Talk:Bruce Bagemihl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.

Ricky Gervais[edit]

ricky gervais did a stand up piece on this book.

So what? I think that this is WP:UNDUE and should be removed. I can understand why the fact that Biological Exuberance was cited in Lawrence vs. Texas is here; this is certainly significant information. One attack on the book or parody by a comedian doesn't seem significant or worth including. Devil Goddess (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
What about all the "In popular culture" sections?! Should we remove all those references from all articles too then? I agree with the OP here; a reference should be added for the RG stand-up. If the issue here is that it was an "attack" then the statement can simply say it was parodied or mentioned or whatever.
Please read Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content. All references in popular culture are not necessarily suitable for across the board inclusion in Wikipedia; rather, we have criteria in place to distinguish references that are noteworthy and warrant inclusion from ones that are just random trivia. I don't know enough about the Ricky Gervais routine to know which side of the line it falls on, but it's not automatically appropriate for inclusion just because it existed — it has to be noteworthy in some way beyond simply having happened. Bearcat (talk) 14:29, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


The article says nothing about why this book is controversial, so I removed that statement. If someone wants to talk about how it's controversial, then it can be put back in. (talk) 12:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


See Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

While the book, “Biological Exuberance,” by Bruce Bagemihl, was cited in a brief filed for the case, it was not cited in the decision itself.

— Jon Mooallem, Can Animals Be Gay?, New York Times Magazine, 31 March 2010

Quoted by Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)