The article Sex offender which is tagged as being of interest to this project was split today. The new article is Sex offender registries in the United States. If this is of interest to the project, feel free to add the project's tag there as well. Etamni | ✉ | ✓ 02:28, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
A new discussion has been started at: Talk:Sodomy#POV and "Sodomy". Comments appreciated. GregKaye 11:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
I have started the article. Please, check and advice. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:06, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
There seems to be an unbalance in focus between same-sex attraction for males and females.
Lesbian is its own article while gay male (or male homosexual) does not have its own article, just a subsection on human male sexuality.
Why does lesbianism get its own article instead of being relegated to a subsection on human female sexuality like with males? Ranze (talk) 07:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- I agree that male homosexuality should have its own article. As to why there isn't one already, it's because someone hasn't made one yet! *hint* *hint*
- As an aside, human male sexuality is a horribly incomplete article. I've been looking at that one for a long time, but I never seem to have time to do the research/writing for it. kyledueck (talk) 13:14, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- Ranze (talk · contribs) and Kyledueck, see Talk:Gay/Archive 6#Gay article vs. Lesbian article?, which shows that this matter has been discussed before. See the valid reasoning given for why there is a Lesbian article, and why there has yet to be a Male homosexuality article. Flyer22 (talk) 21:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Also see Talk:Homosexuality/Archive 23#There is no main article for male homosexuality; I noted there, and in the discussion seen at Talk:Gay/Archive 6#Requested move, that I disagree with "male homosexuality" redirecting to that horrible Human male sexuality article. Flyer22 (talk) 21:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
I think the reason for lack of focus, perhaps not just in Wikipedia but perhaps real life too, would be a lack of uniformity of language. Lesbian is a catchy single term and much easier to search for and name an article after than putting together various combinations of words to reflect its opposite-gender counterpart. That doesn't necessarily mean it's a less important topic, but that it's a topic for which it's harder to source properly due to search engine difficulties and due to phrasing differences in those who write on it. Ranze (talk) 00:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
- Ranze, yes, that has been one of the issues, if not the main issue, as indicated in the aforementioned Talk:Gay/Archive 6#Gay article vs. Lesbian article? discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Not in Front of the Children - at Peer Review
I've requested Peer Review for Not in Front of the Children.
Feedback would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Not in Front of the Children/archive1.
— Cirt (talk) 06:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Epigenetic theories of homosexuality#What about Epigenetic theories of heterosexuality ?. It concerns the lack of a heterosexual comparison, what to title the article, and the fact that better sources should be used for the biomedical information (unless there is a WP:MEDDATE aspect preventing better sources). See this comment I made. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:33, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I've requested Peer Review for Sexuality after spinal cord injury in hopes of getting it ready for an eventual FAC. If anyone can spare the time I'd love to get any feedback at Wikipedia:Peer review/Sexuality after spinal cord injury/archive1.
Thank you! delldot ∇. 21:27, 21 November 2015 (UTC)