Jump to content

Template talk:LGBT sidebar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Oakling (talk | contribs) at 01:22, 4 April 2019 (fixing my typos). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template sidebar move: LGBT to LGBTQ

This discussion has been copied & pasted from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies:


The template sidebar used on many LGBT related articles was changed between 19 & 21 February from "Template:LGBT sidebar" to "Template:LGBTQ sidebar", to include the term Genderqueer. Potentially controversial changes should be discussed beforehand, but there appears to have been no discussion, either before or since. The associated Talkpage redirects here: Template talk:LGBT. Is everyone happy with this?Daicaregos (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT as an initialism has a much more widespread usage:
It should therefore stand to reason that LGBT should take precedence over LGBTQ. I am therefore not particularly impressed that this has been done without discussion. -- roleplayer 16:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you, and other members of this project, would like to comment on that Talkpage. I don't feel qualified to pass comment, but wanted to bring it to your attention, as the change seemed rather radical to me. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Undo it. No bloating, or soon we'll be dealing with FABGLITTER.~ZytheTalk to me! 17:19, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved it back pending discussion.
This discussion is copied & pasted from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies to Template talk:LGBT sidebar. Daicaregos (talk) 08:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To move this page: please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 08:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The LGBT trafficking link doesn't actually go to anything Binaryhazard (talk) 03:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 10 November 2011


Elmasry96 (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC) George wants to be added to the gay people page.[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --NYKevin @871, i.e. 19:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 3 May 2012 (LGBTQA)

LGBT should also include Q and A for queer people (people without a definite label) and for asexuals ( people who are not attracted to any gender sexually) 67.204.11.152 (talk) 02:39, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Given the discussion directly above, it appears consensus has been against this in the past. Regardless, it's something that should probably be decided by the whole of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies and not simply this template. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about this photo ?


This one is better than the original. - 111.251.197.212 (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like the current one, the sunlight shining through the flag is a nice touch. And you also see more of the actual flag in that one than this one. Cadiomals (talk) 19:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 15 November 2012

There are two links to te Violence against LGBT People article. 173.48.61.110 (talk) 07:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Insomesia (talk) 13:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2015

LGBT parenting link 131.251.253.64 (talk) 15:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Pishcal — ♣ 16:57, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Characters

In the LGBT Ethics portion of your sidebar. Cant seem to track them down in the template. --Savonneux (talk) 07:08, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2016

I feel like this was put her by I biased LGBT supporter. Why I think this is wrong if homophobia is a word that describes an irrational fear of homosexuality then why is the word heterophobia made to seem like it can't be a irrational fear. I believe that homophobia and heterophobia should be shown the same level of equality. Where one is an irrational fear of LGBT people and the other a fear of straight people. I completely disagree with what was written the term may have not been around as long as homophobia but I feel it deserves to carry the same kind of definition or remove the page completely from Wikipedia. 2606:A000:3041:8600:5C24:D38A:69CA:7B1B (talk) 12:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 15:36, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2016

Under "Sexual orientation", add "Pansexuality" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexuality), "Polysexuality" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polysexuality), and "Asexuality" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality)

Rtzentmyer (talk) 00:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done Omni Flames (talk) 07:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2017

Please revert 2603:3003:3600:7E00:68A4:44D3:56C1:B018 (talk) 17:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:14, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the flag changed?

Question in title. There seems to have been no discussion on this. Tech12 (talk) 13:58, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The decision to change the official flag for the "Philadelphia City" is arbitrary. There are no sources that indicate that there is consensus in LGTB organizations that this new flag will be adopted, therefore the change should be reverted to the rainbow flag. --Cardnewman (talk) 21:08, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cardnewman: I agree. I'll change it back. Tech12 (talk) 21:11, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gender identity

As it is a template about LGBT, the T should also be represented. Maybe a section called Gender identity should be added under the Sexual orientation one, and include transgender, transexual, cisgender, intersex, third gender or genderqueer articles as well. DaddyCell (talk) 20:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I like this idea too. This sounds like a good addition.Tech12 (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you read intersex you will see that it doesn't belong under gender identity, any more than it belongs under sexual orientation. Trankuility (talk) 21:24, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I looked through the edit history; seems like this section has been added and removed since the discussion above took place. We still lack a category where we can link any of the above.

Since the "Sexual Orientation" section duplicates half of the links immediately above it, it might make more sense NOT to link to individual sexual orientations in this section, and leave it as a section that collates broader information on demographics, biology, environment, etc. of sexual orientation. Seems to me that the part above it,
lesbian ∙ gay ∙ bisexual ∙ transgender

is where things like intersex would go.

So I'm proposing that that header be changed to

lesbian ∙ gay ∙ bisexual (pansexuality ∙ polysexuality) ∙ transgender ∙ queer ∙ intersex ∙ asexual
(I noticed that the asexual link got removed from Sexual Orientation last year, despite discussion to the contrary here!)



I think that gender is a separate issue. It makes sense to me to have a section that collates different pages that address LGBT+ aspects of gender, whether that's about being genderqueer, third/fourth/fifth genders, ball culture, butch/femme gender expressions, or whatever. But I think what's needed there is for somebody to propose what should be in it and let the subheading follow from that, and I don't have a solid vision for it. Oakling (talk) 01:19, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Asexuality

Is asexuality a part of the LGBT? The articles (LGBT history, LGBT community) do not say anything about asexuality. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 22:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT charity GLAAD seem to think that they are (https://www.glaad.org/blog/asexual-agender-aromantic), the book "Asexuality and Sexual Normativity: An Anthology" also links the two (p60), the book "LGBT Psychology and Mental Health: Emerging Research and Advances" also ties asexuality into the LGBTQ+ community (P122),both of which are academic books. I think there is enough to back putting asexuality in sexual orientations and is part of the LGBT community. I will add it back in, if there are no sourced objections, when I am able to get on account. By the way, I am Welsh Socialist (talk--88.110.31.219 (talk) 00:14, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2018

MaisyDaisy (talk) 02:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — IVORK Discuss 02:32, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Detransition as identity

I added cisgender and detransitioner to the identities section of this template. Another user left cisgender there but moved detransitioner to the healthcare section (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:LGBT_sidebar&oldid=882078649) with the note "not an identity - just going back to cisgender". While I appreciate not striking the additions, and I'm not at this time reverting the move, I must ask that this editor and other editors not dismiss detransitioners as "just cisgender", and not dismiss detransitioners' needs as "medical" only. Detransitioners are a unique and emergent identity group, whose experiences, perspectives, and needs aren't limited to healthcare (but also include great legal and social challenges). Most detransitioners are gender-conformists. Most become gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Many refuse the labels of cisgender, transgender, and non-binary (while some do adopt these). Please do not dismiss this group's right to self-identify. Thank you. Jadepraerie (talk) 18:47, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sidebar templates link to major topics, but there's no article on a "detransitioner" identity, and one seems unlikely to meet general notability guidelines, in part because the phenomenon is so exceedingly rare and, as you note, new. Even the article on the process of detransition faces a dearth of high-quality medical sources, as discussed at length on its talk page. I had removed it from this sidebar because this (broader-LGNT) sidebar omitted transition-related articles (on transition and on reassignment surgery and therapy); if we are going to link as obscure a topic as detransition here, I will add the transition links. -sche (talk) 00:10, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is no independent, direct, empirical evidence that detransition is "exceedingly rare", and (as I've stated multiple times on Talk:Detransition) I wish you'd stop making such claim, please. I agree that acknowledgment of detransitioners' existence is new. Jadepraerie (talk) 00:25, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:LGBT_sidebar&oldid=890864021"