Talk:LGBTQ rights in Slovakia

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

Human rights Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Slovakia Mid‑importance

	Slovakia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovakia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Slovakia 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.SlovakiaWikipedia:WikiProject SlovakiaTemplate:WikiProject SlovakiaSlovakia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

The second half of the last paragraph seems extremely biased towards gays and against the Slovak government, could someone with some knowledge on the subject correct it?Elmer Clark 23:22, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i agree. has been done. andrej86.

in my last edit i removed the last remnants of non-neutrality by snipping the word "fact" from what was only a general statement referring to sexuality concealment, and removed the use of some comparatives (e.g. "very", "quickly") which did indeed bias the article uncessarily toward gay people.

i suggest the neutrality disclaimer now be removed. tinot

update: i removed it myself... tinot

'Dispearse'

This English word doesn't exist. It's presumably meant to be 'disperse', but even this isn't correct in this context. People who write English-language Wikipedia articles need to have a good command of English!213.127.210.95 (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on LGBT rights in Slovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in LGBT rights in Slovakia

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of LGBT rights in Slovakia's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "bbc":

From LGBT rights in Latvia: "Same-sex spouses have EU residence rights, top court rules". BBC News. 5 June 2018.
From LGBT history in Russia: "Gay parades banned in Moscow for 100 years". BBC. 17 August 2012. Retrieved 7 November 2013.
From LGBT history in Poland: "Europe | Gay marchers ignore ban in Warsaw". BBC News. 2005-06-11. Archived from the original on 27 December 2013. Retrieved 7 May 2014.
From Recognition of same-sex unions in Slovakia: "Same-sex spouses have EU residence rights, top court rules". BBC News. 5 June 2018.
From Lithuania: "On This Day 13 January 1991: Bloodshed at Lithuanian TV station". BBC News. 13 January 1991. Retrieved 13 September 2011.
From LGBT rights in Germany: "Germany anti-gay law: Plan to rehabilitate convicted men". BBC News. 13 May 2016. Retrieved 8 October 2017.
From Same-sex marriage: "Same-sex spouses have equal residency rights". BBC News. 6 June 2018.
From LGBT rights in Poland: Easton, Adam (28 May 2018). "The gay mayor shaking up politics in Catholic Poland" – via www.bbc.com.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the public opinion table

Regarding the table in the Public opinion and demographics section.

As much as I appreciate the collective effort to document as much information as humanely possible, I find it unnecessary.

While the table does provide some raw information and statistics, they themselves provide no useful information to the reader. Not only do the the numbers barely change within the 15-year time span the table covers, but many of the changes could reasonably fit within the range of a statistical error. It is not helped by the fact that while the table has 12 rows, only 3 of the 16 columns actually make use of the majority of rows.

The table takes up much more space on the page than is warranted, while providing little to no useful information to the reader. If anything, it only makes the article a bigger mess than it already is. Raw data like this should not be included or should be split into a different article, as per Wikipedia:PLOT.

As such, I believe the table should be removed. Similarly, I believe much of the section should be reviewed and reworked to only include relevant information and be easier to read.

If there are any objections, please do reply!

Thanks! — Soggy Pandas (talk) 18:13, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blood donation

The paragraph currently reads "Gay and bisexual people are prohibited from donating blood if they have had unprotected sexual intercourse within one year." and the survey for the donors is linked. This is not correct.

Reasoning: Question #24 of this survey follows in Slovak: "Pre mužov: Mali ste posledných 12 mesiacov sexuálny kontakt s mužom? " Which translates to: "For men: Have you had sexual contact with a man within the last 12 months?" If the donor (male) answers 'yes' to this question, he is prohibited from donation. The sexual orientation is not questioned by the survey, neither there is a word about the sexual intercourse being protected or not.

Suggestion: Modify paragraph text e.g. "Men who had sexual contact with another man within the last 12 months are prohibited from donating blood." Qetuol (talk) 21:00, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unregistered cohabitation

I've reviewed this article and I see no evidence of unregistered cohabitation for same-sex couples in Slovakia. The only source it cites is the civil code of the Czechoslovakia era. That civil code doesn't even mention same-sex couples. Here's the most recent report from ILGA-Europe: https://rainbowmap.ilga-europe.org/countries/slovakia/ . You can clearly see that Slovakia has 0.00% points in the category of 'family'. ILGA World database also doesn't mention unregistered cohabitation for same-sex couples in Slovakia. It is also clearly a more reliable and up-to-date source than a sixty-year-old Czechoslovakia civil code. If our WP:RS are inconclusive, it is better to err on the side of caution and not include Slovakia as recognising unregistered cohabitations? In general, Wikipedia leans towards not including information that is not fully supported, rather than including dubious information until it's proven wrong. Cyanmax (talk) 12:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]