, I am confused as to how this day has anything to do with Transphobia. Reading through the article as it is 16 May 2011, there is no real mention of Transphobia, other than the inclusive in the name, and there is no mention of gender identity or expression. Could this information be added to make the article more inclusive of people that are transgender? 174.92.143.212 (talk) 02:13, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Morwen[reply]

For reals?

Is this some kind of April Fools joke? IDAHO? 72.86.37.79 (talk) 02:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about it? It's just an acronym. 184.76.211.90 (talk) 04:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify tag

I added the wikify tag because in the sections it seems like there is a break after every sentence. The format needs to be improved by making it into paragraphs. I don't know if there is a better tag than wikify, so if someone else does they can change it. HotshotCleaner (talk) 18:52, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IDAHO / IDAHOT / IDAHOBIT Controversies

Until April 2013, all the acronyms on the page were "IDAHO". All this was changed, quite regardless of context, to "IDAHOBIT". Which is patently a political/non-neutral move and, as such, violates Wikipedia's codes. Aside from this, the "IDAHOBIT" Committee does not exist. It is called the IDAHO Committee (and recognised as such by 15 governments and the United Nations!). Rather than just coming in and changing the acronyms all of a sudden - regardless of context! - how about reflecting variations in acronym use, internationally, by creating a sub-section entitled "Different Names for May 17 Mobilisations", which could then include referenced examples? I already reverted the acronyms once, on May 17 itself, explaining that probably less than 90% of the people who mobilise globally around the day call it IDAHOBIT. This was then reverted again! I do not wish to start an edit war.

In general, coverage re. transhobia, biphobia and intersex issues should be improved, to improve the quality of the article and to represent the relevance of May 17 for different communities, but changing the acronyms so that they are non-recognisable, factually wrong in many cases, and politically motivated is not going to achieve that, and it is not what wikipedia is for.

Whoever is contesting the acronyms, can we resolve this please?

But can we keep any discussion focussed on improving the quality of the article, as "Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject"

Thanks Lookatyougo2 (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I am quite happy to work to improve the quality of the article in general, just waiting on a response re. these issues/see if anyone else wants to collaborate. Thanks Lookatyougo2 (talk) 15:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Id be happy to collaborate. I will expand on my comments later. Sport and politics (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great! :) Lookatyougo2 (talk) 21:37, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As this "later" hadn't happened for several months I restored the IDAHO form. It's the official abbreviation and if you don't like it, don't blame us at Wikipedia but the organization that chose it. 88.112.32.233 (talk) 12:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]