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.
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.
Hello, @AfricaTanz:. It seems you have been reinserting the same and similar templated information which was the subject of the above-noted RFC. The consensus there seemed to be that much of your material is original research or novel synthesis, and/or not directly relevant to country-specific articles such as this one. I removed the material which didn't seem to be relevant to Ghana, asking in my edit summary that you discuss the matter at Talk:LGBT rights under international law#Duplicated text on countries' obligations under international law before reinserting it. I assume you overlooked that message when you reverted me without explanation. I'm posting this message here (which includes a notification for you) to ensure that you're aware of the objections to your edits, and that you are requested to discuss them with the community. Some of the information you are trying to post may be appropriate if it were worded differently and/or placed in a different article. The best way of reworking it into something usable will be to engage with your fellow editors on the RFC. —Psychonaut (talk) 18:32, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I just replaced the text with content that I believe is in just the right measure for this article, stripped the material that deals with a scope much higher than the one country, and I reworded the heading to be neutral and factual rather than prescriptive and preachy. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:42, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Both of your efforts to whitewash and exclude information directly relevant to LGBT rights in Ghana are appalling. First you do it based on alleged (and false) copyright violations. Then you do it based on nothing more than "I don't like material that appears in more than one article, even if the material is directly relevant". For anyone who wants to read this important material free of bias, see this version. AfricaTanz (talk) 19:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
"Relevant" in the same sense that it would be relevant to load every article about a person who had ever been arrested for drunk driving with four paragraphs about the jurisdiction's drunk driving laws. "Nothing more than ..."? I told you it was more than that and I advised you to try mentioning it while keeping it brief and directly relevant, linking to it elsewhere, so don't sit there publicly mischaracterizing my rationale. As for "whitewashing", well, you could use a little dose of WP:Assume good faith. I'm gay and have been a gay rights advocate for 30+ years. I also believe the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution ought to have been sufficient to do away with all inequitable treatment by the Federal and state governments of LGBT people, up to and including bans on same-sex marriage, the instant any case relating to LGBT inequality came to any court in the country, but I also would object to someone posting the same generic pontification about the Equal Protection Clause in every article on LGBT affairs in individual states. And, really, if I was whitewashing, would I have restored this part (while keeping it short and sweet)? So if you can only be satisfied by believing I have an agenda to hide something, go ahead and believe it, but you're wrong. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:53, 16 November 2013 (UTC)